How much support are Neurodiverse lawyers provided in the legal industry?

By Reva Naidu.

Reading time: four minutes 

Recently, law firms and chambers have been taking leaps and bounds toward gender and racial equality, but how much support and inclusivity do they offer to neurodiverse lawyers? This article takes a look at how employers can improve this support, and how it benefits their business, while increasing the diversity and inclusivity of their workforce.

What is Neurodiversity?

Harvard Health defines neurodiversity as different ways in which people experience and interact with the world around them where these differences are not viewed as disadvantageous, rather as another natural variation of a complex human behaviour. Some well-known conditions associated with neurodivergence are:

• Autism;
• ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder);
• Dyslexia; and
• Dyspraxia.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority published figures in January, stating that currently, 6% of lawyers in the UK are disabled, while 1 in 5 people living in the UK are neurodivergent. The lack of representation is quite apparent. These figures do not account for types, manners, and forms of disability. Therefore, the percentage of neurodivergent lawyers is much lower; notwithstanding whether neurodivergence should even be considered as a disability, although by law, it is.

Read this article to find out about the rise of disabled lawyers: https://thestudentlawyer.com/2024/01/30/breaking-barriers-the-rise-of-disabled-lawyers/

Challenges faced by Neurodiverse Individuals

A barrier to entering the legal field is the use of psychometric tests and structured examinations which can be rigid and may cause problems for neurodivergent individuals. Rather, firms may focus on verbal and flexible interviews to identify suitable applicants. During these interviews, the importance of removing unconscious bias should be considered. Considering the recruitment process, firms may want to emphasise that neurodivergent applicants are welcome, while not requiring them to necessarily disclose all the details and specifications of their conditions at this stage. In fact, there may be multiple applicants who may not even know that they are neurodivergent, and if they do receive a diagnosis while being employed, firms should aim to make reasonable adjustments for their inclusion. They may also aim to conduct a workplace assessment to analyse the suitability of the office.

Information about how a workplace assessment should be conducted can be found here.

How firms are supporting neurodiverse individuals

Herbert Smith Freehills, a UK-based firm, has begun modifying its recruitment process to achieve this by providing specialist training to their HR department. They have created guides on how they could interview neurodiverse candidates, and establish open dialogue with experts to make continuous improvements to these processes.

Read my previous article to find out more about blind recruitment: https://thestudentlawyer.com/2024/04/30/the-importance-of-blind-recruitment-to-dei/

Some neurodiverse lawyers have also spoken out about how networking events can be a source of trigger for them. It is important for employers to assess the needs of these individuals to ensure they are protected from potentially stressful situations. Allowing employees to work from home to limit the stress of social interactions is one such example of a reasonable adjustment that firms may choose to make. Other ideas to increase their comfort is to:

• allow more flexibility in terms of the office dress code;

• providing a breakout room with minimal sensory overloads during big events; and 

• allowing employees to access it as required, demonstrated by Adelaide-based Your Legal Partner.

Additionally, firms must take steps to educate other employees about these accommodations so that neurodivergent employees are not deterred from using them due to a fear of exclusion, not being accepted, or appearing ‘different’. Firms and chambers may consider developing a Disability Inclusion Action Plan to take the aforementioned steps in a clear and structured way.

IP Inclusive and Neurodiversity in Law are two organisations that aim to reduce the stigma against neurodiversity in the legal industry by providing information and resources to firms about how they can be more inclusive towards employees with different needs. More information about these resources can be found here. 

Benefits of Hiring Neurodivergent Lawyers

Neurodiverse employees are not less capable than neurotypical employees. They provide the legal community with:

• new and innovative ideas;

• a fresh outlook;

• increased productivity; and 

• thought diversity. 

Two common traits of neurodivergent people are ‘hyper-focusing’, and increased emotional intelligence, both of which are incredibly useful tools for a lawyer. By not providing reasonable adjustments, accommodations, and support for them, employers may miss out on the best talent that would have provided valuable viewpoints.

Should Neurodiversity be labelled as a disability?

The Equality Act 2010 labels neurodiversity as a disability, yet we must consider whether it should be considered so, or simply a neurological difference in the way people interpret the world around them. A common reason as to why neurodiverse individuals feel disadvantaged is due to the lack of support structures around them, rather than the ‘condition’ itself, known as the Social Model of Disability. Having such labels may contribute to the idea that there is a ‘normal’ and ‘abnormal’ way of thinking, further alienating them.

Despite this, a label is not always harmful as it may provide individuals with an understanding of how and why they experience the world, giving them clarity and structure. It may help them identify the barriers they face and the tools they could use to overcome them, in order to improve their quality of life. Some may argue that it protects individuals from discrimination by providing them with a legal framework to safeguard their rights. The most reasonable answer to a topic as nuanced as this, is that it is up to neurodiverse professionals, and not employers, to either label their neurological differences or not as it is a highly personal and sensitive identifier.

Overall

Neurodiverse individuals are more than their conditions, and must not be reduced to their diagnosis. As long as candidates meet the requirement for the role, their diagnosis or label should not be a hurdle or barrier to employment. There is a general consensus that neurodiversity inherently cannot be categorised into specific diagnoses and conditions as it involves a range of traits. Thus, employers may choose to instead consider the individual needs and adjustments of all employees to ensure maximum inclusivity, safety, and comfort for them.