The search for answers
In an era of instant information, the journey towards understanding one’s brain often begins with a search engine. You may have come across “quick autism tests” or “ADHD quizzes” while scrolling through social media or looking for clarity about your child’s development. While these tools can spark curiosity about neurodivergence, they often oversimplify a reality that is far more nuanced than a short checklist can capture.
Questioning how your brain works, or seeking answers for someone you care about, is a meaningful step towards self-understanding. However, navigating autism and ADHD requires moving beyond stereotypes and online self-diagnosis towards a professional framework. Neurodivergence is not a checklist of traits to manage, but a unique way of processing the world that requires a clinical, evidence-based understanding.
Why it is an “assessment”, not a “test”
A common misconception is that identifying neurodivergence is similar to diagnosing a physical condition. In reality, there is no medical test, no lab result, blood panel, or brain scan, that can confirm autism or ADHD. Instead, organisations such as Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect) use a comprehensive clinical assessment. This distinction matters because it shifts the focus from finding a problem to understanding a person’s individual life experience.
From a clinical perspective, these assessments are detailed and rigorous. For autism or ADHD, the process typically involves four to six hours of observation and interviews, while a cognitive assessment alone is usually shorter, around three to four hours. Clinicians use standardised, evidence-based tools such as the ADOS-2 (Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule) and the ADI-R (Autism Diagnostic Interview – Revised) for autism, or the DIVA-5 for adult ADHD. These tools help clinicians understand social interaction, sensory experiences, and executive functioning, rather than relying only on outward behaviour.
“Diagnosing autism can be difficult, because there is no single medical test, like a blood test, to assist with making a diagnosis.” - Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect)
The “AuDHD” shift and the 2013 turning point
For many years, autism and ADHD were seen as mutually exclusive. Until the release of the DSM-5 in 2013, clinicians were not permitted to diagnose both in the same person. This is now understood to have been a significant gap in clinical practice. Current research suggests co-occurrence rates ranging from around 22 per cent to as high as 83 per cent, a combination often referred to as “AuDHD”.
This overlap can create internal tension. A preference for routine and predictability may conflict with a strong drive for novelty and change. Long-term, focused interests may exist alongside intense but shorter periods of fixation. To identify this overlap, clinicians look for shared features, including:
- differences in impulse control
- difficulty switching between tasks
- periods of intense focus that exclude everything else
- sensory sensitivities to light, sound, or textures
- repetitive movements used for regulation
The hidden reality for girls and women
Differences in diagnosis between genders remain one of the biggest challenges in neurodiversity advocacy. In childhood, diagnosis rates are approximately three boys to every one girl. By adulthood, those rates are much closer to equal. This suggests many girls are overlooked during their school years, often because their experiences do not match outdated, male-centred assumptions.
Boys are more likely to be referred for behaviours seen as disruptive, while girls are more often referred for emotional distress such as anxiety or low mood. In many cases, the underlying neurodivergence is missed.
A major contributor to this delay is masking. Girls and women are often socially conditioned to hide differences and adapt their behaviour to meet expectations. This is not simply fitting in. It is an ongoing, exhausting process that can contribute to burnout and to discovering their identity later in life.
Diagnosis as identity, not just a disability label
A diagnosis later in life is not simply about identifying a condition. While formal identification can provide access to supports such as the NDIS, its deeper value often lies in self-understanding and identity acceptance.
Using identity-first language, such as “autistic person”, recognises neurodivergence as an integral part of who someone is, rather than something separate from them. For many people, a diagnosis offers clarity, supports self-acceptance, and creates a pathway to community and belonging.
“For some people, receiving a diagnosis is beneficial in terms of understanding more about themselves and a part of their identity.” - Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect)
Debunking the “bad parenting” and “sugar” myths
Moving forward requires challenging long-standing myths that place unnecessary blame on families.
The parenting myth: autism and ADHD are not caused by poor discipline or parenting. They are neurodevelopmental differences with strong genetic influences.
The sugar myth: research consistently shows no direct link between sugar intake and the development of ADHD.
The “lazy” label: difficulties with organisation, focus, or follow-through reflect differences in executive functioning, not a lack of effort or motivation.
Professional assessment can open the door to environments where neurodivergent people can live well, not just cope. Access has improved in recent years, with telehealth allowing people in regional areas to receive specialist support. For young children, clinicians may guide parents to help create assessment environments that allow natural responses to be observed.
Although assessments involve time and waiting, they often replace confusion with understanding. When neurodivergence is recognised as a difference rather than a deficit, people are better supported to use their strengths.
If we focused less on changing neurodivergent people and more on adapting schools, workplaces, and communities, what new ideas and perspectives might we unlock?
