I have mixed feelings on this article. I've had two neurodivergent boys in my life.

I got married late in life. An eight-year old stepson came into my life. He was below his peers in academics. He didn't have many friends. My wife was against medication. Yet he was still generally a happy kid in elementary school. I thought I had the disposition to lead him through reading and math homework, coupled with recreation and adventure.

But in junior high, his poor academics and poor social skills further alienated him from his peers. He became abusive to me and this mother. He dropped out of high school. He works as a food delivery person, and living rent-free with relatives, who may not extend their generosity much longer. He is a bitter young man, unwilling to make life adjustments to put him in a better place.

He has a younger brother, who was also showing symptoms of neurodivergence. This time, I was adamant that he gets treatment. My wife relented. Danny is catching up to his peers in school. His social skills have improved. But without the medication, he would be following the path of his brother. I am not that good of a parent to fight my son's neurodivirgence by myself.

While I understand we still need to find better ways to deal with neurodivergence, I am thankful the tools we have today.

So I am not OK with letting neurodivirgent kids and adults do their own thing, as this article seems to suggest. Sorry, there are workplace obligations and employers cannot bend that much.

And yes, the medications are hard on the body. But life without the medications is harder.

BTW, I have friends who raised four kids. The three boys were all treated for neurodivirgence. One is still finding life challenging. The other two are gainfully employed. They no longer take the medication. They have learned to cope.

------------

I noticed your byline mentions "The Deep South". We in Canada might be further ahead in this social issue than the USA (or parts of the USA).