In one sentence
Reflective interviews with 37 autistic or ADHD police officers show recurring identity dilemmas: medical versus social disability frames, ability versus disability talk, and staying invisible versus becoming an advocate at work.
What the researchers did
Researchers used critical discursive psychology to analyse reflective interviews with 37 police employees who were autistic or had ADHD. They examined how officers talked about their conditions alongside occupational identity and disability positioning. This is a qualitative discourse study, not a prevalence or performance trial.
What they found
- Officers navigated tension between medical and social-model identity frames.
- Talk about ability and disability often pulled in opposite directions within the same workplace story.
- A third dilemma was remaining invisible (masking or non-disclosure) versus advocating for self and others.
- Authors argue organisations should move beyond binary “able vs disabled” thinking and help reconcile these tensions.
What this means for families and therapists
- Workplace support for neurodivergent adults needs room for both strengths and access needs — not only one narrative.
- Disclosure is a strategic dilemma, not a moral test; safety and culture matter.
- Related reading: autistic healthcare students on placements, autistic burnout, and social identity questionnaire.
Limitations and what we don't know yet
- One occupational group (police); UK-focused qualitative sample.
- Discourse analysis does not measure job performance outcomes.
- Findings may not generalise to all neurodivergent workers.
This is a plain-language summary of Ideological dilemmas of policing on the spectrum: Using critical discursive psychology to examine how neurodivergent police manage their identity framing by O'Reilly M., Drewett A., Tromans S.J., Discourse & Society (2025). Source license: CC-BY. It is not medical advice — talk to a qualified clinician before changing therapy.