Understanding Neurodiversity in the Workplace: Legal and HR Perspectives

How does the concept of "camouflaging" or "masking" by neurodivergent employees complicate an employer's legal obligation to provide reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)?

I am not a neuroscientist but from my research: “Pushing through” is not a character or discipline problem. It’s a Silent Generation/Boomer/Gen X problem. Neuroscience dismantles this cultural myth. It’s not you, your character, or your discipline. It’s your capacity. And everyone has a different capacity. Neurodivergent people tend to have less capacity (specifically Autism), but if you are part of that “push through” generation – you just do it because that is what you were taught by those who had less information. What allostatic load actually means: It's not just "stress adds up." It's cumulative biological wear on regulatory systems: HPA axis, immune, cardiovascular, metabolic. Each stress cycle that doesn't fully resolve leaves a residue. Over time, the system stops returning to baseline. That's not weakness, a character issue or a lack of discipline. That's physiology. The PFC shrinkage problem: Under chronic stress, the prefrontal cortex undergoes measurable structural changes: dendritic retraction and, in sustained cases, gray matter volume reduction. The PFC governs exactly what attorneys are paid for: risk assessment, ethical reasoning, impulse control, working memory, nuanced judgment. The organ doing the "discipline" is the organ being damaged. You cannot willpower your way through the deterioration of the structure that generates willpower. Simultaneously, the amygdala becomes hyperreactive. So the legal professional gets less top-down regulation and more emotional reactivity, precisely when high-stakes decisions demand the opposite. Why "discipline and character" framing fails: It assumes fatigue is motivational and that effort can override it. But when the PFC is structurally compromised, this isn't a software problem you can override. It's a hardware problem. The legal industry's culture essentially asks people to use a damaged tool more forcefully and then judges them when precision suffers. And then there are specific implications for lawyers: Chronic stress doesn't just make you feel bad. It measurably degrades the quality of legal judgment while the attorney often can't perceive the deficit. That's the insidious part. Impaired self-assessment is one of the first casualties of PFC compromise. The structural PFC changes are most robustly demonstrated in animal models. Human neuroimaging studies (particularly from McEwen's lab and others studying chronic stress) show consistent patterns and you can merely google some of this for more information. So what I am trying to say in all this: "pushing through" doesn't preserve performance. It degrades the biological means needed for performance while creating an illusion of functioning. That's not a character argument. That's a malpractice risk argument which is the language that industry actually responds to. Wishing you all the best, Marlo