Navigating a jeopardising career on the thin blue line of ability vs disability: Neurodivergent police experiences at work

Abstract

Some populations experience inequalities, including issues of gaining and retaining employment. One group impacted are neurodivergent individuals. This is pertinent in careers that carry higher demands, like policing. We interviewed 37 neurodivergent police officers and staff about their careers. Analysis created five themes: (1) self-identity, relating to how they saw themselves in terms of their autism or ADHD; (2) revealing their condition, with reflections on telling others; (3) advantages for policing, referring to how their characteristics were of benefit to the organisation; (4) challenges in the workplace, considering how they encountered some difficulties because of their neurodivergent characteristics; and (5) reasonable adjustments, in relation to some of the benefits and difficulties in mobilising resources to support them. We identified areas where police organisations could change their approach and culture to optimise neurodivergent strengths and capitalise on benefits to the organisation. We conclude with several recommendations for policing practice.

Keywords

neurodivergence police career qualitative

Introduction and background

In this paper, we focus on the career experiences of neurodivergent police, specifically in the context of autism and ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). Research concerning autism and ADHD in relation to the police has typically focused on members of the public and how the police interact with those suspects, witnesses, or victims (Crane et al., 2016; King and Murphy, 2014). Comparatively, there is little research exploring the personal experience of neurodivergent police, working in a role that is stressful and demanding (Tromans et al., 2023). Thus, understanding the perspectives of neurodivergent individuals could provide important insights into the benefits and barriers in such an occupation. Autism and ADHD are two of the most common neurodevelopmental conditions and the characteristics of these could arguably be of great benefit to police forces. It is important therefore to explore the experiences of these police personnel in greater detail and to better understand how the associated characteristics intersect with the occupational roles held.

To understand autism and ADHD in the context of police experiences, the medical framing becomes important. Autism is characterised by ‘deficits’ in social communication and social interaction, and by restricted or repetitive behaviours (World Health Organization (WHO) [ICD-11], 2024). The global prevalence of autism is approximately 0.8% in the general population (Baxter et al., 2015). ADHD is characterised by persistent patterns of inattention and/or impulsivity-hyperactivity which negatively impacts the individual’s social functioning and daily life (WHO, 2024 [ICD-11]). The global prevalence of ADHD (with childhood onset) is 2.58%, and symptomatic adult ADHD (regardless of childhood onset) is 6.75% (Song et al., 2021). Autism and ADHD also demonstrate high rates of co-occurrence in affected individuals, with Rong et al. (2021) estimating a lifetime prevalence of 40.2% of ADHD in autistic people. Notably, these figures are founded in medical diagnoses based on criteria from clinical manuals and this has implications for all areas of the lives of autistic people and those with ADHD, including in employment, not least because they classify individuals as having a disability.

Neurodivergence and employment

There is much written in policy viewing neurodevelopmental conditions as disabilities. Seeking a formal diagnosis is often thought to provide medical validation for the disability label which many individuals believe will provide a foundation to mobilise needed resources (O’Reilly et al., 2023), and can help adults make sense of their prior life experiences (Lewis, 2016). Conceptualising neurodivergence as a disability, however, has implications for how people are treated at work, especially given that disability is a protected characteristic in the Equality Act 2010. In the UK, government figures suggested that 7.2% of disabled people were unemployed, and 43.3% economically inactive, with a disability employment gap of 29.8 percentage points (Gov.uk, 2023). Data from the UK 2021 census reported that only 29.0% (95% CI 24.8-33.2) of autistic people were employed, placing this group as having the second lowest employment rate among the 17 categories of disability for which they reported data (ONS, 2021),¹ with only 1 in 3 people with ADHD employed, and 60% of them more likely to lose that job (ADDA, 2024). These trends also exist abroad; with research evidence from non-UK nations reporting that both autistic adults and adults with ADHD experience higher rates of unemployment relative to the general population (Helgesson et al., 2023; Roux et al., 2013). In the case of people with ADHD, for those who strive for employment, there is a lack of opportunity, transportation challenges, structural inequalities in the school system resulting in lower academic attainment, employer barriers and misconceptions, as well as personal factors around self-esteem, confidence, and anxiety (Russell et al., 2014; Samosh et al., 2024).

Attaining employment is not the only challenge for neurodivergent individuals, as they also have greater challenges than their neurotypical peers in retaining employment (Barnard et al., 2001; Nicholas et al., 2019; Ohl et al., 2017). The challenges for retaining employment are arguably because of organisational and practical barriers, with businesses operating through a neurotypical lens, creating social problems, communication issues, and process-related difficulties for job entry (Lorenz et al., 2016). A lack of predictability and continuity can further lead to stress and exhaustion, making working life difficult (Högstedt et al., 2023). These barriers are arguably problematic, not least as neurodivergent individuals have skills that are beneficial to organisations. For example, autistic people report having many employment-related strengths and being able to thrive in the right environment (Cope and Remington, 2022), particularly when provided appropriate reasonable adjustments (Gov.UK, n.d.). This includes greater attention to detail (Scott et al., 2017), excellent visual skills (Jiang et al., 2015) and strengths in terms of visuospatial reasoning, hyper-focus on tasks and creative thinking (Doyle, 2020). A strengths and competencies-based approach is therefore needed and improvements to encourage inclusion, participation, and voice in work. This will promote equity for neurodivergent individuals, reduce economic inequalities, and capitalise on the benefits that they bring to the workplace (Johnson, 2022; Wong et al., 2018).

Notably, the promotion of equity in the workplace is based on the Equality Act 2010, which clarifies that employers must not discriminate on the basis of disability. For neurodivergent employees this can create some concern, which is twofold. First, there is political debate whereby some groups advocate that neurodivergent conditions should not be classified as disorders or disabilities, on the basis that they ‘are not intrinsically harmful, and that they are valuable, natural and/or normal parts of human neurocognitive variation’ (Hughes 2021, p.47). This has created tensions with varying considerations as to the extent the condition may be disabling, especially given the broader framing in terms of legislation promoting equality. The argument around a disability framing is complex and nuanced. Second, is in relation to inequalities in employment for those who are neurodivergent, as employment is a central feature of typical adult life but as we have demonstrated, can be difficult to obtain for neurodivergent persons. Arguments have therefore been proposed that the concept of neurodiversity is more appropriate. While there are some differing perspectives within this movement, the promotion of a strengths-based approach and advocation of hearing the voices of autistic individuals or those with ADHD is valuable in the context of employment and disability.

The neurodiversity movement

Our perspective on autism and ADHD aligns with the neurodiversity movement in relation to this being a rights-based movement (see Tan, 2024) viewing neurodivergent individuals as different from their neurotypical peers (Milton, 2017). The neurodiversity movement seeks to reduce a medicalised characterisation of autism and ADHD, seeing difference as part of a natural variation across humans (Jaarsma and Welin, 2012). Baumer and Freuh (2021, p. n.p) describe neurodiversity as ‘the idea that people experience and interact with the world around them in many ways; there is no one ‘right’ way of thinking, learning, and behaving, and differences are not viewed as deficits.’ Neurodiversity refers to differences seen in all people, referring to degrees of variability rather than a characteristic of a population with everyone having a unique nervous system (Singer, n.d.). Nonetheless, it is frequently used in the context of people with neurodevelopmental conditions as an advocacy movement (Baumer and Freuh, 2021) with neurodivergent being the term to describe them (Singer, n.d.).

Our alignment with the neurodiversity movement is in its rights-based foundations as we seek a platform for neurodivergent individuals to have a voice. In valuing the strengths-based, rights-based foundations of the neurodiversity movement, we do not disregard the value of medical labels and clinical support as we recognise that individuals can and do seek to mobilise resources through diagnosis which can create tensions around a disabled identity and for some that can be challenging to reconcile (see Lester and O’Reilly, 2021 for discussions). Thus, we recognise the controversies in a disability framing, with some neurodivergent people valuing medical intervention and others resisting such conceptualisations (see Lester et al., 2015; Tan, 2024). Neurodiversity claims are important in the context of employment and disability therefore, as they do not ignore the heterogeneity of neurodivergence, even within single conditions, and neither do they discard the disabling impact of social conditions on some people, but it does challenge the characterising of these as a disability (Jaarsma and Welin, 2012). Some of these challenges are recognised at a policy level. For example, legislative changes to the UK Mental Health Act through a draft bill in 2022 formally acknowledged autism as a developmental condition rather than a mental health category (Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, 2022).

Focus on neurodivergent police

We construct our argument regarding autistic police and those with ADHD in this paper within the wider disability literature for three reasons: (1) autism and ADHD are clinical conditions as per DSM-5 and ICD-11 and constitute a form of disability in formal legislation (APA, 2013; WHO, 2024), (2) some families and neurodivergent individuals do position themselves as disabled (Lester et al., 2015) because of their high support needs (Tan, 2024), and 3), such discussions contribute to nuances around inequality, because in terms of equality, diversity, and inclusion, neurodivergence has a disability framing (Equality Act, 2010), that cannot be ignored in police contexts and employment inequalities. Indeed, we argue that in considering the pertinence of disability in relation to autism and ADHD in the context of policing, it is important to consider the nuanced and contextual specifics of this as a career choice. This is however complicated by the limited literature on career choices by neurodivergent individuals and the specific benefits and challenges they bring and face in such occupations.

We argue, therefore, that part of the challenge when considering disability and neurodivergence in the context of employment is that the literature on employment treats neurodivergence and employment in a homogenous way. In other words, much research focuses on ‘employment’ generally, without due attention to the challenges that different roles bring specifically to autistic individuals or those with ADHD. Instead, it is more usual to see employed or unemployed as categories, or for surveys to cluster professions, as managerial, professional, technical, secretarial, trade, caring, plant, and elementary (see ONS, 2021). There is a small growing literature that recognises the specific employment issues that certain kinds of occupations might bring to autistic people and those with ADHD. For example, there has been some work focusing on a career, like librarian (Lund, 2018) social worker (Guthrie 2023), and medic (Doherty et al., 2021). Additionally, some attention is being paid to neurodivergent police, such as autistic and those with ADHD (Tromans et al., 2023) or dyslexia (Hill, 2024).

Given some of the strengths associated neurodivergent individuals, there is potential for elevated successes in careers whereby those conditions are well-suited, such as ADHD and entrepreneurship roles (Wiklund et al., 2017), and autism and information technology-based careers (Walkowiak, 2021). However, in order to achieve their potential, it is important that autistic employees work in a supportive environment where their line manager and colleagues have a good understanding of how to support neurodivergent employees (Petty et al., 2023; Robbins, 2017). One category of employment where there is scope for exploration is in jeopardising careers, due to the arguably increased stress and demand. We define a jeopardising career as holding a role whereby there is a greater degree of potential harm to persons, including death, in the daily conduct of the job, but also in relation to the risk of human error and thus, personal or organisational accountability (O’Reilly et al., 2024, p.13). This may include roles such as medicine, social work and law enforcement [police]. Neurodivergent conditions and employment have not been given sufficient research attention, and in police careers even less. Embedding neurodiversity approaches within organisations is central to improving the organisational structures that may facilitate or hinder the work of neurodivergent police officers and staff. A spotlight on their views can help unlock some solutions to the challenges faced in the workplace.

We therefore address the question ‘what are the workplace and career experiences of neurodivergent persons working for the police?’

Method

In the spirit of inclusion and promoting participation, we utilised a qualitative design centring the voices of neurodivergent police officers and staff. Aligned with our participant-centred ideology, we partnered with the National Police Autism Association (NPAA), to promote opportunity and to be mindful of our neurotypical researcher status.

Data collection

With NPAA support we distributed a survey sent to all neurodivergent members for those autistic and ADHD to voluntarily complete (Tromans et al., 2023). Based on expression of interest from the survey and consent, we recruited 37 police officers (n = 26), described as those who investigate crime and respond to incidents, and staff (n = 11), described as those to support officers and contribute to organisational efficiency. The sample consisted of 18 women and 19 men. Of these 22 identified as autistic and 13 as having ADHD, with seven participants reporting both conditions (when co-occurring often referred to as AuDHD, Sadiq, 2025). Two participants identified as neurodivergent without being specific, and five self-identified with some being on a waiting list (autism = 3, ADHD = 2). Experience with the police ranged from two-39-years, with most having 10-years + experience.

A reflective interviewing style was adopted to allow participants to provide stories and examples from their work and reflect on the impact on them (Roulston, 2010). The reflective approach allowed a more conversational style whereby interviewees could lead and reflect on events in their career history, and the interviewer was freer to ‘think’. Questions were clustered to allow for participant-driven topics, and included questions about their experiences of neurodivergence, about their career history in the police, their perceptions of any inequality they have witnessed or experienced in relation to autism or ADHD, and organisational support for their condition. Interviews typically lasted an hour. Interviews took place over the video-conferencing platform Microsoft Teams to accommodate a wide geographical spread as participants were from across the UK and one participant requested adjustments and provided responses to questions as text.

Analytic approach

A reflexive thematic analysis approach was adopted due to its inductive and participant-driven way of working (Braun and Clarke, 2022). This type of thematic analysis emphasises language and meaning, allowing for a reflective approach to coding (Braun and Clarke, 2022). This was selected above other qualitative approaches such as Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis because it aimed to identify broader patterns of experiences across the dataset rather than focus on an in-depth analysis of the specific and detailed experience of individuals (Braun and Clarke, 2022). Two members of the team engaged with inductively coding the data (MO and AD) and a mapping exercise from the entire data corpus from the project led to the creation of forty-two overarching themes, to create themes as per guidance by Braun and Clarke (see O’Reilly et al., 2024 for details of the 42). Both researchers met midway to discuss their coding; this was not to triangulate or for reliability but as collaborators to reflexively develop the analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2022). Codes were amalgamated without difficulty at the end of the process due to the similarities in the coding categories and mutually agreed theoretical positioning and differences were discussed with the third team member for resolution. In this paper we report only the overarching themes most relevant to our research question.

Ethics

All participants provided written informed consent, confirmed for the recording. Ethical governance was provided by the University of Leicester Ethics Committee; reference 35588-mjo14-ss/mc:sociology. The NPAA representative provided consent to approach and recruit participants through this national organisation. We were not made aware of the specific police force that each person was employed by.

Results

The data were rich in detail as participants navigated through their positive and negative personal experiences associated with their condition, their career trajectory and their accounts of any barriers faced. We report the five overarching themes pertinent to this paper, which focuses on police work and career experiences.

Theme one: The self-identity

This theme exemplifies tensions inherent in different standpoints. Participants recognised the importance of others’ understandings of autism and ADHD and the way in which the conditions are linguistically positioned in relation to mental health and disability narratives. In navigating whether they were ‘disabled’ they grappled with the tensions of how the label mobilised opportunities for reasonable adjustments or support. However, they resisted disability categories for the self-identity not liking the term, such as PO26 who claimed, ‘I don’t like the word disability in any term, any context’. Others agreed that the term disability was not necessarily appropriate.

So, you get diagnosed with autism ‘oh you’ve been diagnosed with autism I am so sorry that you're suffering with autism, what reasonable adjustments do you need?’ ‘Well first of all I'm not suffering.

PO18

I didn’t like that, seeing neurodiverse as disability. I must admit I didn’t like that…… And he [manager] said ‘well I'm glad you told me this’ and he sent me this link and went to the disabilities site where you could claim money for, to be able to keep your job, to do your job basically...

PO12

The tensions associated with disabilities were evident as participants resisted notions of ‘suffering’ with their condition or being constructed as ‘disabled’. In presenting the reactions of colleagues and managers when revealing their neurodivergent identity at work, they imbued the responses with a pejorative sense of self, with others presenting a version of neurodivergence that was inconsistent with their own. Participants self-identified as neurodivergent but argued that part of the tensions when revealing this was the homogenising of their personal identity, such as PO1, ‘because every autistic person is different’. They argued such homogenising was unhelpful and contributed to misconceptions.

There is a saying, once you’ve met one person with autism you’ve only met one person, because everybody is so different.

PO2

Neuro-typical people are not a homogenous group, and neither are autistic people.

PS4

Notably, participants constructed difference as part of being human and actively argued that neurodivergent people cannot be collectively understood because of their unique differences. Aligned with this positioning, they noted that neurotypical persons cannot be grouped together in a homogenising way because of the differences across the population and leveraged this argument as a rationale for not doing so with neurodivergence. Indeed, most participants were adopters of neurodiversity emphasising difference over disability.

But I don’t feel, not that I've got a problem but I'm just different. Because I've always been different so I can't not be different if that makes sense.

PO16

Indeed, it was recognised that their difference can be advantageous as given the appropriate adjustments, they can ‘thrive’ and ‘do better than the neurotypical person’ in the job.

If you give me the right conditions and the right reasonable adjustments, I can thrive and do better than the neurotypical person, because of just how my brain works and all of those things.

PS2

Advocates of neurodivergent persons have consistently called for changes in the way society views, adapts, and responds to neurodivergent members, with the social model strongly proposing the ‘disability’ being situated within the social and environmental surroundings of a person (Oliver, 2013). Perhaps unsurprisingly, the participants aligned with social and neurodiverse constructions of their condition and made a case that police organisations should see difference not disability, and simple adjustments can facilitate their success in policing.

Theme two: Considerations in revealing the condition

Notably, not all participants had revealed their condition to their Occupational Health departments, to their managers or to their peers. While some had informed their managers and not their peers, and others had told their peers but not their managers, some had elected to tell no-one. Some were concerned that revealing their neurodivergence would negatively impact them at work as they argued that police organisations did not understand autism or ADHD.

I think for me the biggest difficulty is lack of understanding in the police about autism.

PO1

Because I can tell that it's not going to change anything, because they don’t understand what ADHD is.

PO10

Due to this lack of understanding and concerns about what it would mean to identify as neurodivergent within the force, some participants reported not telling anyone at work. Indeed, PS9 said she ‘wouldn’t ever disclose it to anyone at work’.

There were some however who were actively vocal about their condition and used this status as an expert by experience to educate others, create and deliver training, or lead support groups. They reported a sense of obligation to help other neurodivergent police by educating their force and supporting those new to the police or new to diagnosis (or both).

From my point of view. I'm quite open, I have no issues with anyone I work with knowing that I'm autistic....

PO11

So, a few of us got together and chatted, and they’ve set up the ADHD neurodiversity support group, which is growing by the day.

PO12

Nonetheless, a commonly held view regardless of whether they had or not revealed their condition, was that being neurodivergent would impact career progression. This was because the characteristics of the conditions were themselves perceived as a barrier, or because of the attitudes of others, or because of a lack of organisational knowledge and understanding.

It's very interesting that I speak to a lot of people who would like to do something in their career but are worried that if they come out and declare their diagnosis that they’ll be told that they can't do it.

PO24

I have now had an occy health referral now, I did put that off for a bit. I don’t know what… probably worried that they might, I don’t know, restrict me in some way.

PO15

While there were various reasons for participants to tell people within their organisation or to withhold that information, it was clear that concerns were at the centre of their decision (see O’Reilly et al., 2025a for further discussion of this concern regarding disclosure). Participants generally were positive about their neurodivergent identity, but believed there was stigma generally in society and certainly a lack of understanding within the police which influenced their decision about if and who to inform. Despite this, however, they did report a range of advantages that their neurodivergent condition brought to policing.

Theme three: Advantages for policing

A fundamental message from participants related to the benefits brought to the police role due to specific characteristics associated with their autism and/or ADHD. They differentiated between themselves and their neurotypical peers, where they highlighted differences specifically to highlight benefits to the police. They argued that policing was a well-suited career for those autistic or ADHD.

So, I don’t think it's the police force, it's more who’s around you. I think there’s a great potential for the police service to be a brilliant place for neurodiversity,

PO8

I joined the police, and I think it's endemic in the police, neurodiversity in general.

PO13

As well as talking in general terms about policing and about neurodivergence, participants offered specific examples of how the characteristics of autism or those of ADHD may benefit police work, such as being able to sort ‘patterns and numbers’ (PO17) or being able to ‘think outside of the box for solutions’ (PS10).

When I said about the ADHD you have good aspects of it where I can pick out things that other people don’t, I can see things.

PO4

So, I do think that’s not everyone’s got that, that good a memory. And looking at detail and being a bit interested in detail. So yeah, there is an advantage, it can be an advantage.

PO6

In so doing they illustrated how some tasks or roles were well-suited to the nature of their condition and that these strengths ought to be capitalised upon by organisations.

I make a great detective because I'm autistic and autistic people do this, this and this and I'm very good at that, that, that and that’s the qualities that you want in a detective.

PO18

I think the police would do well to recognise the strengths that neurodiversity can bring from high functioning autism and ADHD... And I think that they're missing a trick massively by not actually positively seeking out employees, even if it's staff, but certainly some roles police officer roles, where they utilise neurodiverse conditions actually to form a dream team. Buddy them up with somebody and then buddy them up with somebody neurotypical and you'll have a dream team.

PO14

Ultimately, therefore, they argued that police organisations ought to be more proactive in seeking out neurodivergent employees and recruiting new police with these characteristics. They argued that because of the benefits and skills these personnel bring to the job, they create a ‘dream team’ when combined with neurotypical peers.

Theme four: Challenges in the workplace

While there were elements of policing work and of police organisations that were positively appraised by participants, they did spotlight various challenges that were role, organisation, and culture related. They believed they were motivated for the career prospects and demands of a stressful job but recognised that the challenges for them were systemic, societal, and organisational. They argued there was limited understanding of neurodivergence in society and specifically in the police, and many misconceptions and stereotypes which impacted how they were treated. Participants reported that they failed to ‘fit’ in with their peers and the organisation.

I enjoyed the work, but I didn’t ...I really struggled with the colleague side of it again. Because my face didn’t really fit.

PO1

They felt there were problems with the culture of policing and peer/manager attitudes toward them.

And being young, I was just like ‘yeah this is what everyone does, this is what the old sweats have done for 30 years, they’ve been on team, they've just kind of got on with it’. And no one ever processes it really.

PO21

And changing, as I say, changing that mind-set of policing of ‘you'll do as your told, you'll go to whatever role, tough you’ve got to be good at this’. It needs a complete change.

PO23

Specifically, they expressed concern that police forces were organised around neurotypical people, their needs, and the way they operated. They felt that these challenges were systemic and needed redress because ‘it’s inequality, because the system is designed for neurotypicals’ (PO12).

Yeah, the hoops to jump through are very much geared around, as I say, a typical person, a neurotypical person’s type view rather than encouraging that real diversity.

PO26

I think the second huge battle in policing is our systems. Our systems are not suited to neurodivergent conditions at all. They’re very complex, they're very difficult to get round just for everybody they are.

PO10

The challenges faced is multi-layered and complex. Participants reported different levels of difficulty, from general social attitudes toward autism and ADHD, to more organisational issues like systems and culture. They felt that these layers of challenge contributed to a problematic ‘inequality’ that failed to genuinely account for ‘diversity’ within policing.

Theme five: Reasonable adjustments and the career trajectory

Much discussion occurred regarding retention in employment and advancement in careers. Participants noted the obligation of police forces to support neurodivergent employees to maximise their potential and facilitate the working environment.

But they need to be the right reasonable adjustments for the right person. And basically, what you need to do is, it is a flow, it's a dynamic flowing process because an autistic person in one job in the police may not need reasonable adjustments, but in another job may need loads of reasonable adjustments.

PO18

Nonetheless, they believed that police organisations were not capitalising on neurodivergent strengths and felt that with the right kind of support, use of reasonable adjustments that worked in practice, and a greater level of acceptance, policing would advance. They felt limited in promotion prospects and believed that reasonable adjustments were failing to support career trajectories.

But then they give you these accommodations, but they don’t stick to them, so part of me thinks it's a bit pointless really, that’s not much more I can do, you know.

PO1

But I actually want some [headphones] that you put on and you pretty much block the world out. So that’s all I've really asked of the job. But it's on the too difficult list, I think. I’ll end up buying them myself no doubt.

PO14

Promotion challenges were considered as participants explained the difficulties associated with reasonable adjustments. Specifically, the problems they encountered in trying to work through the police hierarchical system, with promotion viewed as ‘inaccessible’ (PO1).

I don’t think career progression is necessarily, that it would necessarily be particularly easy for me.

PO7

And when you're kind of asked in a promotion context ‘tell us about a time when….’ And I'm like ‘I can't, I just did my job I just did this’, I don’t think in those terms, or I didn’t think in those terms.

PO26

Ultimately, participants believed that their career in policing was influenced and shaped by the characteristics of their neurodivergence. While there were benefits acknowledged and recognition that police organisations did make some effort to make reasonable adjustments to support their work and progression, they felt that fundamentally there were systemic problems with the promotion process and with the nature of support given.

Discussion

Summary of findings

Neurodivergent individuals face considerable challenges in gaining and retaining employment (Barnard et al. 2001; Nicholas et al. 2019; Ohl et al. 2017). When in employment, they work hard to not only manage the complexity of their chosen career, but also work to ‘fit in’ with their peers and be part of the workplace community. This aligns with a systematic review of barriers for autistic people in employment generally that found autistic employees lost their jobs because of difficulties with social interaction rather than aspects of their job role (Fong et al., 2021). In working in their role, these neurodivergent people make active decisions regarding whether to reveal this aspect of their identity, with some choosing to keep their condition hidden due to concerns about incompatibility between their neurodivergence and career progression (Doherty et al., 2021; O’Reilly et al., 2025a). This is further compounded by the often unstructured and unpredictable systems within organisations and the hierarchical structures often found in disciplines like medicine (Bury et al., 2021) and in policing as we illustrated through our data.

Our research with neurodivergent police officers and staff illustrates that there are many complexities in working within a jeopardising career like policing. There were tensions to be balanced which reflected the wider societal dilemmas that neurodivergent people face daily. They negotiated their own self-identity as a neurodivergent person and how that influenced their role identity working in the police. They grappled with the challenge that neurodivergence falls within disability categories on the agenda of equality within occupational standards, and yet resisted this in favour of neurodiversity. This did nonetheless create some difficulties as participants made decisions about whether to inform people within the organisation about their condition (see also O’Reilly et al., 2025a). They noted that revealing their condition mobilised resources and support, but also it could bring negative attitudes and misconceptions. There were related cultural challenges in the police and yet they reported advantages they brought to the job. Despite these advantages they consistently faced problems in attaining promotion and building a career.

Recommendations and implications

Through our writing we have attempted to add to the small body of literature that focuses on jeopardising careers and neurodivergence, such as social work (Guthrie, 2023), and medicine (Doherty et al., 2021). Based on the voices of our participants we offer some recommendations which can be synthesised with the current evidence that supports a strengths-based, neurodiverse approach to facilitating neurodivergent people in work. Scholars such as Kirby and Smith (2021), Milton (2017) and the recent Buckland Report (2024) (a review focussed on ‘identifying the barriers to autistic people securing sustained and fulfilling employment and exploring how we can overcome those barriers’) emphasise the strengths that neurodivergent identities bring. Employers therefore need a greater awareness and take steps to capitalise on the advantages that their neurodivergent employees bring to the organisation. We therefore make recommendations to police organisations based within five domains: (1) recruitment, (2) support systems, (3) reasonable adjustments, (4) culture and organisational systems, and (5) optimising strengths.

First, an important implication relates to recruitment. Indeed, some participants reported that police organisations should proactively recruit neurodivergent persons, and some into specific roles where the characteristics are well suited. Awareness and acceptance were necessary regarding the value of neurodivergence in policing at all levels of the organisation. However, the Buckland Report (2024) shows that autistic people specifically have more negative experiences of recruitment interviews, psychometric testing, and group tasks than their neurotypical peers. Thus, in terms of policing, the College of Policing can listen to the voices of neurodivergent police officers and staff to provide ways to support inclusion in the training of new recruits. Senior persons in police organisations and trainers could have in depth conversations with student officers that recognise the strengths neurodivergent employees bring. This is important at the recruitment phase as personality testing may preclude certain characteristics found in neurodivergent persons and attention needs to be paid to the kinds of questions asked in interviews to be clear and unambiguous.

Second, the support systems within police organisations may benefit from additional attention. When individuals do reveal their neurodivergent identities to peers, managers and/or Human Resource departments the way in which they are treated will be instrumental to their sense of identity and the way in which they do their job. Senior managers or wellbeing champions can act as a mentor and having a point of contact that can be a central source of support can be beneficial. Kirby and Smith (2021) offer advice in this regard explaining that clarity in the job description is essential, descriptions of jargon helpful, timely adjustments need to be in place, and regular reviews can facilitate development. They further recommend clear line management and support processes, clear lines of communication through annual review and space for the person to discuss issues encountered. All employees deserve to be respected at work.

Third, the obligation of organisations to make reasonable adjustments for individuals with disabilities under the Equality Act 2010 requires genuine implementation within any workforce. While there are tensions regarding the positioning of neurodivergence as disability, for purposes of equality the Act makes clear organisational responsibility. Our participants recognised various challenges and problems with the implementation of reasonable adjustments, and of course they rely individual disclosure. However, where they are in place, it is important that these are reviewed regularly, and it should be recognised that these rely on a trusting relationship between the neurodivergent individual and their team/manager.

Fourth, the culture of policing can be challenging in a range of contexts and can have detrimental impacts on the wellbeing of police officers and staff (O’Reilly et al., 2025b). The participants in our study reported that the nature of police culture was not beneficial to neurodivergent persons and that the systems within it favoured neurotypical employees. As part of Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion, this is an area that requires some redress. Cultural change is led from senior management and a broader ethos of awareness and acceptance is needed. This is reflected more widely in societal attitudes toward autism and ADHD and not just in policing. Training within police forces that focus on neurodiversity and acceptance could be helpful. This is something that is being seen in health and social care in England with the Oliver McGowan Mandatory Training in Learning Disability and Autism Programme (NHS Health Education England) and could be translated in a policing context.

Fifth, the strengths of neurodivergent officers and staff could be more meaningfully optimised by policing organisations to the benefit of the public being served. Participants reported that there were some roles better suited to their neurodevelopmental profile than others, but this was sometimes challenging to assure within the police. While there are likely operational and financial challenges, where possible and beneficial, individuals could be positioned in job roles that optimise their strengths while being advantageous to their psychosocial wellbeing. For example, research has highlighted how autistic people communicate effectively with other autistic people (Crompton et al., 2020), an example of the double empathy problem proposed by Milton et al. (2022) suggesting that non-autistic persons lack insight into the culture of neurodivergence. This suggests that autistic police and those with ADHD are well-suited to working with neurodivergent witnesses, victims, and suspects. Furthermore, the participants identified their neurodivergent strengths, like attention to detail, problem solving and being insightful, which indicates suitability for those roles that require those skills.

Strengths and limitations

The strengths of this study include a focus on a group for which limited research into the personal experiences of neurodivergent employees has been previously conducted, namely neurodivergent police officers and staff. Additionally, through the inclusion of participants both with and without formal clinical diagnoses of autism and/or ADHD, we are acknowledging the barriers that many people face to obtaining a diagnostic assessment (Morris, 2024).

This study has some limitations. We do not know if the study population is representative of neurodivergent police force employees more generally, as those who are NPAA members and/or were open to taking part in this research may not be entirely representative of this wider group. Second, we do not know if neurodivergent police force employees are representative of adults with neurodivergent conditions in the general population. By virtue of their employment, they may, on average, have lower support needs (see Tan, 2024) than the wider neurodivergent population within which they exist, and this may affect some of their perceptions on how they view their condition, especially in terms of disability conceptualisations. There is an uneasy relationship between neurodivergence and disability, and these tensions and nuances were revealed through our data.

In closing our argument, we align with Doherty et al. (2021) who noted a need to change the culture of medicine so that practitioners can reveal their neurodivergent identity in health organisations without concerns about stigma and discrimination. They note that this has positive implications for neurodivergent patients. Likewise, neurodivergent police should be able to have their neurodivergent identity recognised and celebrated by their forces, and this can only be useful and positive for neurodivergent persons encountering the police.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to the National Police Autism Association for their support during our research. We offer great thanks to the officers and staff who took the time to participate in our work. We are also grateful to the Wellcome Trust [pump priming award] to support the research.

ORCID iD

Michelle O’Reilly

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study is supported by Wellcome Trust pump priming award; RM32J0028M9

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

Original data are not available for sharing due to ethical constraints. “For the purpose of open access, the author has applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to the Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission.”*

Note

References

ADDA (2024) ADHD at work. https://add.org/impact-of-adhd-at-work/#:∼text=Risks_for_Employees_with_Untreated_ADHD&text=Loss_of_Employment_%E2%80%93_Employees_with_impulsively_(Barkley%2C_2008)

American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Barnard

Harvey

VPD

Prior

(2001) Ignored or Ineligible? the Reality for Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorders. London, UK: The National Autistic Society.

Baumer

Freuh

(2021) What is neurodiversity. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/what-is-neurodiversity-202111232645

Baxter

Brugha

Erskine

, et al. (2015) The epidemiology and global burden of autism spectrum disorders. Psychological Medicine 45(3): 601–613.

Braun

Clarke

(2022) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.

Buckland Report (2024) Buckland review of autism employment. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-buckland-review-of-autism-employment-report-and-recommendations/the-buckland-review-of-autism-employment-report-and-recommendations

Bury

Flower

Zulla

, et al. (2021) Workplace social challenges experienced by employees on the autism spectrum: an international exploratory study examining employee and supervisor perspectives. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 51(5): 1614–1627.

Cope

Remington

(2022) The strengths and abilities of autistic people in the workplace. Autism in Adulthood: Challenges and Management 4(1): 22–31.

10.

Crane

Maras

Hawken

, et al. (2016) Experiences of autism spectrum disorder and policing in England and Wales: surveying police and the autism community. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 46: 2028–2041.

11.

Crompton

Ropar

Evans-Williams

, et al. (2020) Autistic peer-to-peer information transfer is highly effective. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice 24(7): 1704–1712.

12.

Doherty

Johnson

Buckley

(2021) Supporting autistic doctors in primary care: challenging the myths and misconceptions. British Journal of General Practice: The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners 24(708): 294-295.

13.

Doyle

(2020) Neurodiversity at work: a biopsychosocial model and the impact on working adults. British Medical Bulletin 135(1): 108–125.

14.

Fong

Taylor

Berdyyeva

, et al. (2021) Interventions for improving employment outcomes for persons with autism spectrum disorders: a systematic review update. Campbell Systematic Reviews 17(3): e1185.

15.

Gov.UK (nd) Reasonable adjustments for workers with disabilities or health conditions. https://www.gov.uk/reasonable-adjustments-for-disabled-workers

16.

Gov.UK (2023) Official statistics: employment of disabled people 2022. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/the-employment-of-disabled-people-2022/employment-of-disabled-people-2022

17.

Guthrie

(2023) Swimming with the current but against the tide: reflections of an autistic social worker. British Journal of Social Work 53(3): 1700–1710.

18.

Helgesson

Björkenstam

Rahman

, et al. (2023) Labour market marginalisation in young adults diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): a population-based longitudinal cohort study in Sweden. Psychological Medicine 53(4): 1224–1232.

19.

Hill

(2024) Being a Dyslexic Police Officer in England and Wales: Identity, Disability, and Disclosure. The Police Journal, 0032258X241280197.

20.

Högstedt

Igelström

Korhonen

, et al. (2023) It’s like it is designed to keep me stressed’—Working sustainably with ADHD or autism. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 30(8): 1280–1291.

21.

Hughes

(2021) Does the heterogeneity of autism undermine the neurodiversity paradigm? Bioethics 35(1): 47–60.

22.

Jaarsma

Welin

(2012) Autism as a natural human variation: reflections on the claims of the neurodiversity movement. Health Care Analysis: HCA: Journal of Health Philosophy and Policy 20: 20–30.

23.

Jiang

Palm

DeBolt

, et al. (2015) High-precision visual long-term memory in children with high-functioning autism. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 124(2): 447–456.

24.

Johnson

(2022) Using a strengths–based approach to improve employment opportunities for individuals with autism spectrum disorder. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development 34(1): 16–25.

25.

King

Murphy

(2014) A systematic review of people with autism spectrum disorder and the criminal justice system. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 44: 2717–2733.

26.

Kirby

Smith

(2021) Neurodiversity at Work: Drive Innovation, Performance and Productivity with a Neurodiverse Workforce. Kogan Page Publishers.

27.

Lester

O’Reilly

(2021) The Social, Cultural and Political Discourses of Autism. Springer.

28.

Lester

Karim

O’Reilly

(2015) Autism itself actually isn't a disability: The ideological dilemmas of negotiating a ‘normal’ versus ‘abnormal’ autistic identity. Communication and Medicine 11(2): 139–152.

29.

Lewis

(2016) Realising a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder as an adult. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing 25(4): 346–354.

30.

Lorenz

Frishling

Cuadros

, et al. (2016) Autism and overcoming job barriers: comparing job-related barriers and possible solutions in and outside of autism-specific employment. PLoS One 11(1): e0147040.

31.

Lund

(2018) Redefining opportunity for the library employee with autism: a model of positive behavioral support for library management. Journal of Library Administration 58(5): 434–448.

32.

Milton

(2017) A Mismatch of Salience: Explorations of the Nature of Autism from Theory to Practice. Pavilion Press.

33.

Milton

Gurbuz

López

(2022) The ‘double empathy problem’: ten years on. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice 26(8): 1901–1903.

34.

Morris

(2024) The rapidly growing waiting lists for autism and ADHD assessments. https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/the-rapidly-growing-waiting-lists-for-autism-and-adhd-assessments

35.

Nicholas

Hedley

Randolph

, et al. (2019) An expert discussion on employment in autism. Autism in Adulthood: Challenges and Management 1: 162–169.

36.

Ohl

Sheff

Little

, et al. (2017) Predictors of employment status among adults with autism spectrum disorder. Work 56(2): 345–355.

37.

Oliver

(2013) The social model of disability: thirty years on. Disability & Society 28(7): 1024–1026.

38.

ONS (2021) Outcomes for disabled people in the UK: 2021. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/disability/articles/outcomesfordisabledpeopleintheuk/2021

39.

O’Reilly

Kiyimba

Lee

, et al. (2023) Give my child a label: strategies of epistemic corroboration in case-building within child mental health assessments. Sociology 57(6): 1410–1429.

40.

O’Reilly

Tromans

Drewett

Nelson

Broderick-Spencer

(2024) The n-POLICE study: Neurodiverse Police Officers and staff: Learning Information about their Career experiences . A report for the National Police Autism Association.

41.

O’Reilly

Kiyimba

Tromans

Drewett

(2025a) The experiences of mid-career disclosure of Autism and ADHD diagnosis by UK police officers and staff. Policing: An International Journal 48(5): 1031–1046.

42.

O’Reilly

Thorne

Smith

Kiyimba

(2025b) Toward a suicide-responsive police culture: Police experiences of working with suicide. Policing & Society, 35(1): 101–1117.

43.

Petty

Richardson

Eccles

, et al. (2023) Supporting autistic employees: understanding and confidence in UK workplaces. Industry and Higher Education 37(3): 448–454.

44.

Robbins

(2017) The untapped potential of the ADHD employee in the workplace. Cogent Business & Management 4(1): 1271384.

45.

Rong

Yang

Jin

, et al. (2021) Prevalence of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: a meta-analysis. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 83: 101759.

46.

Roulston

(2010) Reflective Interviewing. London: Sage.

47.

Roux

Shattuck

Cooper

, et al. (2013) Postsecondary employment experiences among young adults with an autism spectrum disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 52(9): 931–939.

48.

Russell

Ford

Rosenberg

, et al. (2014) The association of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder with socioeconomic disadvantage: alternative explanations and evidence. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines 55(5): 436–445.

49.

Sadiq

(2025) Explaining AuDHD: The expert-led guide to Autism and ADHD Co-concurrence, Vol. 1. Dorling Kindersley Ltd.

50.

Samosh

Lilius

Atwood

(2024) ADHD and career success: barriers, facilitators, and future research directions. In: Neurodiversity and Work: Employment, Identity, and Support Networks for Neurominorities. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 257–281.

51.

Scott

Jacob

Parsons

, et al. (2017) Employers’ perception of the costs and the benefits of hiring individuals with autism spectrum disorder in open employment in Australia. PLoS One 12(5): e0177607.

52.

Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (2022) Draft mental health bill. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1093555/draft-mental-health-bill-web-accessible.pdf

53.

Singer

(n.d.) Reflections on neurodiversity. https://neurodiversity2.blogspot.com/p/what.html

54.

Song

Zha

Yang

, et al. (2021) The prevalence of adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Global Health 11: 04009.

55.

Tan

(2024) Spaces on the Spectrum. Columbia University Press.

56.

Tromans

Drewett

Lee

, et al. (2023) A survey of the workplace experiences of police force employees who are autistic and/or have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. BJPsych Open 9(4): e123.

57.

Walkowiak

(2021) Neurodiversity of the workforce and digital transformation: the case of inclusion of autistic workers at the workplace. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 168: 120739.

58.

Wiklund

Tucker

, et al. (2017) ADHD, impulsivity and entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing 32(6): 627–656.

59.

Wong

Donelly

Neck

, et al. (2018) Positive autism: investigation of workplace characteristics leading to a strengths-based approach to employment of people with autism. Review of International Comparative Management 19(1): 15–30.

60.

World Health Organization (2024) ICD-11 for mortality and morbidity statistics - 6A02 autism spectrum disorder. https://icd.who.int/browse/2024-01/mms/en#437815624