In childhood, consistent emotional attunement from caregivers is essential for developing a cohesive, regulated nervous system. When a child grows up in an emotionally unpredictable or unsafe environment, their nervous system adapts in self-protective ways, leading to fragmentation—a process where the child’s physiological states (fight, flight, freeze, fawn) become disconnected rather than integrated.
How Fragmentation Develops:
Hypervigilance (Fight/Flight) → If emotions at home are volatile, the child stays alert, scanning for emotional shifts in caregivers.
Dissociation (Freeze/Shutdown) → If emotional neglect or unpredictability is too overwhelming, the nervous system numbs itself as a defense.
Attachment Confusion → When love and rejection occur unpredictably, the child struggles with relational coherence, leading to anxious or avoidant attachment patterns.
In short, an emotionally unstable home prevents the nervous system from forming a unified, regulated response to stress. Instead, it fragments into separate survival strategies.
The Double Burden: Autistic Children in Unpredictable Homes
If we combine these two frameworks, we see that autistic children raised in emotionally unstable homes faced a double challenge:
- Their own natural neurobiological differences made it harder to predict and respond to social cues in a way that neurotypical caregivers expected.
- If the home itself was unpredictable, their nervous system had to cope with both the internal dysregulation of autism and the external instability of their environment.
Possible Effects of This Double Dysregulation:
More extreme nervous system fragmentation → Greater shifts between shutdown (dorsal vagal) and hyperarousal (sympathetic fight/flight).
Stronger social withdrawal → Avoidance of unpredictable social situations due to both sensory overload and attachment uncertainty.
Misinterpretation of autistic behaviors as emotional rejection → Caregivers, lacking understanding of autism, might respond with frustration or further withdrawal, reinforcing the misdiagnosis.
By integrating what we now know from Polyvagal Theory, autism research, and trauma-informed care, we can rewrite the framework:
Children in unpredictable emotional environments often fragment as a survival response, regardless of neurotype.
Many autistic children, particularly those growing up in unstable homes, likely exhibited extreme nervous system fragmentation—leading to further misunderstandings of their behaviors.
From Pathology to Understanding
Culture is a learned, shared, integrated behavior. When people or groups of people do not share the same culture (i.e., language), cultural miscommunication can occur (i.e. committing some sort of cultural taboo). As an autistic woman, I have experienced differences in communication between my own neurodivergent and the dominant neuronormative cultural norms for communicating. This is because neurodivergent culture holds separate language ideologies for the modes of communication, such as speech, gesture, touch, and eye gaze. (Ahearn, page 53) Because the neuronormative assigns different meanings to these modes and how they should be used, it results in significant friction between the two cultures unless neurodivergent individuals “mask,” or pretend, to communicate in a more neuro normative socially acceptable form by “code switching” between the two language ideologies.
Linguistic interactions establish a common understanding of what the interaction is about (Ahearn, page 45), but cultural miscommunications occur when no common understanding can be established. For this and other reasons, I believe that cultural anthropologists should explore the intersection between neuronormative and neurodivergent linguistic ideologies more closely. One example of a cultural miscommunication between neuronormative and neurodivergent language ideologies can be found in the concept of “infodumping,” a mode of communicating that is unique to neurodivergent usage. Infodumping involves sharing large amounts of information related to special interest topics, and these streams of thought are generally thought of as the way that neurodivergents exchange pleasantries, similar to the neuronormative practice of small talk. Neurodivergents, on the other hand, usually find small talk uncomfortable and unnatural (see attached image below illustrating this common miscommunication).
In addition to infodumping, the concept of parallel play from childhood is extended into adulthood, where two adults share a common space while maintaining separate activities. This is also referred to in neurodivergent spaces as “body doubling.” Beyond “infodumping” and “parallel play,” other forms of neurodivergent specific modes of communication can include: “penguin pebbling” (giving small, meaningful gifts), “support swapping” (offering emotional support and understanding), “deep pressure” (physical touch like hugs or gentle pressure), echolalia (repeating words or phrases), and using visual aids or alternative communication methods like PECS (Picture Exchange Communication System). (Neurospark Health)
Another mode of neurodivergent communication is the practice of oversharing, which is particularly common to the ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) neurotype due to difficulties in impulse control. Neurodivergents may overshare when they struggle to “read the room” and have difficulty with social cues that indicate discomfort in others with sharing information that might not be socially appropriate to the situation, such as topics considered personal or private according to neuronormative social norms. Oversharing can lead to frequent miscommunications between neurodivergent and neurotypical language ideologies due to the violations of social norms. For instance, I have often used social media as a place to share about the struggles that I am overcoming in life. From my perspective, I am connecting with others through my vulnerability, and it gives me a sense of feeling like my lived experience matters in some small regard. Neurotypical individuals on my feed may perceive me as being attention seeking or complaining, or may just be irritated by my posts because they deviate from their expected norms for social media usage (sharing of accomplishments or basic information exchanges). Neurotypical people often perceive oversharing as uncomfortable, intrusive, or a sign of poor boundaries, as it can feel like someone is revealing too much personal information too quickly, potentially making them feel uneasy or even judged by the person who is oversharing; this can be especially true in social situations where a certain level of privacy is expected. This has been a common miscommunication error when I try to date. I have a tendency to want to escalate things quickly in my relationships, which causes a fear response in potential partners and tends to push people away due to neuronormative relational standards defining oversharing as a red flag behavior to immediately distance themselves from, instead of the separate form of relating and communicating through the lived differences in social and behavioral abilities that the behavior may actually represent.
Some autistic people use spoken language as their predominant method of communication, some are minimally speaking, situationally mute, and some are nonspeaking. A common miscommunication between cultures is the assumption that non speakers lack autonomy, agency, or intelligence. The neurodivergent community assumes competence regardless of individual abilities. For a neurodivergent person, “code switching” means adjusting their communication modes to fit in by mimicking neurotypical behaviors, and generally refers to speaking individuals. Mimicking behaviors or code switching between language ideologies by using conflicting modes of communication can be exhausting and is considered a form of “masking,” a way of imitating others to appear more neurotypical. These frequently unsuccessful attempts at fitting in cost neurodivergents their authentic means of expression and natural ways of being in the world. Neuronormative modes of communication include making eye contact, taking turns speaking, using verbal cues, and relying heavily on unspoken social cues using theory of mind. (Stimpunks) Neurotypicals benefit through privilege that creates imbalances in relational power by requiring their modes of communication to be adapted to in order to fit in with and function in their society.
The paper written by Kristen L Syme and Edward H Hagen titled “Mental Health is Biological Health: Why Tackling “Diseases of the Mind” is an Imperative for Biological Anthropology in the 21st Century” reference an important social problem and gap in communication abilities between neurotypes, the autistic dysfunction of the theory of mind; the cognitive ability to infer the mental states of others and more generally reflect on the connection between one’s own or others mental states and actions. ToM is thought to have evolved in response to social selection pressures and elements of it appear in infancy and early childhood. It is one of the foundations of the social intelligence hypothesis, the idea of social complexity, which is the ability to understand and manage people, and to act wisely in human relations. (Syme and Hagen, p. 101) Opponents to ToM argue that the theories about ToM deny autistic people agency by calling into question their very humanity and, in doing so, wreak violence on autistic bodies. (Yergeau, 2013)
Empirical findings suggest that ToM performance is affected by sociodemographic variables such as age, socioeconomic status, and education, as well as individual difference variables such as intelligence, and executive functioning. (Karoğlu) Autistic and other neurodivergent individuals are statistically more likely to become victims of bullying and abuse, two things I have consistently struggled with throughout my own life, due to deficits in theory of mind that make it more difficult to recognize intentions and emotions of others. (Trundle, Grace, et al., 2022) Abuse is a significant cultural taboo for both neurotypes whether physical, emotional, or psychological, but due to imbalances in power and the cultural privileges experienced because of them, neuronormative individuals tend to be the aggressors in situations involving any type of abuse between the two cultures. Neurodivergents may struggle to recognize manipulative or harmful behaviors, which makes them more susceptible to being taken advantage of. Social isolation, lack of public awareness about autism, and power imbalances also increase their vulnerability to abuse.
Misunderstandings are often used in instances of power imbalance intentionally by the dominant linguistic neurotype to intentionally reinforce cultural norms of communication as a form of microaggression. Microaggressions can be defined as indirect, subtle, or unintentional discrimination against members of a marginalized group. Microaggressions within social relations serve the purpose of reinforcing ideologies that maintain the existing power structures, which continue to serve the interests of the dominant neurotype, and perpetuate the social inequalities experienced by members of the human species who deviate from cultural norms for communication.
Conclusion: A Holistic Model for Understanding Autism, Trauma, and Nervous System Regulation
- An autistic child struggles with emotional and sensory unpredictability in their environment.
- The nervous system fragments as a response to both internal (autistic processing) and external (attachment instability) stressors.
Autism and attachment trauma together create a double burden that magnifies challenges in emotional regulation, social navigation, and identity formation. While autism itself is not inherently pathological, the social model of disability highlights how environments structured around neuronormative expectations create disabling barriers for autistic individuals. Meanwhile, attachment trauma compounds these struggles by disrupting the development of secure relational templates, making it harder to form trusting connections in a world that already misinterprets autistic cognition. The DSM’s deficit-based framework exacerbates this issue by pathologizing autistic traits—such as differences in communication and social reciprocity—without addressing the social and relational adaptations needed for genuine inclusion. This neglect mirrors the limitations of the psychosocial model, which, while considering environmental factors, still fails to integrate the role of culture and linguistic relativity in shaping how autistic sociality is perceived and valued. Theories of mindblindness have historically misrepresented autistic cognition by assuming an inherent lack of empathy, rather than recognizing a different cognitive processing style shaped by divergent socialization experiences. Cross-cultural research in linguistics and anthropology further underscores how language ideologies—such as the Western emphasis on verbal, explicit communication—frame autistic expression as deficient rather than different. This structural and conceptual misalignment leaves autistic individuals with attachment trauma especially vulnerable to misattunement, rejection, and compounded marginalization, reinforcing cycles of alienation and distress in both personal relationships and broader societal participation.
This topic has immense nterdisciplinary potential.
Works Cited
Ahearn, Laura M. Living Language : An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology. Third Edition. Malden, Ma, Wiley-Blackwell, 2021.
Karoğlu, Nilda, et al. “Theory of Mind in Offending: A Systematic Review.” Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, vol. 23, no. 5, 6 May 2021, p. 152483802110131, https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380211013143.
“Neurodivergent Love Languages.” Neurosparkhealth.com, 2025, http://www.neurosparkhealth.com/blog/neurodivergent-love-languages. Accessed 18 Jan. 2025.
“Neuronormativity.” Stimpunks Foundation, 1 Jan. 2024, stimpunks.org/glossary/neuronormativity/.
Syme, Kristen, and Edward Hagen. “Mental Health Is Biological Health: Why Tackling “Diseases of the Mind” Is an Imperative for Biological Anthropology in the 21st Century.” Yearbook of Physical Anthropology, 24 Oct. 2019, pp. 87–117. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.23965.
Trundle, Grace, et al. “Prevalence of Victimisation in Autistic Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Trauma, Violence & Abuse, vol. 24, no. 4, 6 May 2022, p. 15248380221093689, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35524162/, https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380221093689.
Yergeau, Melanie. “Clinically Significant Disturbance: On Theorists Who Theorize Theory of Mind.” Disability Studies Quarterly, vol. 33, no. 4, 5 Sept. 2013, https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v33i4.3876.Rather than viewing autism and attachment trauma as separate phenomena, we should recognize that they intersect when:
Spirolateral 