I'm posting because I genuinely want to know whether other autistic people have experienced anything similar.
I recently found myself involved in an Employment Tribunal relating to disability issues, and I have come away from the experience feeling humiliated, frustrated and deeply disappointed.
I have Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Dyslexia. Both are lifelong neurodevelopmental disabilities that have affected me since childhood.
I disclosed both conditions during the application process that led to the dispute.
The organisation acknowledged receipt of that disclosure and documents later disclosed to me confirmed that they were aware of my disabilities.
Despite that, I found myself in the extraordinary position of having to explain, justify and effectively defend disabilities that had already been disclosed and acknowledged.
One statement in particular has remained stuck in my head.
I was told:
"These neurodivergent things are difficult to determine and they needed to clarify if they counted as disabilities under the disability act."
What made that statement particularly upsetting was what happened next.
Almost immediately afterwards, the discussion moved towards establishing whether I was disabled enough for legal protections and obligations to apply.
That was the moment I felt genuinely humiliated.
I had already disclosed Autism Spectrum Disorder and Dyslexia.
The disclosure had already been acknowledged.
Documents later disclosed to me confirmed that the organisation was aware of both disabilities.
Yet despite this, I found myself being questioned in a way that felt less like a discussion about how a disabled person had been treated and more like an attempt to establish whether my disabilities were sufficiently valid to count.
I cannot adequately describe how degrading I found that experience.
To me, there is a huge difference between disclosing a disability so that appropriate consideration can be given to it and being placed in a position where you feel compelled to prove that your disability is serious enough to matter.
I have lived with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Dyslexia my entire life.
Like many autistic people, I have spent years learning coping strategies, learning how to function in environments that are often not designed for me, learning how to mask, learning how to work around difficulties and learning how to present as capable despite those difficulties.
Then suddenly I found myself having to sit down and catalogue the very problems I have spent my life trying to overcome.
I found that invasive.
I found it distressing.
I found it humiliating.
What made the experience even worse was that while I was being required to discuss highly personal aspects of my disabilities, the other side had brought a large number of students and interns to observe the proceedings.
There were approximately a dozen of them.
I was never informed beforehand that they would be attending.
I was never consulted.
I was never asked whether I had concerns.
I was never given any opportunity to object.
I only became aware of their presence during the hearing.
I understand that students need experience.
I understand that trainees need to learn.
That is not my issue.
My issue is that I was sitting in an Employment Tribunal discussing deeply personal aspects of my Autism Spectrum Disorder and Dyslexia while a sizeable audience of observers watched.
To me, that felt profoundly disrespectful.
I appreciate that some people may disagree, but I do not believe I should have been treated as a teaching exercise without even being informed in advance.
I am not a case study.
I am not a training aid.
I am not a classroom exercise.
I am certainly not a circus attraction.
I was a claimant seeking a fair hearing concerning serious issues that have had a significant impact on my life.
Instead, I found myself discussing some of the most personal aspects of my disabilities while being observed by a room full of people who had no direct involvement in determining the outcome of the case.
At times it genuinely felt as though my humiliation had become part of somebody else's education.
I found that degrading.
Another thing I struggled with was being asked questions about policies and legal technicalities.
My personal view is that disabled people should not need specialist legal knowledge in order to be protected by disability legislation.
It should not be necessary to know the wording of internal organisational policies.
It should not be necessary to know every legal definition.
It should not be necessary to have the knowledge of an employment lawyer just to argue that a disability that has already been disclosed and acknowledged should have been taken seriously.
Most disabled people are not lawyers.
Most disabled people are not HR professionals.
Most disabled people simply disclose their disabilities and expect organisations to comply with the obligations placed upon them.
What has disturbed me most about the entire experience is the feeling that neurodivergent disabilities are still treated with a level of scepticism that would be considered unacceptable if applied to many visible disabilities.
As soon as the words "neurodivergent" were mentioned, the conversation did not focus on what adjustments had been made, what support had been considered, or whether obligations had been met.
Instead, it immediately moved to whether my disabilities counted and whether I was disabled enough.
That distinction matters.
It may sound small to some people, but as an autistic person, it felt as though the starting position was scepticism rather than acceptance.
Perhaps some people will disagree with me.
Perhaps some people will say this is simply how the system operates.
Perhaps some people will tell me that this is normal.
If it is normal, then I think that is part of the problem.
Because I came away from that process feeling less like a person seeking justice and more like someone who had been required to prove the legitimacy of disabilities that had already been disclosed, acknowledged and known.
I would genuinely be interested to hear whether other autistic people have experienced similar situations, whether in Employment Tribunals, workplaces, universities or elsewhere.
Have any of you ever found yourselves in a position where you felt you had to prove you were "disabled enough" despite already having disclosed and documented your condition?
And if so, how did it make you feel?
