The Triage Trap: Why do we defend the systems that rely on our crisis?

I wanted to share some thoughts not to focus on frustration, but to help us constructively look at why navigating these systems can feel so incredibly exhausting. By gently unpacking the core mechanics of the structures around us, we can stop spending our finite energy trying to fit into spaces that weren't built for us, and instead start looking at how to cultivate a genuine way forward.
Following on from the discussion regarding the structural limitations of the NHS, I’ve been reflecting on how the concept of "triage"—which we normalised as an acceptable operating model—actually impacts almost every other major pillar of neurodivergent life.
Triage is, by definition, a battlefield necessity born out of extreme scarcity. It was designed to sort the immediately dying from those who can wait. When we carry this wartime mindset into peacetime society, it creates a perverse infrastructure that can actively punish proactive management and force neurodivergent people into visible crisis just to receive basic human adjustments.
From my perspective, we see this identical "battlefield triage" model playing out across three major areas:
1. The Education System: Triage at the School Gate
Because school budgets and specialized staff are under permanent scarcity, resources (like 1-to-1 support or sensory spaces) are strictly rationed. To get help, a child often must be in a state of visible, disruptive crisis—acting out or school-refusing. Autistic children who default to internalizing their anxiety, masking, or quietly slipping under the radar are pushed to the bottom of the pile because they aren't "disrupting the battlefield" of the classroom. Their slow-motion burnout is ignored until they completely collapse.
2. The Workplace: Reactive HR, Not Proactive Design
Corporations heavily market their "neuroinclusive" credentials, but their operational models remain entirely crisis-driven. Offices and workflows are rarely designed with sensory sensitivities or executive dysfunction in mind from the outset. Instead, the corporate triage machine only kicks in when an employee hits a breaking point—resulting in a performance failure or prolonged sick leave. Only when it becomes a financial or legal risk does HR step in to patch things up, rather than building a peacetime environment where they could have thrived from day one.
3. State Support and Benefits: The Deficit Trap
The entire infrastructure for disability support operates on this exact same battlefield mindset: prove to us how broken you are today so we can decide if you qualify for support. It demands that we describe our absolute worst, most dysfunctional days, stripping away the context of dynamic disability. If an autistic adult manages to scrape by through immense personal effort and preventative self-care, the system views them as "healed" and strips the safety net away—inevitably triggering the very crisis they were working to avoid.
The Solution and the Psychological Barrier
Many of the posts I read across this forum already describe these exact battles in heartbreaking detail. We know the system is blind to slow-motion, chronic challenges. But when we talk about solutions, we often fall into a trap. We instinctively adopt the establishment's language—arguing about tax hits, macroeconomics, or why radical change "can't be done."
In a way, it can feel like turkeys voting for Christmas. It is a known psychological defense mechanism: it is far less painful to believe that the system is broken because of "budgets" or "poor funding" than it is to confront the harsh reality that the current design relies on a level of structural spite and hostility toward neurodiversity. If we convince ourselves that a better, bespoke world is an impossible luxury, the mistreatment we endure right now becomes easier to accept.
This isn't about wallowing in despair; it is about accurately identifying the problem so we can finally start talking about a realistic way out. But if we are ever going to find a sustainable path forward, we have to stop accepting the excuses of a crisis-driven model that treats our well-being as an afterthought.
How do we, as a community, step away from this cycle of accommodation and survival? If we were to stop trying to adapt to frameworks that are simply working exactly as they were structurally designed to, what does a genuinely supportive, proactive environment look like to you?
Parents
  • Thank you both,   and . Yours are I believe very illuminating additions to the conversation, especially with Alexa sharing that firsthand insight into how the machinery of HR actually operates.
    In a way, you have both perfectly illustrated the mechanics of the "triage trap" from two sides of the same coin.
    Alexa, your experience as an HR officer highlights the exact structural flaw I was pointing out. When the legal definition of a "reasonable adjustment" is strictly capped by the requirement to bring a neurodivergent person up to the exact baseline of a neurotypical worker, the system is operating entirely on a deficit model. It treats neurodiversity as a personal "fault" that needs to be patched up to fit an unyielding corporate mold, rather than valuing the unique cognitive styles, objective problem-solving, or deep analytical skills that an autistic individual naturally brings to the table.
    Iain, this connects directly back to your analogy of the workplace being like the Sahara Desert. The Sahara is a fixed force of nature and geography. But corporate workflows, rigid HR benchmarks, and physical office spaces are not natural phenomena—they are conscious choices. When Alexa points out that our world was simply not built for these things in the past, she is entirely right. But we do not have to accept that past design as our permanent future.
    When a system dictates that we are a "hassle," a poor "return on investment," or that we must simply "cope better" within an architecture that was explicitly designed without us in mind, it is choosing a path of structural exclusion.
    Alexa's point that some shops simply cannot afford lifts or ramps is exactly why relying on individual employers to voluntarily accommodate us—one crumb at a time—is a failing strategy. It is precisely why pouring more money into the "broken bowl" of existing frameworks doesn't work. If the baseline architecture itself is fundamentally incompatible with neurodiversity, the answer isn't to try and "cope better" in the desert; it is to start talking about how we build entirely parallel, proactive structures designed for peace and sustainability from the ground up.
    Maybe the desert can be brought into bloom?
  • When a system dictates that we are a "hassle," a poor "return on investment," or that we must simply "cope better" within an architecture that was explicitly designed without us in mind, it is choosing a path of structural exclusion.

    I think it is less the system that is to blame here and more the people within it.

    The managers and team members that are tasked with including the neurodivergent person are rarely informed or have bias and are often poorly suited to helping those with special needs.

    If we can find a way to raise awareness and tolerance of us then we have a chance for these systems to be actively of use.

    This is why I think we are at least a generation away from it starting to work - people are just so low to accept the differences of others.

    A great topic by the way!

Reply
  • When a system dictates that we are a "hassle," a poor "return on investment," or that we must simply "cope better" within an architecture that was explicitly designed without us in mind, it is choosing a path of structural exclusion.

    I think it is less the system that is to blame here and more the people within it.

    The managers and team members that are tasked with including the neurodivergent person are rarely informed or have bias and are often poorly suited to helping those with special needs.

    If we can find a way to raise awareness and tolerance of us then we have a chance for these systems to be actively of use.

    This is why I think we are at least a generation away from it starting to work - people are just so low to accept the differences of others.

    A great topic by the way!

Children
No Data