Should You Disclose Your Diagnosis at Work? Weighing the Risks and Benefits

Bridgette Hamstead

Deciding whether to disclose a neurodivergent diagnosis at work is a deeply personal and complex decision. Many autistic, ADHD, and other neurodivergent individuals struggle with whether sharing their diagnosis will lead to greater understanding and accommodations or if it will expose them to bias, discrimination, or workplace stigma. While some employees find that disclosure allows them to work more effectively and receive necessary support, others experience negative consequences, including microaggressions, dismissal of their struggles, or even workplace retaliation. Before making the decision to disclose, it is essential to weigh the potential benefits and risks, assess the workplace culture, and consider alternative strategies for self-advocacy.

One of the primary benefits of disclosure is the ability to request formal workplace accommodations. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in the United States and similar laws in other countries, employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities. Accommodations can include flexible work schedules, quiet workspaces, assistive technology, written instructions for tasks, and modifications to communication methods. These adjustments can make a significant difference in job performance and overall well-being. Without disclosure, it may be challenging to access these supports, leading to increased stress and burnout.

Disclosure can also foster a more authentic and supportive work environment. Many neurodivergent individuals spend significant energy masking their traits to fit neurotypical expectations, which can be mentally exhausting. Being open about neurodivergence can reduce the pressure to mask, allowing employees to work in ways that align with their strengths. In some cases, disclosure can lead to meaningful conversations about neurodiversity in the workplace, encouraging broader discussions on accessibility and inclusion. It can also help normalize neurodivergence and create connections with colleagues who may share similar experiences.

However, the decision to disclose also comes with potential risks. Workplace stigma surrounding autism, ADHD, and other neurodivergent conditions is still prevalent, and not all employers are understanding or supportive. Some employees who disclose face subtle or overt discrimination, including being passed over for promotions, micromanaged, or treated differently by colleagues. Neurodivergent traits, such as needing extra processing time or struggling with executive dysfunction, may be unfairly perceived as incompetence or a lack of professionalism. Unfortunately, even well-intentioned coworkers may respond with patronizing attitudes, assumptions, or a lack of understanding.

The company culture plays a crucial role in determining whether disclosure is likely to be beneficial or harmful. In an inclusive and supportive workplace, neurodivergent employees may find that disclosing leads to better communication and access to accommodations. However, in environments where ableism and rigid productivity standards dominate, disclosure may lead to more harm than good. Observing how management responds to other disabled employees, assessing existing diversity and inclusion efforts, and researching company policies on accommodations can help gauge whether disclosure is a safe option.

For those who are unsure about full disclosure, alternative strategies can provide support without formally disclosing a diagnosis. Requesting specific accommodations without naming a diagnosis is an option in some workplaces. For example, an employee can ask for written instructions, flexible deadlines, or a quiet workspace without necessarily stating that they are neurodivergent. Framing accommodation requests in terms of optimizing productivity rather than medical necessity may also lead to more receptive responses from employers. Seeking out neurodivergent-friendly mentorship, support groups, or employee resource networks can also provide guidance and advocacy without requiring formal disclosure.

Another factor to consider is the timing of disclosure. Some employees choose to disclose during the hiring process if they anticipate needing accommodations immediately, while others prefer to wait until they are more familiar with the workplace culture. Disclosing early may allow for accommodations to be implemented from the start, but it also carries the risk of bias influencing hiring decisions. Waiting until a concrete need arises can provide more control over the disclosure process and allow the employee to demonstrate their capabilities before introducing neurodivergence into the conversation.

If an employee decides to disclose, preparing for the conversation can increase the likelihood of a positive outcome. Choosing a supportive supervisor, HR representative, or manager with a reputation for fairness can make a difference. Framing the discussion around strengths and solutions—such as explaining how an accommodation will enhance productivity—can help shift the focus away from perceived deficits. Providing educational resources about neurodivergence and being prepared to answer questions can also facilitate better understanding.

Ultimately, the decision to disclose a diagnosis at work depends on individual circumstances, workplace culture, and the employee’s comfort level. While disclosure can lead to improved accommodations and a more authentic work experience, it is not without risks. Each neurodivergent person must weigh the potential benefits and challenges, explore alternative strategies, and prioritize their well-being in navigating professional environments. Regardless of the choice made, all neurodivergent workers deserve a workplace that respects and supports their needs.