Advancing Neurodiversity and Disability Inclusion: Pasha Marlowe

She is the CEO of Neuro Belonging and also a global neurodiversity speaker. I'm sure you're going to be able to draw all kinds of interesting parallels with creativity and the work that you do. So thank you for coming in today. Thank you so much for having me. Glad to be here. I'm loving the work that you do because you were trained as a mental health therapist many years ago, and you've, through a variety of life paths, you've come to a different place now. But through all of it, it seems like you're making this conscious decision to celebrate where you are. And who you are. So talk to me about how you became the CEO of Neuro Belonging and what that means. I think all interesting paths are not straight. So mine was winding, and on a resume it might look disjointed, but the common thread is service to others and caring for others. So I came to be the CEO of Neuro Belonging via being a therapist for 30 years via being a health coach and yoga instructor after that, and then being a parent to three humans and starting to see basically cultural trends, mainly in the DEI world and thinking about the future of work and what younger generations are bringing to the table. And neurodiversity and disability inclusion and accessibility are important topics right now, more than ever I think. So that's why I decided to focus on it in my work. And I love this recognition that we are in a different place, and actually in many ways we are at least more aware of, if not as welcoming as perhaps we should be, but still at least more aware of things than maybe when you and I both trained a few years ago, but also how important this is for our generation, the generation behind us, generations to come. And how does this play out living in Maine? It's interesting. I work globally and least frequently in Maine, which is something I want to change, which is one of my motivations for coming on because I feel like the narrative has not reached Maine yet, that we need to focus on neurodiversity, we need to add neurodiversity and disability to DEI policies and strategies. And so I also think that there's a big shift going on, and for anyone who is trained in the mental health profession or health professions, they were trained in the pathology paradigm and the pathology paradigm in short states, there's one normal right ideal way to be function in the world, not just think about the brain, but about how you move, how you work, how you love, how you act. And that is shifting to the neurodiversity paradigm, which says there is no one normal right ideal way to be. And there are many differences and challenges. I'm not denying challenges at all, but that there are differences, and those differences can be acknowledged, can be accommodated, can be celebrated, and hopefully elevated. That makes me really happy to hear, because I am well aware of the kind of pathology model that we've been working under in medicine, and oftentimes as a long time family doctor, the idea that we are mostly dealing with problems that doesn't really align with what I see people bringing to a conversation with me, which are significant strengths. Yes, yes. Because for some people, and I consider myself neurodivergent and disabled, the narrative out there is it's a superpower to make us feel better, and sometimes it is a superpower and a disability and just my life. Do you know what I mean? So I think the conversation needs to shift. When I walk into a doctor's office or to a therapist's office, they'll look on paper and see ADHD, autism, trauma, chronic illness, and then they'll determine any diagnoses or any opinion about me from those words. And I would like to depathologize and destigmatize a lot of the labels that are out there. And so I unmask and I notice how much resistance there is. And in the workplace, I notice how much power and privilege I lose when I unmask. But I also want to recognize that for some people, it's safer to mask our identities. And I am thinking about lots of identities now, including queer identity. It's sometimes safer to mask it. And so my message isn't everyone be your authentic self all the time, unapologetically, unmask, bring your full self to work. I don't think we're at that place yet where that's safe for all people. It's safe for a lot of people, but not for the people who have the most intersecting, marginalized identities still. I think we're actually at a really challenging place because they're kind of dueling narratives. I think the cultural narrative in many ways, not all places, not always, is that we should be more inclusive. But I think when people from a practical standpoint attempt to embrace that they are marginalized, even if it's very subtle, maybe it's not to their face, maybe it's not in an outward way. They can be protected by all the HR standards and the rules and the laws, but there's still an impact. Absolutely. Laws protect us, but there's still stigma, biases, microaggressions, discrimination. There's still a lot of exclusion in not just the workplace, but in communities and families as well. We lose people when we step into our truth sometime if they are coming in with our own biases and stigma as everybody does. Well, I think sometimes we stay in places that aren't entirely who we are because that's what other people have always wanted us to be, in which case it's just easier not to rub up against other people because they're just like, I need you to be. In my case, I'm a broad range of things. I'm a singer, I'm a writer, I'm a doctor, but people like to have me be a doctor. That is what they like me to be. This is the thing we value most about you, which I'm not disputing. It is a valuable thing, but also I think inherently just as a human, I have other things that I am and do. So it's not just about that. That's exactly how I feel when I enter a room, specifically in networking, certainly the first question is, what do you do? Or they'll look at my name tag and figure out what letters are behind my name. And for me, I'm happy to have the MFT, which stands for Marriage and Family Therapist behind my name, but sometimes I forget to even mention it when I describe myself to people who actually want to know me. And I think of myself as a mother and as a creative in the way that I think expansively and systemically and critically. And so my creativity and my art is in human interactions and in change, systemic change, cultural change. But often what I'm asked to stay in as the box is, oh, okay, you're a therapist, you're an author, you're a podcast host, you're a coach. And I'm like, yes, and yes, and I have so many other qualities that aren't as valued in our capitalistic society. I'm thinking about your idea of stepping into a healthcare setting, where in healthcare, and I mean, I've been around long enough that it was, and I know that you also were in this space as well, when we had paper charts, and I'm not saying we should go back to paper charts, but people, there was a fuller sense of who they are, whereas if you have to be putting somebody into a box, computers don't like it. When you're not in a box, you're a yes or you're a no, you're a diagnosis. And the diagnosis sometimes in unanticipated ways because now everybody can access their health records can be very harmful. I mean, I can't remember how many times I sat in a conversation with people who are coding a visit and they said to me, well, this person's body mass index puts them into a technically obese diagnosis, and so we can bill more money for this diagnosis. And I said, but they can access their own records. And do I really want them to be sitting there thinking to themselves, oh, she thinks that I'm obese, not just a diagnosis. It's not just a word that means nothing. Exactly. And often those numbers don't take into account as genetics and muscle mass and cultural norms. There's so much more to those numbers than what the word allows. And then there's stigma, internalized shame and stigma for the person who receives that information, who sees that on their record, which is exactly why I left therapy because I would meet with, I love working with couples mostly. I work with couples still, and I'll meet a couple and to get the insurance or the treatment plan or any medication or any support, one person has to be identified as the client, even though I believe the couple is the client and the interactions between the two and the pattern is the problem, the pattern of interaction, not one person, not this one person's autism or this one person's anxiety, for example. But then I have to diagnose that one person to get the insurance to cover it. So now that person has a diagnosis on top of that, that diagnosis always ends in disorder thanks to the DSM. And I don't think it is disordered to have human experiences such as a response to trauma or grief. I don't think there should be disorder at the end of most of the labels. And back to the box that you were mentioning, the dropdown menu, there isn't a other or I don't agree with any of these choices. If you don't fill in the box, you can't move forward. It's very binary in so many ways. And I think we're trying, particularly within healthcare, I think we're trying harder, but I also went through a recent experience with the health system where we were trying to help take care of people better by understanding how they identified themselves. And the labels were still even, so, are you straight? Are you gay? Are you queer? Are you bisexual? And still, it was the boxes. And we would ask people to stand in front of the person who was checking them in because we needed to have this information. It was important to help take care of them, which I don't deny. There's absolutely, if somebody has different needs because of their lives, I meet them there. But trying to figure out how to portion that out and do it in front of a waiting room full of people, I feel like there was harm that we were potentially perpetrating on people we were supposed to be helping. I think that happens a lot where we exclude the people we're intending to include. I see that often, currently 30% of Fortune 500 companies have neurodiversity hiring practices. So they're checking the box, yay. We're neurodiversity affirming. However, when a neurodivergent person enters that workforce, they will soon find out that what they actually meant was they're an autistic hiring program. They're not in neurodiversity hiring program on the whole, that's the trend. And then all the other people who are not identifying as autistic are excluded even though they thought they were finally included. So there's that. On top of that, the practices are exploitive. They're for the most part, encouraging neurodiversity hiring practices, for example, or programs because there's tons of new research showing, for example, autistic people being 360% more productive. They're like, oh, good worker bees who will work overtime and can't stop, which is true in some ways and exploitive. And so the language around being inclusive is often lip service. We happen to be meeting in a very important week of a shift in HR, SHRM, which is the governing HR organization that trains HR professionals. That is the gold standard of HR, has just changed their DEI policy to release equity. So now it's just DI. And outside of the fact that I think all DEI policies and strategies should have diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, belonging, and accessibility. I hope I said them all, DEIA, B and J to intentionally drop equity is not responding to the pulse of our society right now, and it's really harmful. And so that happened this week. And so the HR world is in this moment shifting to determine are we going to respond to the sociopolitical scene and follow money or are we going to be, I think, ethical and be on the right side of history and continue to center and value equity? And I think accessibility first. Well, first of all, I'm glad you told me about this. I wasn't aware of it, and I suspect other people aren't either. And also as you're talking about this, I'm thinking about the example that I just gave where we were asked to create a space so that we could better help people identify who they were, but it was so complicated and we had to do it so quickly that it made it very challenging to do it in a mindful way. And so as you're talking, what's coming up for me is whatever shifting is happening, it seems it's not taking into consideration the complexities and it's not perhaps, I know we need to make decisions quickly sometimes, but maybe there's not as much mindfulness around it as perhaps might be better in the longer run. Yes, I agree. And back to your example, if on a piece of paper when I walk into a doctor's office, it says, do you identify as male, female, other? I'm gender nonconforming. So I say other, but it doesn't matter what I check because typically nobody reads the forms before they address me anyhow. So it's almost more vulnerable to ask if you're not going to be mindful about reading it and respecting it. Right. And there's so many practices around lgbtqia plus and gender affirming care that I would have to say, but I think it is all wrapped up in this whole idea of being more mindful, being more intentional. If you say you have affirming practices, practice them. If you say you have a DEI, policy and strategy, be accountable to it, be consistent and integris with it because otherwise there's a false sense of safety, false sense of psychological safety and security. And then it just feels worse when I go to a meeting or a conference or even a yoga class and they say, this is a safe space from my trauma-informed therapist mind. I think you can't guarantee safety. So to say that somebody will still not feel safe for whatever reason, given their own day, their own trauma, their own perspective and frame of reference, and now they're being told this is a safe space across the board. I don't feel safe in my body right now. So what does that say about me? I can't even be safe in a safe space. It really is destructive. It's a lot about the words. I get hung up on words. I don't even want to say hung up. That makes it sound like I'm doing something wrong. I'm very particular and mindful about words, and I like the accuracy of words, not from a policing or policing of terms at all, but let's be accurate because it matters because it impacts people like the diagnosis. The diagnosis or a label of disorder affects somebody. And as somebody, as a writer, but also as a communicator, words are also very important to me and not just what the words are, but they're said and the context in which they're used. And so what I often will hear people say is, it's just too complicated and it's always changing. So I'm not going to try to figure it out. And I think, well, okay, but that really, you may be alienating people in ways that you really don't intend to. You're not trying to be creating a place where people don't feel safe, but you are. So if you don't even try, then to me, that just says something that isn't as comfortable to me anyway. Yes, that is the number one criticism of learning new gender pronouns and them. For example, people say, oh, it's a whole new world. It's a whole new way of talking. It's a whole new language. And it's just humorous to me because we learn a lot of words and we learn a lot of languages and we evolve in so many ways. So I think the resistance is not so much learning a new word. I think the resistance is stigma and biases and hate, unfortunately, And getting it wrong. I think it's hard because if you go into something and then you say the wrong thing, then you also feel vulnerable. You said the wrong thing, you potentially hurt somebody. But then if you say nothing at all, then is that better? I tell organizations that I work with, silence can be deafening. Silence speaks volumes. So if they're avoiding talking about disability, for example, because they're worried, do I say non apparent or invisible or hidden? What do I do? What do I do? I don't want to offend anybody. So they say nothing. So then they don't even acknowledge a disability. So then they don't acknowledge accessibility or access needs or accommodations. Now things are just so much worse for the person who's disabled who now has to be extra brave and vulnerable to say, I have a disability. I need an accommodation. And so I look at things from an inclusive design perspective, which is different than universal design. It's really solving for one, sorry, solving for one and serving many like the curb cuts in the sidewalks made for wheelchair users, also benefiting most anybody with a stroller or a suitcase or a bicycle and on and on. So in an organization, if every meeting there are close captions available or options in different ways of learning, whether it's visual or audio, whether there's accessible technology, there's so many ways to assume access and support needs and be more proactive rather than waiting for a problem. And that might help that awkwardness and the fear of not knowing what to say because not going to be in those instances met with somebody saying, I have a disability. I need this in this meeting right now. And then not knowing what to say. You've already built in through inclusive design, you've built in the accommodations as much as possible by thinking, what are the access and support needs of the people that we know are here, the people that we'd like to potentially recruit and hire the people in the world who are telling us these are access needs that they have. So I think it could be more proactive, and I think some of that awkwardness could dissipate. I can think of a recent example where my father, he had slowly lost different senses because he was at the end of a long disease process, but he lost his hearing and then he got hearing aids. So that was really great. But then he wasn't able to use them consistently, but he used them a lot. But then he lost his vision, so he couldn't really see very well and his memory. And then each of those things, I saw him withdraw more and more. So that for me was the heartbreak. And I think about people who have different areas that they are not like everybody else. And if what we're unintentionally doing is just excluding them from being part of the world. Exactly. And I saw this happen to my father in such clear ways, and it was so heartbreaking. I thought, what if this was a person who had had this happen for the entirety of his life and never been able to actually interact fully with the world. Exactly. And you can't unsee that. So now you're going to be so much more aware of accessibility issues or even right here in town and how that's restrictive and how it's not just or equitable. So when I talk to organizations, it's hard to get people to care unless they know or love somebody with a disability or somebody who identifies as neurodivergent, for example, or somebody with mental health challenges. Most everybody knows somebody. So I try to get to that kind of personal connection and hope that that translates into the professional world. But the initial resistance is what's the business case for it? What's the ROI? How does this make us money? And I could argue that as well. It's not as interesting as the human case, but I can certainly argue it. And when I'm in the room, how I actually make that human connection and it finally clicks is through talking about their parent or their child or their grandchild who needs accommodations in some way. And they're like, okay, it doesn't always work, but it helps to have a personal story in connection. Yeah, we recently interviewed Tim Sample, who is a Maine humorist and so many other things, but he's originally from Maine, and he described his journey and his understanding himself as, I don't know if would describe himself as neurodivergent, but however he describes himself. And then I had somebody at our gallery opening last night who came in and had a family member who also is neurodivergent and was talking to me about how great it was to hear Tim talk about this. And Tim is somebody who talk about RO. I mean, this is a man who has created an entire life for himself out of his creativity and his ability to just work really hard. And yet also, he's letting us all know that this has not been an easy thing for him because he had to work through his own set of access issues. But it was such a wonderful thing to hear this other person come to me and say, that was really powerful to hear that that was a positive. It was meant as a positive. So when you say the business case for including people, that is what comes to me is that sometimes the things that we need to figure out because it makes us not quote "the same as everybody else". Sometimes maybe they're not a superpower, but certainly they make us kind of creative and flexible. Absolutely. Adaptability, problem solving, innovation, resiliency. I think those are, and critical thinking, especially today in the age of AI, I think we need more critical thinkers, more neurodivergent thinkers to say, okay, AI gave me this or Chat GPT spit out this, or the first five pages of Google search gave me this. And none of those definitions are correct or accurate. I see that all the time with neurodiversity, and I probably should have defined it just in case there's miscommunication out there or misunderstanding. But neurodiversity is the diversity of all minds, not brains. And neurodivergent is anyone who diverges from neuron nativity or society's idea of normal. The narrative is neurodivergent equals ADHD, autism, dyslexia. That's a very narrow view of it. So 99% of the statistics out there say that 20% to 30% of our population is neurodivergent. And that's only looking at, for example, ADHD, autism dyslexia, where in fact 50% of Gen Z and a third of millennials, for example, identifies neurodivergent and disabled, by the way, because non apparent disability, which is 80% of disability, includes mental health challenges. So now the language of neurodiversity, neurodivergent disability is just, it's centered in conversation. And so it has to be part of what an organization or business thinks about. And neurodiversity in the workplace could look like sensory friendly environments or spaces, but it could also be different learning styles and learning tools. It could also be mental health support or extra training or extra coaching. I could go on about that. There's many ways to accommodate, but I think the future of work is actually going to be, and the future of spaces in terms of design of spaces will be with a more accessible and equitable lens, which will include neurodiversity and disability more than it does already. So in the work that I do, I work with mostly physicians, but some other types of clinicians, and they talk about, especially the younger ones, will tell me about their transition from the academic space and the learning space to the workplace and kind of the stark realities, I think education has been more aware of the need to have language around this and the need to have inclusive design. But then once there's almost a cliff that drops off, people enter into the workplace and all of a sudden they feel like out in the cold. And to me, trying to learn how to bring all the generations together effectively in the workplace is that understanding that culturally and educationally, people are coming from a very different space. So we really should be trying to figure this out because otherwise they feel very alienated and alone. Yes, there are thankfully some resources in schools thanks to 504's and IEPs and other structures in schools. And I know I just said neurodivergent doesn't equal autism. It doesn't. But I will say 80% of autistic people are unemployed. I feel this in the workplace all the time. And that's not just stigma. When you think differently and see the world differently and move differently, act differently, it doesn't match with the current standards of let's say corporate America. And so I was just in an interview yesterday, and the reason I didn't get the job is because I think very quickly and systemically, and they worry, I'll be bored and disrupt their system. And I'm thinking, well, if the system isn't working, wouldn't you want to disrupt it? And the answer was, for the next three years, we have the curriculum already set. The strategy's already set. We're not going to stray from the strategy. You're coming in with a lot of ideas, a lot of crazy ideas, like everyone should have equal opportunity to thrive at work. And we've already set things up. So are you going to be patient enough to accept the slow pace of waiting three years before you want to implement or before we can even attempt to implement any of this? And no, I mean, clearly it wasn't a good fit anyhow, but it was so interesting, and this happens a lot. The pace that some people think is different than the pace of a typical workforce or even the way people conceive the world and think systemically or think circularly or nonlinearly match the way many workplaces operate. And it's discomfort. It's a threat. It's change, it's new. And I will say for autistic people, that's a big barrier as well as truth telling, which is just we're the canaries in the coal mine who will sense something because of our sensitivities. We'll sense something in a room environmentally first, or we'll sense something culturally that's going on, and we call it out not to tattletale or cause any trouble. We call it out because it's true. And because if we don't offer feedback, how will change happen? But that's not met with open arms all the time either even when we're told share anything, we want feedback anytime. What do you think about this? But then when we tell them there's resistance, so that's a common challenge for, I will say autistic people, but also anyone who thinks outside the box who tries to step into the workplace. It's a challenge. And Gen Z is feeling that because Gen Z is almost seemingly innately already a bit disruptive in the best of ways, in the sense that they're like, wait a minute, does it have to be this way? They're challenging the status quo. And so they're feeling that resistance in work as well, Not to take their side and having this conversation with you, but I at least the fact that they were willing to say to you, this is our strategy and you're three years ahead of us. And again, not taking their side and not suggesting you shouldn't have gotten that position. But what I find is more often, because I tend to process things a little faster, and as a doctor in a very conservative field, I get the sense a lot, we'd be happy to have you come do the things that we think are important for us right now. But don't try to change things too quickly. Right, exactly. But they're not necessarily going to say that second part, they're mostly, if you can be who we want you to be, if you can be the kind of doctor we want you to be, then you are very valuable to us. If you are going to do anything different than that, then that is not necessarily a good fit. It's going to be a little disruptive. It's going to mess with the status quo. It's going to challenge our system and possibly challenge people in power, people with power and privilege. They might be the ones that are scared of what's coming and it's coming. Well, and I mean, that's kind of always been my point. Well, particularly in healthcare, it's not really working what we're doing now. Does this benefit us to keep doing what we're doing? Maybe we should be thinking about this. I don't know. This is just the way I'm looking at, but maybe? I like to think, well, who is this benefiting? Okay, now it makes sense because if we follow the money or follow the power or privilege, it makes sense to some people to keep things the way they are. And yeah, I think we're starting to unveil that a bit. And it's also very polarizing. I understand, depending on sociopolitical perspectives. But yeah, I have some hope for the future of work and humanity given what the youth is bringing to the table, what I see in my own children, what I see in cultural changes, frankly, the L-G-B-T-Q-I-A, and I will say even more specifically, the trans community, I'm just daily impressed with their bravery and creativity and resiliency. Well, I think there's hope too. And part of the reason I say this is because even though there are situations where as a doctor, and I'm just talking about my professional label and title, that early on just across the board, it was like, Nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. But now I talk to people and I'm like, what do you think? Do you think we could work on this together? And there's so many more sparks, there's so many more people who are like, yeah, that kind makes sense. Yeah, I feel like we can move in that direction. And so that for me is kind of, we understand it's not working the way it should, so there's an opening there. That's my feeling of hope. Definitely. And the reason why I love podcasts and conversations and debates is because I truly believe it's going to be through conversations. Either individual conversations, small group conversations, bit by bit where somebody who's and racist, homophobic and queer in the same room, neurodivergent, neurotypical, disabled able, whatever, having conversations together, trying to understand each other's perspective with a respectful debate. That's interesting to me, is to have those conversations. And I think that's where the growth is going to happen. But because we're often polarized and scared and just uncomfortable with discomfort, and I think it comes with age. I love being 54 and being like, I'm going to make some people mad, and I'm going to be a little controversial in what I'm saying. And I used to worry about losing people. I used to worry about losing family or job opportunities, and now I'm more fiery and frankly integris and in alignment and stronger in my conviction. And I love that about being a postmenopausal person in the world. I don't know. I don't need to people please as much, and I really want to be part of the change. Well, I've very much enjoyed our conversation today because I also believe firmly that it is through conversation that we are going to be able to move forward. So maybe that's, I'll only speak for myself when I work with people in my various fields. What I'm always hoping is to just foster communication, whatever that looks like. And communication in all the ways. All the ways. So Pasha, hopefully you and I will continue to see positive forward motion in this area. And I appreciate your willingness to come in and talk with me today. Thank you so much. It's great to be part of the Maine community. Great to have you. And today we've been speaking with Pasha Marlowe, who is the CEO of Neuro belonging. I encourage you to reach out to Pasha. I think she has many very interesting things to say. This is just my opinion,