Canaries in the Coal Mine: Neurodiversity, Modernity, and Burnout

Burnout in neurodivergent people isn’t just personal — it’s structural. This post explores why masking, overwork, and unsustainable systems are pushing sensitive minds past their limits. What if they’re not weak, but warning us?

I’m often struck by how frequently burnout appears in conversations about neurodiversity. Perhaps the algorithm is feeding me what I want to see — after all, I situate myself as a neurodiversity expert — but I also sense something deeper. We’re not just talking about individual overwhelm. We’re witnessing a collective failure.

Burnout is often framed as a personal deficit — a failure to cope or self-regulate. But when so many neurodivergent people are sounding the alarm, perhaps we need to stop asking what’s wrong with them, and start asking what’s wrong with the system.

What Is Burnout?

Burnout isn’t just stress. It’s a prolonged state of emotional, psychological, and physical exhaustion that arises when the demands placed on someone exceed their internal and external resources. Originally studied among healthcare and human services workers, burnout has since been recognised across parenting, education, and disability communities.

Most clinical definitions centre on three key features:

• Exhaustion (emotional, physical, and cognitive)

• Depersonalisation (emotional numbing or withdrawal)

• Reduced sense of accomplishment (feeling ineffective or stuck)

  
  

Neurodiversity and Burnout

According to the 2024 Global Workplace Well-Being Inventory, nearly one-third of workers report feeling emotionally drained, and neurodivergent individuals are significantly overrepresented in these statistics. While burnout affects many people, its causes and manifestations within the neurodivergent population are unique.

Neurodivergent individuals can be thought of in many different ways, but I often see them as more sensitive versions of the human template. Research has identified neurobiological differences across brain regions, neural connectivity, and neurotransmitter systems in conditions such as autism and ADHD. These neurological variations are often accompanied by physiological sensitivities such as sleep disturbances, sensory processing differences, allergies, and gastrointestinal disruptions. For many, these reflect a heightened responsiveness to the environment.

From this perspective, what is often perceived as low resilience may actually be a reduced capacity to tolerate the intolerable. Neurotypical individuals may have more internal defences—or at least more energy available to maintain those defences. This might include psychological numbing, performing cultural scripts, or simply looking the other way. These strategies enable them to ignore or suppress the impact of harmful systems associated with modern life.

Neurodivergent people, on the other hand, often cannot. For autistic individuals, burnout is not simply the result of overwork or temporary stress. It emerges from a sustained mismatch between internal capacities and external expectations, compounded by environments that fail to accommodate sensory, cognitive, and emotional differences. What makes autistic burnout particularly complex is its chronicity and severity: it often presents as a long-term collapse in functioning, with profound mental, emotional, and physical exhaustion, reduced tolerance to stimulus, and loss of previously mastered skills.

Burnout in this context is frequently mistaken for depression or anxiety, leading to misdiagnosis and interventions that may do more harm than good. One of the primary contributors is the relentless demand to mask—in other words, the pressure to suppress natural behaviours or responses in order to appear neurotypical. Over time, this camouflaging creates an emotional and cognitive debt that becomes impossible to sustain. This is especially evident in mid-career autistic professionals, who often face years—if not decades—of navigating social and professional environments without appropriate support, structure, or recognition.

This begs the question: is burnout a flaw in the person? Or is it a rational response to cumulative environmental stressors? Neurodivergent people are not breaking down because they are inherently less resilient. They are burning out because they are asked to survive in conditions that are fundamentally unfit for human wellbeing.

The Modern World Is Mismatched With Human Wellbeing

Modern life is, in many ways, profoundly misaligned with what humans need to function and flourish. It prizes speed, output, and optimisation — often at the expense of rest, meaning, and relational depth. The structures we live within have been shaped more by economic imperatives than psychological insight. We are constantly connected, rarely still, and asked to compete endlessly — even in environments where collaboration and care should be central.

For neurodivergent people, this mismatch is particularly stark. The demand to multitask, self-promote, suppress emotional needs, and tolerate bright lights, loud sounds, or rapid transitions can push sensitive systems beyond capacity. But even for neurotypicals, the cracks are showing. Rising rates of anxiety, depression, loneliness, and burnout are not isolated problems — they are symptoms of systemic strain.

Put bluntly, we are not designed to live like this. As social mammals, we evolved in small, supportive groups where belonging, shared responsibility, and rhythmic patterns of work and rest were core to our survival. Today’s culture, in contrast, fosters isolation, hyper-individualism, and the illusion of limitless productivity.

It’s not that neurodivergent people can’t cope with life — it’s that modern life has become increasingly unliveable, and neurodiverse individuals are simply less able to pretend otherwise.

Canaries in the Coal Mine: A Warning Sign, Not a Weakness

The metaphor of the canary in the coal mine has long been used to describe those who register danger before the rest of us do. In the early days of mining, canaries were carried underground not because they were weak, but because they were exquisitely sensitive. When the air became toxic, the canary would collapse — a signal that others needed to evacuate.

In much the same way, I wonder if neurodivergent people are alerting us to what is no longer sustainable? Their burnout, distress, or withdrawal is not a personal failure — it is a biological and psychological alarm. And yet, instead of listening to the warning, we question the canary’s constitution. We medicate it, pathologise it, or ask it to be more like the miners. Rarely do we stop to ask what is poisoning the air.

This inversion — where the sensitive individual is blamed while the environment is left unscrutinised — is a dangerous one. It protects the status quo by shifting attention away from systemic problems and onto individual pathology. If we admit that the environment is hostile, we are called to change it. That’s harder and requires collective discomfort, redistribution of resources, and a rethinking of norms.

The Emperor Has No Clothes: Seeing Through the Delusion

There’s another story that comes to mind when I think about the neurodivergent experience in modern systems: The Emperor’s New Clothes. In the tale, everyone colludes in a shared delusion — the emperor is naked, but no one dares say it. It takes a child, too young to filter their thoughts, to name the obvious. “But he isn’t wearing anything.”

In many ways, neurodivergent individuals seem to manifest as this archetype. Without the same social filters, or the capacity (or willingness) to perform compliance, they name what others avoid. They draw attention to the gaps in logic, the hypocrisy in institutions, the absurdity of norms we’ve come to accept as immutable. And this is threatening. Not because they’re wrong, but because they’re right.

If we allow ourselves to believe their voice, "the system is broken", the consequences are destabilising. To acknowledge that our workplaces, schools, healthcare systems, or social structures are harming people would require us to confront uncomfortable truths. Capitalism, in particular, relies on a certain kind of shared delusion, namely that endless productivity is possible, that value can be measured in output, and that those who burn out simply weren’t strong enough. When neurodiverse individuals reject this narrative, they aren’t just making noise. They’re revealing the emperor’s nudity.

And so, we risk splitting: The neurodivergent person is mad. The system is sane.But perhaps it is the other way around?

The System Is Sick, Not the Professional

There are countless manifestations of systemic dysfunction in the world around us, but perhaps it is easiest for me to speak from within my own community: the helping professions. Globally, mental health systems are overwhelmed. The research is unequivocal — we are in the midst of a mental health crisis.

Clinicians are inundated with clients presenting with complex trauma, neurodevelopmental differences, and personality organisation that would benefit from long-term, relationship-based interventions. And yet, instead of being met with care systems that reflect this complexity, they are often funnelled into time-limited, manualised approaches like CBT — not because they are the most effective, but because they are the most "efficient." Put simply, they are affordable.

Evidence-based modalities such as DBT, MBT, and Transference-Focused Psychotherapy (TFP) can take 12 to 24 months or more, and require intensive training, specialist supervision, and institutional support. But rather than investing in these frameworks, we hand therapists a short-term protocol, an overfilled caseload, and a clipboard — and then ask them to perform miracles.

Clinicians are not burning out because they are incompetent. They are burning out because they are being asked to absorb and contain structural failure. They are caught between vulnerable clients who idealise them, hoping a dozen sessions will undo years of suffering, and managers who monitor their outcomes, enforce KPIs, and threaten to scapegoat them when things go wrong. They carry the emotional weight of others' pain while working in systems that undermine their wellbeing and often compromise their professional standing in cases of crisis.

And when the worst happens — when a client dies by suicide, relapses, or harms others — the unspoken narrative is that the clinician was not enough. Sometimes, of course, there are things we could have done differently. But we must acknowledge that the system itself is not structured to support enduring change. In many cases, it sets us up for failure, and then blames us for falling apart.

What If the Work Itself Isn’t Reasonable?

We often hear workplace accommodations described as "special allowances" for neurodivergent employees — as if they are exceptions to the rule. But what if we’ve misunderstood the baseline? What if the typical work environment is not neutral or fair? At best, it may be designed for a narrow range of neurotypical performance under optimal conditions. At worst, it is a ticking time bomb held together with a hope and a dream.

Neurodivergent individuals often request accommodations like quiet spaces, flexible schedules, asynchronous communication, or transparent expectations. But even neurotypical employees benefit from these same supports. What is called an "adjustment" for one person may, in fact, be a marker of a more ethical and effective system. If we all communicated more clearly, behaved in ways that respected one another’s dignity, and shaped environments with success — not just survival — in mind, society as a whole would benefit.

So why do we continue to normalise working environments that are inherently hostile to human well-being? Why do we only begin to consider change when someone collapses under the pressure — and even then, treat that person as the problem?

Rethinking work isn’t just about access and inclusion. It’s about redefining what we consider reasonable. It’s about asking who the current system is built for — and whether that system is even working for them. Neurodivergent people aren’t asking for special treatment. They are shining a light on what truly sustainable, humane, and productive work could look like — for all of us.

We Still Need Systems — But They Must Change

In critiquing the system, we must be careful not to swing too far in the other direction. Humans need structure — a sense of rhythm, contribution, and purpose. Work is an important part of adult life. At its best, it offers identity, community, and moral growth. Through work, we learn to delay gratification, collaborate with others, and take responsibility beyond ourselves. These are not just soft skills — they are core elements of psychological integration and adult development.

But structure without compassion becomes rigidity. And purpose without dignity becomes exploitation. The goal is not to reject social systems, work, or even hierarchy, outright — but to build systems that foster both accountability and care. Systems where people are supported to grow. Where boundaries protect rather than punish. Where excellence is cultivated, not extracted.

To build such systems, we must reclaim a deeper understanding of what people need to thrive. It is not simply to generate profit. It is to contribute meaningfully to something larger than the self — to build, connect, and create. For that to happen, our environments must nourish both the individual and the collective.

Accommodations are not an obstacle to this vision. They are a vehicle for it.

Conclusion: What If They’re Not Insane?

What if neurodivergent people are not failing to cope — but are, instead, unable or refusing to comply with systems that are not conducive to well-being? What if their sensitivity is not a weakness, but a signal about something deeply flawed in modern life?

We are quick to label distress as disorder. But perhaps, in some cases, it is clarity. Perhaps the child who says “the emperor is naked” is not confused, but honest. Perhaps the canary is not weak, but vital.

When we pathologise neurodivergent distress, we miss the opportunity to learn from it. To ask what it reveals. To ask what might change — in our schools, workplaces, healthcare systems, and homes — if we took that distress seriously, not as an individual malfunction, but as collective feedback.

Neurodivergent people do not need to be fixed. But the world they live in might.

Key Takeaways

• Burnout in neurodivergent individuals is often systemic, not personal.

• Masking, sensory overload, and environmental mismatch drive neurodivergent burnout.

• Sensitive people may be registering dangers others have normalised.

• Accommodations benefit all — not just those who ask for them.

• Distress can be a sign of clarity, not dysfunction.

Written by Kirstan Lloyd, Clinical Psychologist

 Founder of the Helix Centre, a UK-based psychology and psychotherapy practice specialising in neurodiversity, mental health, and therapeutic assessment. This article was written by Kirstan with the support of AI research tools and is grounded in recent literature from psychology, neuroscience, and trauma-informed care.

References

• BBC News. (2025, January 23). ‘Evil’ Southport killer jailed for minimum 52 years. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gweeq1344o

• BBC News. (2025, July 1). England’s junior doctors vote to strike in July over pay. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp820586x9do

• BBC News. (2025, June 9). Alice Figueiredo death: NHS trust and manager guilty of failings. BBC News. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdd2l0rmrrdo

• DeYoung, P. A. (2015). Understanding and treating chronic shame: A relational/neurobiological approach. Routledge.

• Haidt, J. (2006). The happiness hypothesis: Finding modern truth in ancient wisdom. Basic Books.

• Haidt, J., & Lukianoff, G. (2018). The coddling of the American mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure. Penguin Press.

• Hazlett, A. M. (2025). The importance of resources and interventions for mid‐career autistic professionals. Diversity & Inclusion Research, 4(1), 12–23.

• Higgins, J. M., Arnold, S. R. C., Weise, J., Pellicano, E., & Trollor, J. N. (2021). Defining autistic burnout through experts by lived experience: Grounded Delphi method investigating #AutBurnout. Autism, 25(8), 2356–2369. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211019858

• Lembke, A. (2021). Dopamine nation: Finding balance in the age of indulgence. Dutton.

• Mantzalas, J., Richdale, A. L., & Dissanayake, C. (2022). A conceptual model of risk and protective factors for autistic burnout. Autism in Adulthood, 4(1), 52–63. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2021.0010

• Maté, G., & Maté, D. (2022). The myth of normal: Trauma, illness, and healing in a toxic culture. Avery.

• McWilliams, N. (2011). Psychoanalytic diagnosis: Understanding personality structure in the clinical process (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

• Peterson, J. B. (2021). Beyond order: 12 more rules for life. Penguin Random House.

• Raymaker, D. M., Teo, A. R., Steckler, N. A., Lentz, B., Scharer, M., Hunter, M., ... & Nicolaidis, C. (2020). “Having all of your internal resources exhausted beyond measure and being left with no clean-up crew”: Defining autistic burnout. Autism in Adulthood, 2(2), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2019.0079

• Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy—and completely unprepared for adulthood. Atria Books.

• Wolbring, G., & Lillywhite, A. (2023). Disablism burnout: A conceptual analysis. Societies, 13(4), Article 131. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13040131

(Note: References were used for conceptual framing and clinical accuracy. This is not an academic article.)