I read Dame Uta Frith’s recent article, “Why I no longer think autism is a spectrum”, with great interest, and the debate that has followed has been just as compelling. I wanted to take some time to work through my own understanding of what she has said and why it matters.
Who is Uta Frith?
Before engaging with her argument, it’s important to understand Uta’s influence. Her research in the 1980s was groundbreaking. She was one of the psychologists who helped establish autism as a neurodevelopmental condition, at a time when some still blamed it’s cause on poor parenting. Her work shaped much of our current understanding. In short, she is someone who has spent her life deepening knowledge in this field, and so I believe her views deserve careful consideration.
What Uta Is Arguing
In her article, published in the Times Educational Supplement on March 4th 2026, Uta expresses concern that the idea of the “autism spectrum” has become so broad and inclusive that it risks losing its meaning altogether. If everyone can locate themselves somewhere on the spectrum—because all brains differ—then the term no longer helps us understand or support the people it is meant to describe.
Instead, she argues that evidence points to distinct subgroups within what we currently call autism. She describes two broad groups:
- people diagnosed in early childhood
- people diagnosed much later
I think this wording was unfortunate, and may be why the article has caused such strong reactions. We know that many children who should be diagnosed early are often not, because of long waits for assessment or because their needs are misunderstood. Additionally there are now many adults who are rightly gaining a diagnosis because the understanding and acceptance of autism has come on so much since they themselves were in their early childhood.
Why such a Backlash?
In addition to the concerns around these comments on timing, much of the backlash has come from England, where an autism diagnosis brings legal rights, funding, and access to support in school. Parents understandably fear that if the definition changes, their child may lose the diagnosis—and therefore lose support.
In Scotland, our system is needs-led, and a diagnosis is not required before targeted support should be provided. Uta suggests that teachers and parents can identify needs and act on them without waiting for assessment. In Scotland, that is essentially how the system is designed to work—yet we still see families waiting desperately for diagnosis, because people want and deserve to understand themselves, but the current diagnosis process is overwhelmed and underfunded.
Where I Agree — and Why
I do not claim to understand the nuances of autism but it is important to remember, that in many ways no one does – the study of the brain is such a new science, that we are still learning about neurodiversity, and there is still much more to learn. It seems naive to me that we would not continue to explore and redefine what autism is – as we have for the last 80 years, since Leo Kanner first recognised it as a separate condition.
Setting aside the timing of diagnosis, I do agree with Uta that there are clear differences between at least two groups of people who currently fall within the autism spectrum:
- one group who experience significant difficulties with language, social communication, and learning
- another group who do not struggle in these areas, but who are highly sensitive, both physically and emotionally, and often experience intense anxiety in social situations
I see these differences every day in my work with children and young people with additional support needs, and I am acutely aware that there is no generic autism support that comes close to supporting both groups.
Why I Think Change Could Help
I believe that those who could be described as hypersensitive—physically, emotionally, socially—are currently being let down.
- A diagnosis of autism, when given, doesn’t describe their lived experience. The spectrum is so wide that the label becomes vague.
- They often don’t meet the threshold for diagnosis, but are left with nothing that explains their way of experiencing the world.
- In schools, they are compared to the first group and seen as “high functioning”, “coping”, or “less in need”, and so are not given vital adjustments.
- Supports designed for autistic learners often don’t fit, while mainstream environments overlook their sensory needs.
- Research into hypersensitivity is deprioritised, because everything is grouped under one broad condition.
For these reasons, I believe that creating separate diagnoses—or at least clearer subcategories—could better reflect the very different experiences of autistic and hypersensitive people. It would make these conditions easier to understand, and it would help educators provide more appropriate, targeted support.
Get in touch if you’d like to explore how coaching could help you understand autism or hypersensitivity for you, your children or your class. I’m here to support you. You don’t need to have it all figured out. You just need to start.