In recent years, autism diagnoses have risen dramatically, leading many to wonder why autism appears more prevalent now than ever before. Or worse, whether people are just making it up for attention.
But the question we should really be asking is this: is it actually more prevalent? I don’t think so. Let’s explore the frank reasons behind this apparent surge in autism identification, revealing a more profound truth about human neurological diversity that has always existed but remained hidden in plain sight.
1. Historical diagnostic criteria were designed around boys, leaving women excluded and undiagnosed for decades.
The history of autism research reveals a stark reality: autism diagnostic criteria were developed based almost exclusively on observations of young, white males.
Leo Kanner’s original 1943 studies that formed the foundation of autism diagnosis included only 8 boys and 3 girls. Hans Asperger’s work—which influenced diagnostic understanding for decades—studied exclusively boys. This male-centric approach created a template for autism that completely overlooked how the neurological difference manifests across genders, cultures, and ages. And the diagnostic manuals and social perceptions of autism themselves reflected this bias.
The result? Mostly only males were diagnosed. The result? Mostly only males were included in ongoing research. The result? A vicious cycle where women are excluded from both diagnosis and research. The result? It’s taken decades to understand how autism presents in girls and women.
Generations of autistic people who didn’t fit this narrow profile remained invisible to clinicians and researchers. Imagine an ornithologist designing criteria for identifying birds but only studying blue jays—they’d miss the eagles, hummingbirds, and penguins entirely.
The criteria have slowly evolved, but the legacy of this bias continues to influence clinical practice today. Current research suggests that the actual gender ratio in autism may be closer to 2:1 rather than the previously reported 4:1 male-to-female ratio. Some even suggest that when you factor in how many girls and women are undiagnosed, it could be 1:1. It’s slow progress, but the boys’ club of autism diagnosis is finally opening its doors, albeit with a squeak of rusty hinges from decades of neglect.
2. More women and girls are now coming forward for diagnosis due to recent strides in our understanding of autism.
Research by Dr. Sarah Bargiela and colleagues has highlighted how autistic women frequently demonstrate different characteristics than their male counterparts.
Social camouflaging—or masking—represents perhaps the most profound difference. Many autistic women develop sophisticated strategies to hide their autistic traits, consciously mimicking neurotypical social behaviors, suppressing stimming, and forcing painful eye contact. This exhausting performance often leads to burnout, anxiety, and depression, but historically allowed many to fly under the diagnostic radar.
Autistic females frequently display interests that appear more “socially acceptable”—focusing on animals, literature, or psychology rather than the stereotypical trains or physics. Their special interests may be misinterpreted as typical rather than having the intense, focused quality characteristic of autism.
Communication differences also present distinctively. While stereotypical autism involves obvious language delays, many autistic women demonstrate advanced verbal abilities that mask underlying social communication challenges.
The work of Dr. Francesca Happé and Dr. Meng-Chuan Lai has been instrumental in developing new models that account for these differences. Studies now show that autistic girls and women often score similarly to neurotypical females on traditional diagnostic measures despite experiencing significant autistic traits.
Recognition of this profile has opened the door for countless adults to recognize themselves—people who spent decades feeling different without understanding why. Their autism wasn’t newly developed; it was simply invisible to a diagnostic system that wasn’t looking for them.
3. Within families, a child getting diagnosed is now prompting older family members to explore diagnosis.
When a close family member received their autism diagnosis at age 7, something unexpected happened. I began researching autism to better understand and support my relative—and found myself reflected in the descriptions. My sensory sensitivities, social anxiety and exhaustion, extremes of thinking and behaviour, and the need for routine suddenly took on a different meaning in this new context.
And I’m not alone in this experience. That “aha” moment often spreads through families like wildfire. Suddenly, generations of “family quirks” have an explanation.
Research supports this common scenario. Studies have shown the heritability of autism is estimated to be between 80-90%. The genetic component of autism means it often runs in families, with autistic traits distributed across generations.
Many parents—mothers especially—discover their own neurodivergence during their child’s diagnostic journey. They went undiagnosed throughout their childhood because of the male diagnostic bias we’ve already talked about. This pattern repeats across extended families, with aunts, uncles, grandparents, and cousins recognizing shared traits once one family member receives a diagnosis. The first diagnosis in a family often leads to a cascade of realizations—like dominoes of discovery.
Dr. Tony Attwood, a leading autism researcher, describes this phenomenon of “retrospective diagnosis”. Adults who previously compensated for their differences suddenly have language and framework to understand lifelong experiences.
The growing awareness of how autism presents in adults has created a pathway for valid mid-life and later-life diagnosis.
Intergenerational diagnosis explains part of the apparent increase—we’re not actually seeing more autism developing but rather recognizing patterns that have existed undetected across generations. The family trees of autism are finally becoming visible, branches and all.
4. Social media has helped to reduce inaccurate stereotypes about autism and broaden people’s understanding about different autism presentations.
Social media exposure to diverse autism presentations has allowed countless previously undiagnosed individuals to recognize their autistic identity.
TikTok videos tagged #actuallyautistic have amassed over 1.7 billion views. Instagram accounts dedicated to neurodiversity education reach millions. YouTube channels run by autistic creators demystify autism through personal narrative.
Social media has revolutionized autism understanding by centering autistic voices. Traditional autism education came primarily from non-autistic clinicians and researchers. Now, autistic people themselves share lived experiences directly with global audiences. The autism experts are finally those who live it every day.
The accessibility of these platforms allows for nuanced, multifaceted portrayals of autism that extend far beyond clinical descriptions. People share strategies for managing sensory overload, explain internal experiences of social interaction, and create communities around shared experiences that were previously isolated struggles.
These platforms have a particular impact for those whose autism presentations didn’t align with stereotypes. The hashtag #AutisticWhileBlack addresses intersectional experiences of race and neurodivergence. Content about late-diagnosed autism provides validation for adults who struggled without explanation for decades.
While misinformation can spread on these platforms, the overall effect has been to broaden understanding of autism’s true diversity far faster than formal clinical education could achieve alone.
5. The “epidemic” is largely statistical recategorization.
The apparent surge in autism prevalence appears dramatic on paper—from roughly 1 in 2,500 in the 1970s to current CDC estimates of 1 in 36 children. However, research shows this represents mostly improved identification rather than increased incidence.
A key study found that despite the increase in numbers diagnosed, there had actually been no increase in the prevalence of autism. It’s simply that the numbers of people recognizing their autistic traits, and therefore seeking and receiving diagnosis, have increased. Improvements in our understanding of autism presentations also means that professionals referring and assessing for autism are capturing people who would previously have been missed. The assessment tools themselves have also advanced.
Changes in diagnosis terminology have an impact too. The DSM-5 consolidated previously separate diagnoses (including Asperger’s Syndrome and PDD-NOS) into a single autism spectrum. This administrative change instantly increases autism prevalence without any actual change in the population. It’s like suddenly counting apples, pears, and peaches all as “fruit” and then declaring a fruit epidemic. Of course there are more fruits when you expand the definition.
Educational classifications demonstrate similar patterns. Many children previously categorized under intellectual disability, language disorder, or emotional disturbance now receive more accurate autism classifications. Studies analyzing special education data confirm this diagnostic substitution effect.
Looking at absolute numbers provides a better perspective. While diagnoses have increased dramatically, autistic people still represent a small minority—approximately 2-3% of the population according to most comprehensive studies.
Autism rates are not skyrocketing as some would like you to believe, it turns out we’re just getting better at counting.
6. We are recognizing and diagnosing autism across the lifespan, not just in children.
Historical autism diagnosis focused almost exclusively on children. But in recent years, adult diagnostic pathways have slowly emerged to deal with the lost generation of undiagnosed autistic adults who fell through the cracks. Yet these services remain insufficient to meet the demand.
Life transitions can play a role in triggering recognition too. Many adults discover their autism during major life changes—starting college, entering the workforce, becoming parents, perimenopause, or experiencing loss. These transitions strip away familiar support systems and routines, making autistic traits more apparent. There’s nothing like a total life upheaval to expose coping mechanisms that no longer work.
Gender plays a significant role in lifespan recognition. Research shows that women frequently receive autism diagnoses decades later than men, with 80% of autistic women misdiagnosed with conditions such as borderline personality disorder, eating disorders, bipolar, and anxiety.
The recognition of autism in older adults further demonstrates that autism has always existed across generations. Studies examining nursing home populations have identified previously undiagnosed autism in elderly individuals who spent lifetimes without explanation for their differences.
These patterns confirm what the autistic community has long maintained: autism has always been part of human neurodiversity. We’re simply getting better at recognizing it throughout the entire lifespan.
7. The neuroaffirming movement is pushing back and speaking up.
For generations, autism intervention focused on “normalization”—making autistic people appear and act more neurotypical regardless of internal experience. Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), the most common autism intervention, targets the reduction of visibly autistic behaviors, rather than aiming to enhance autistic people’s quality of life. That is, it directly encourages people to suppress or mask their natural autistic traits.
Now, autistic adults who experienced these harmful approaches are pushing back, and rightly so. Research by Cassidy et al. (2020) found that masking of autistic traits predicted suicidality in autistic adults. The autistic community has begun advocating for approaches that accept and support neurological differences rather than trying to eliminate them. And understandably, they are being very vocal about it.
This outspoken movement has created space for people to recognize and accept their own neurodivergence. Many who previously suppressed or denied their differences found permission to identify their authentic neurological experience. Many autistic people have endured decades of shame about their natural ways of being before discovering that these differences have a name and a community.
As neuroaffirming approaches gain clinical validation through research showing better outcomes for quality of life and mental health, more professionals are adopting this framework, further accelerating identification of previously unrecognized autism. The days of forcing square autistic pegs into round neurotypical holes are thankfully coming to an end.
Final thoughts…
The apparent increase in autism represents not an epidemic but an unveiling—the gradual recognition of a neurological difference that has always existed within human diversity. The expansion of our understanding reveals not just scientific progress but a cultural shift toward valuing neurological differences.
For those discovering their autism later in life, the diagnosis often brings profound relief. Years of feeling “wrong” or “broken” transform into understanding that their brains are simply wired differently. For families, recognition across generations creates new connections and understanding.
The path forward involves continuing to expand our recognition while building a world that accommodates and celebrates neurological diversity. The seeming explosion in autism isn’t new people becoming autistic; it’s autistic people finally becoming visible. And that visibility is something worth celebrating.
So the next time someone bemoans how “everyone seems to be autistic these days,” perhaps the appropriate response is: “No, we’re just finally seeing people who were always there.” And honestly, isn’t a world where we recognize and embrace human diversity better than one where we force people to hide who they truly are? I think we all know the answer to that.
You may also like:
