Pilot trial demonstrates procedural fairness and improves decision making in court for neurodivergent youth, indicating the need for tailored recommendations.
In Aotearoa New Zealand, Young Adult Courts provide an adapted court process for people aged 18–25, built on a commitment to procedural fairness and a vision of an enlightened world where all those seeking access to justice experience being seen, heard, and understood. The well-documented over-representation of ‘neurodivergent’ presentations, which impact information processing, comprehension, decision making, communication, and emotion regulation, are an inherent barrier to this aim, unless addressed directly. This paper describes how a multi-profession group grappled with challenges including diagnostic, conceptual, and ethical issues, cultural safety, resource limitations, and the pragmatic utility of recommendations. It outlines how these were resolved through the development of a ‘functional neurodiversity’ model that pays attention to the primary strains of court participation, and a strengths-based ‘Court Participation Tool’ that evaluates those strains and provides tailored recommendations to enable participation. Pilot outcomes from a trial of this screening process are described.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Derbyshire et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: