Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Conceptual framework models dynamic interactions among 25 psychological needs across human contexts, suggesting wellbeing depends on systemic balance rather than fixed hierarchies.
The Human Needs Blueprint™ and Need-Protection Theory proposes a dynamic, non-diagnostic model of human functioning based on 25 psychologically meaningful human-need constructs. The framework begins from a one-species principle: people are not first categorised by diagnosis, neurotype or behavioural presentation. Instead, each individual is understood through their own changing configuration of need importance or requirement, current access, discrepancy, capacity, context, threat sensitivity and protective response. The paper distinguishes closely related constructs including Autonomy, Agency and Authorship; Esteem, Recognition, Significance and Dignity; and proposes that human needs operate as an interacting system rather than as isolated variables or a fixed hierarchy. Seven provisional interaction mechanisms are described: Access Dependency, Need Dominance/Crowding, Need Synergy/Cascading Access, Dynamic Reconfiguration, Need Displacement/Constrained Expression, Satisfier Transformation and Asynchronous Need Functioning. The model also distinguishes human needs from accommodations and satisfiers, and proposes that visible functioning or achievement in one area should not be assumed to demonstrate whole-system wellbeing. The framework was developed iteratively through lived experience, caregiving, fostering, naturalistic observation, assessment development and applied framework construction. It is presented as a developing, non-peer-reviewed theoretical model intended for independent empirical investigation rather than as a validated universal taxonomy. This paper provides the theoretical foundation underlying later applied work including HNEPT™, while the proprietary assessment items, scoring architecture, formulas, weighting, interpretation rules and implementation systems are not disclosed in this publication.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Danielle Mary Cook (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: