> Because they really are both very smart and disabled at the same time.

I agree with almost everything you say here. However, I wanted to point out that you make the same mistake the articles author does. "Disabled" and "Diagnosed" are not actually the same thing, even though we do describe ADHD and the like as "learning disabilities."

Being diagnosed with a learning disability or other type of neuro-divergency does not automatically entitle someone to special treatment. The vast majority of that 38% are likely just "diagnosed" people who are asking for no special treatment at all.

That doesn't fit the authors narrative, or trigger the human animals "unfairness" detector though so it makes a far less interesting article.

You are actually landed on the difference between “impairment” and “disability”! They’re often used interchangeably (along with “handicapped”), but they have specific meanings.

https://med.emory.edu/departments/pediatrics/divisions/neona...

The original article is more enlightening: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-universit... (Gift link taken from the linked article, not my own)

The stats are thin because not everything from private universities (where the disability numbers are highest) is reported. However they did get this:

> L. Scott Lissner, the ADA coordinator at Ohio State University, told me that 36 percent of the students registered with OSU’s disability office have accommodations for mental-health issues

Note that's only accommodations for mental health issues, so exclusive of the numerous other disability types.

The article is pretty clearly someone trying to drag disability on to the stage of the culture war because it's another group that's easy to other, imo.

This Is detail often left out of this debate . A diagnosis does not imply accommodations.