This text is based on an ongoing Nordic survey on ADHD and working life. Nearly 300 adults with a confirmed ADHD diagnosis have responded so far. They are between 20 and 67 years old and live in Denmark, Norway, Sweden or Finland. The survey is still open.
ADHD still carries strong cultural associations. It is often imagined as a diagnosis of unruly boys, impulsive behaviour and poor self-control. These images linger, even when the reality is adult professionals managing complex work and responsibilities. Why would anyone admit they have ADHD?
Disclosure involves weighing potential benefits against possible consequences. People think about timing, audience and context. They consider what might change once the diagnosis is known.
In our study, some participants describe positive experiences of openness and disclosing their condition at workplace. They mention understanding managers, practical adjustments and a sense of relief. But these accounts sit alongside many others marked by caution. For a large share of participants, disclosure is approached as a calculated risk.
The reasons for hesitation are remarkably consistent. Many fear being seen as less competent, less reliable or less suitable for responsibility. Others worry that their diagnosis will be used to explain future difficulties, even when those difficulties have little to do with ADHD. Some describe concerns about career progression, access to challenging tasks or long-term credibility. Few participants also mention that this is a private issue, and does not concern anyone at work. Fair enough.
Some who have disclosed their diagnosis at work, point to subtle shifts after disclosure. Expectations may change, trust may be questioned or responsibilities quietly reduced. What is said and what happens in practice do not always align. Misunderstanding plays a central role. ADHD is often interpreted through simplified stereotypes that do not reflect adult working life. Some describe reactions that minimise the diagnosis or question its relevance. Comments suggesting that everyone struggles in similar ways are common. While often intended as reassurance, such responses can invalidate the need for accommodation and make disclosure feel pointless.
Because of this, many choose not to disclose the diagnosis itself. Instead, they talk about specific needs. They ask for clearer deadlines, written instructions or quieter workspaces without explaining why these adjustments matter. This approach can be effective in practice, but it also places the responsibility for adaptation entirely on the individual.
Disclosure is also shaped by position and power. Many describe feeling that openness is riskier in roles associated with authority, expertise or leadership. Of course, there are still some professions that exclude entry to them for individuals with ADHD. In our data, some managers, specialists and entrepreneurs fear that disclosure could undermine their professional credibility.
When disclosure depends on individual attitudes rather than clear organisational practices, the outcome feels uncertain. Uncertainty makes silence a safer option. Several respondents note that disclosure felt safer only after they had clearly demonstrated competence. ADHD could be mentioned once performance was established, not before. This suggests that acceptance is conditional. The diagnosis becomes acceptable only when it can be separated from questions of ability.
The picture that emerges based on our participants’ accounts, is one of partial inclusion. ADHD is present in workplaces, but kept invisible. Disclosure, then, is not solely a personal choice, but it eflects how workplaces understand difference, credibility and competence.
Tips for employers and managers
When an employee chooses to disclose an ADHD diagnosis, the most important response is interest rather than judgement. Acknowledging the disclosure and expressing a willingness to learn sends a strong signal of trust. Asking open questions about what supports the employee’s work and how you can help them succeed shifts the focus from limitation to collaboration. Disclosure is not a request for special treatment, but an invitation to create conditions where competence can be used sustainably.
Tips for employees considering disclosure
Disclosure tends to feel most relevant when work starts to feel difficult to manage alone. If recurring issues arise, if exhaustion becomes constant, or if a large amount of energy goes into masking and adapting, sharing the diagnosis may open space for change. Disclosure is not about explaining oneself, but about making work more workable. At the same time, the decision is personal and context-dependent. It makes sense to consider whether the workplace feels safe enough for openness to lead to support rather than additional strain.
