Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Welcome back, everyone! We’re in for a fascinating conversation today because our guest is Emily Kircher-Morris. We’re thrilled to finally connect with her and have this discussion. Emily is a mental health therapist specializing in working with neurodiverse kids and teens. She’s also the host of the Neurodiversity Podcast, so you can see why we’ve been eager to make this happen—she truly speaks our language!

When we asked Emily about the topics she wanted to cover, she suggested “Using novelty to hack your child’s ADHD.” That is right up our alley, and we couldn’t be more excited to dive into it.

Welcome, Emily! It’s great to have you here.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Thank you so much! I’m excited to chat with you.

Diane Dempster: Why don’t we start with a bit of your backstory? How did you get involved in the work you do, and what’s your "why" behind it all?

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Neurodiversity.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yeah! For so many of us, it’s a personal story in some way. I was diagnosed with ADHD as a child, which wasn’t very common for girls of my age at that time. It was around the early days of what we were starting to understand about ADHD. Unsurprisingly, school was a real challenge for me.

When I graduated high school, I was passionate about improving the education experience for kids like me. I wanted to make it better because my experience wasn’t great, and I felt it could be done differently.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: I used to want to be a school principal.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Oh, I never wanted to be a principal—that’s for sure!

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: I wanted to change the system.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Same here! I wanted to change the system too. I went into education, teaching elementary school, and eventually earned a master’s in Gifted Education. I taught gifted programming at both the elementary and middle school levels for a while. But what I loved most was the social and emotional side of working with students.

So, I went back to school to get a second master’s in Counseling and Family Therapy. I worked as a school counselor—which is as close as I ever got to being a principal—and eventually started my private practice.

Now, I primarily work as a mental health counselor. I also have three neurodivergent kids, all of whom have ADHD, which has shaped a lot of my personal and professional journey.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: So, why neurodiversity in particular? It’s one of those hot terms now. It hasn’t always been, but you’ve been doing this for a while. You were kind of early adopters in this area. What drew you to that? Because you could have gone in so many different directions.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yeah. Well, part of it was my experience teaching in gifted education programs. When I got my master’s in gifted education, we weren’t really talking about how individuals who are cognitively gifted could also have other disabilities layered on top of that. When I started my private practice, I thought I’d specialize in working with gifted kids.

I was like, “Okay, we’ll address some anxiety, some perfectionism.” But ultimately, I ended up working with a lot of kids with ADHD and autism. Over the last decade or so, the growing awareness of those overlaps has been amazing. Here's an interesting statistic: individuals identified as autistic are one and a half times more likely than the general population to have intelligence in the superior range.

From a personal standpoint, while I’ve never been assessed or diagnosed as autistic, I notice a lot of those traits in myself. I stop short of self-diagnosing, but I recognize them. Part of that is because, when I was first assessed, Asperger’s wasn’t even in the DSM yet, so I wasn’t evaluated for it. Plus, until 2013, you couldn’t be diagnosed with both ADHD and autism.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Exactly. Yes.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Right. And that’s a critical point. Historically, providers could only diagnose one or the other. That changed with the 2013 DSM update.

Another key statistic I’ll share: the overlap between autism and high intelligence highlights the significant neurodiversity within twice-exceptionality—those who are both gifted and have another disability. That was my entry point into this work, but it has expanded far beyond that over time.

We’re now recognizing that neurodivergent individuals, a population typically underserved, often have their struggles viewed as moral failings. That’s a significant issue we need to address.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: I love that. You’ve touched on so many critical points. I want to highlight a few for context. First, you were diagnosed during a time when girls were rarely diagnosed. Second, the historical framework: until 2013, ADHD and autism couldn’t be diagnosed together, which is a huge shift in understanding. Third, the concept of 2e—twice-exceptional kids who are both gifted and face challenges. So many of our neurodiverse kids fall into that category.

Diane Dempster: I’d add a fourth point: you mentioned Asperger’s, Emily. While it’s no longer a term in the DSM, there’s still this group of kids—and adults—who seem to fall through the cracks. We’re still struggling to find the language and terminology to describe their experiences. That’s where the umbrella term “neurodiversity” becomes so helpful, encompassing the complexities of this community.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Exactly. People outside these conversations often ask, “How do you know if you’re neurodivergent?” or “What is neurodiversity?” I explain that it’s an umbrella term. It describes a spectrum of experiences, and while diagnoses and labels matter, they’re always evolving—just like the DSM itself. Neurodiversity is shorthand for recognizing unique needs and challenges, regardless of specific diagnoses.

It’s like a Venn diagram—there are a lot of gray areas. I appreciate terms like “neurodiversity” or “neurodivergence” because they allow us to focus on providing support, whether someone struggles with executive functioning, social relationships, or something else. It all falls within the same realm.

Diane Dempster: That’s a great point. I’d also add what I call “situational neurodiversity.” There are moments or circumstances where everyone struggles with executive function, even if it’s not a daily reality. Acknowledging that is important.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Absolutely. And it’s interesting you mention that because much of my work focuses on education. While I’m a mental health practitioner, the books I’ve written are about education. My upcoming book, which launches in January, is about creating neurodiversity-affirming schools. It focuses on building environments where all students can thrive. Universal Design for Learning for example, isn’t just effective for neurodivergent learners—it benefits everyone.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Right.

Emily Kircher-Morris: It helps people who are going through situational experiences, whether it's for a short period of time or due to something they're dealing with. If we have a universal design in place with multiple entry points and ways for people to succeed, it benefits everyone. That's the whole point of universal design.

And, yes, absolutely, it's not a completely unique experience. The idea is not, "If you don’t have this particular label, you can’t understand what it's like." There are many experiences we can all relate to and connect with.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Absolutely. What stood out to me when I first wrote The Essential Guide to Raising Complex Kids—and we like using the term "complex," right?—is that people would ask, "How do you know what’s complex?" And I’d respond, "If you have a complex kid, you know exactly what we mean." You don’t need further explanation.

Now, the term "neurodiversity" has really become a catch-all for much of what we’re talking about. So, let’s take this to the next level. We've set the framework for neurodiversity, and neurodiversity's focus in schools. The relationship between ADHD and autism is exceptional. What you want to talk about today, which we love, is novelty. What does novelty have to do with these complex kids?

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yeah, well, when we think about the ADHD brain, we’re looking at a brain that doesn’t respond to rewards the same way that other brains do. It’s a bit of a vague way to put it, but it’s that they need something a little different. A lot of the struggles that individuals with ADHD experience often have to do with the type of response or feedback they’re getting—whether it propels them forward, and how they’re reacting to it.

When we look at the neurology, we recognize that, for example, the dopamine system in the ADHD brain isn’t wired the same way as it is in other brains. This relates to reward response and reward-seeking behavior. When we think about academic struggles or challenges at home and try to figure out how to support and motivate, novelty becomes a key component. Bringing in something new, making it a little more exciting, can trigger that dopamine and activate the brain wiring that propels someone forward. That’s what we’re talking about when we discuss motivation and forward motion.

In my work with clients, I find that even introducing a little bit of novelty can make a huge difference in helping them feel successful and make progress toward their goals.

Diane Dempster: And what comes to mind is that we know if something’s really boring or difficult, the ADHD brain has a hard time pushing through it. So, when I think of novelty, I think of it as something that makes things lighter. It's about how to make something feel less heavy, or how to get the brain to spark and say, "Oh, wait, what about that?" It creates that dopamine spark, which makes it easier to push through boring or tough tasks.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Exactly. When I think of the term "neurodiversity-affirming," which I use often, I think about how we can work with our brains, rather than against them. For ADHD brains, much of the world is set up in a way that doesn’t work for them. But, again, talking about universal design, a lot of the things that work for ADHD brains work for many people.

I love the word "spark" because it makes me think of a shiny object, like something that catches your eye and pulls you in. That’s exactly what we're looking for.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: I want to revisit a term you used to set the context for this. You mentioned that when they're struggling with the type of feedback they're receiving. Could you explain a little more about what that means?

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yes.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Because we’re looking for solutions. Novelty is a great solution, and it works for many kids. But what problem are we trying to solve?

Emily Kircher-Morris: Right. Going back to what Diana said about things being boring, a lot of times if something is boring or tedious, there’s no feedback to provide information or motivation to continue that task.

In many cases, some people can self-regulate through a boring task with even minimal feedback. For instance, "Okay, I did that item. It feels good. That item is finished, and now I can move on to the next one." This works for them, but for an ADHD brain, finishing that item doesn’t give that little "feedback kick," like "Okay, good, I got that done." Instead, it feels more like, "Oh my gosh, now I have to do another one."

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: What's next?

Diane Dempster: I just had an analogy. It might not be a perfect fit, but I’ve been fishing when I was a kid. I don’t know if you’ve ever been fishing, but imagine a typical brain catching a fish with a hook, reeling it in, reeling it in. For a neurodiverse brain, that hook isn't as solid, so you have to go back and hook again, and again, in order to reel in and keep things moving forward. I don’t know if that helps anyone else, but it helped me.

Emily Kircher-Morris: No, I like that. Yes, it's like, but it's not just going to stay the course that way. So, you have to find something that keeps things going. I think another example of feedback is in social relationships for those with ADHD.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Right.

Emily Kircher-Morris: First of all, we know that many individuals with ADHD experience significant negative emotions related to perceived rejection. Sometimes this is referred to as rejection sensitivity or dysphoria.

I tend to think of this more as a culmination of the negative feedback ADHD individuals receive throughout their lives. It's almost like a trauma response, causing a larger emotional reaction. If you're constantly getting negative feedback, you're going to be much more anxious about being vulnerable in those situations.

On the flip side, some kids who are impulsive and really want friends might act out without thinking. They're looking for that positive feedback, but it backfires. They might say something offensive or hurt someone’s feelings, or people might avoid them because they can’t wait their turn. They’re still seeking feedback, but it’s not the feedback they want. So, novelty is the tool that can help us implement strategies or learn new skills to hijack that brain and find solutions to reach whatever goal they are working toward.

Diane Dempster: I have a question based on what you said. There’s this idea that kids often behave negatively to get attention because attention is still a form of feedback.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Because it's still feedback.

Diane Dempster: Exactly. So, talk a little more about how we can tell if it's feedback or just attention-seeking or something else.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yes, so when I think about this, I go back to the brain wiring, especially with ADHD, and how dopamine and the reward system work. Often, I think of the ADHD brain as being understimulated. We talk about ADHD and hyperactivity, but for what it's worth, when I think of inattention, I see it as internalized hyperactivity. It's like, "I can’t focus because my brain is constantly moving."

The ADHD brain is seeking stimulation, and if it’s not getting it in a positive way, sometimes negative attention is better than no attention. They’ll do whatever they can to reach that stimulation level. Kids don't realize they’re doing it, though. They’re not acting out on purpose.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Yes, I love that you said that. The term I use is "stimulation-seeking." They’re seeking input, and if it means picking a fight or causing some drama to get engaged, that’s what they’ll do.

Diane Dempster: So the subtle difference is between doing it on purpose, like "I’m being bad to get attention," and the brain seeking stimulation. They think they’re doing something to get the stimulation or feedback they need. It's a very different kind of purpose.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Right. It’s the difference between a conscious thought and an unconscious one. Like, "I’m going to do this because…" versus suddenly realizing, "I’m doing this, and I’m not sure why."

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: That’s the truth. In the framework we teach, one of the things we emphasize is whether the behavior is naughty or neurological.

Emily Kircher-Morris: I love that.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: What this is driving at is that we often think of it as "naughty" behavior, when in reality, it's usually something neurological. The child is seeking input of some kind, and the way it manifests may not be ideal. Can we?

Let’s circle back to novelty. I’ve been thinking about your work in schools, since that’s your background. You've been talking about universal design, and it got me thinking—our schools were designed to prepare kids to become factory workers, which, let's face it, is boring and tedious, right?

So how do we bring this idea of novelty into the classroom, using universal design, in a world where we're no longer training kids to be factory workers? We need to train them to think, because we don’t know what the world will be like in 20 years.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Well, that's true. There are a lot of things we can do in the school setting that are also applicable at home. Novelty can take many forms, and I think people often assume that novelty has to mean something new. But that's not the only way to think about it. Yes, something new can be exciting and get someone interested, but novelty also means something just a little different. For example, when I work with clients, we might brainstorm a strategy, and the child feels successful with it. But after a few weeks—maybe two, three, or even four weeks—they come in and say, "It's not working anymore." The parents often get frustrated, asking, "Why can't they just stick with something? Why can't they just keep going with this?" And I say, "You got two, three, or four weeks out of it, and that’s great!" Let’s take that same strategy and just tweak it a little—make it a bit different. So, for example, if the goal was checking things off a list to get ready in the morning, maybe instead of checking them off, you use clips that the child moves around or something like that.

Diane Dempster: Or maybe they use a timer instead of checking off boxes?

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yes, exactly. It may seem like a small change, but sometimes that’s all it takes. So, we find what works, and we shift it just a little.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: I want to share a story because I’m a big novelty seeker. What I've learned is that even if a system is working, once I get tired of it, I want to change it. It’s like rearranging the kitchen cabinets—after a while, I’m just done with how it’s set up. But what I’ve found, and this really proves what you’re saying works, is that I’ve used the same journal system for 15 years. I don’t have scraps of paper anymore; everything goes into my journal. But how I use it has changed a million times over those 15 years. It’s the same basic structure, but sometimes it’s personal on one side and professional on the other. Sometimes it's a list, sometimes it’s a more creative setup. That’s what keeps it fresh and engaging, while still serving my needs.

Emily Kircher-Morris: I use the same system as well!

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Exactly! But it’s the variations in how I use it that keep it feeling new.

Diane Dempster: And for me, if you look at my journals from 15 years ago, they’ll look almost the same as the ones I use now—just with different meeting titles and clients. It’s the consistency that works for my brain.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Yes, exactly.

Emily Kircher-Morris: That’s interesting. One of my favorite things to do every year is order my planner from Plum Paper. It’s my favorite because you can personalize the layout, and every year I change it. But I always go back to one paper planner. My husband asks why I don’t use a digital planner, but it just doesn’t work for me. I need something I can carry with me and see the whole picture at once. I get excited about it every year. I even start planning for it in October, because they always have a Black Friday sale!

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: And so, Emily just proved that it’s not that people with ADHD can’t plan ahead—it’s that they need something novel to motivate them.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Right! It has to be something new and exciting—what cover will I choose this year? What layout will I personalize? It’s all about the novelty. Just thinking about it right now makes me a little excited!

Diane Dempster: What I want to highlight here is that, as parents, we often think we have to come up with the perfect new system to engage our kids, but what you both are describing is that it's about figuring out what’s novel for them, not for us.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Exactly.

Diane Dempster: As parents, we might think, “Okay, here’s the new structure we’re going to use,” but part of what we teach is that we need to help our kids figure out what structures work for them.

So, I just want to put a quick note here: Parents, it’s not your job to come up with the new novel system. It’s your job to partner with your kids to experiment and figure out what will re-engage their brains and stimulate them.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Absolutely. Can I add one more thing before we wrap up? I love this topic so much, and Emily, thank you for bringing it up. If you have a child who’s a novelty seeker—and not all kids are highly motivated by novelty, but many are—you’ll notice this especially at the start of the school year. They’ll be really excited about new teachers, new students, and new materials. These are your novelty seekers. However, by October or February, that same child might come to you and say, “I’m done with school.”

This is a great opportunity to shift things up—tweak the systems, or even acknowledge their progress by saying, “Wow, you made it to February this year! Last year, you were done in December!” Helping them recognize that they’re motivated by novelty can be a great tool in helping them persevere through those tougher months.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yeah, I love that. I think some of the things you can use in these situations are important because you're exactly right. I find that competition is a great way to introduce novelty. I'm very cautious about competition against others, though, because it can quickly become maladaptive. But self-competition is different.

For example, I’ve written four books, three of which are published, and one will be. The way I motivate myself is by timing how many words I write in an hour. I have a spreadsheet where I track it. Just so you know, my average is 800 words per hour. I tend to edit a little as I go, but my goal is always to beat the 800 words from the last hour. That’s the trick.

When we're talking about kids, we want them to self-regulate with novelty. So, we help them find the structure. You mentioned this earlier—getting their buy-in and helping them self-evaluate what's working and what's not. When they can do this on their own, that's when they begin to gain independence, especially as they reach high school and adulthood. Let’s be honest, ADHD brains are always going to be ADHD brains.

Luckily, as kids grow into adults, they gain more control over their environment and the types of jobs they choose. But ultimately, finding ways to introduce novelty that works for them is crucial. We’re here to guide them, not impose it on them.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: I love it, and I really appreciate your example of using competition with writing. For me, that would shut me down in a heartbeat. So it’s important to help your kid find what works for them, because just because something works for one person doesn’t mean it works for everyone.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Exactly.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: We definitely need to wrap this up. Emily, how can people learn more about you?

Emily Kircher-Morris: They can check out the podcast, The Neurodiversity Podcast. It’s available anywhere you listen to podcasts. We have lots of information there. You can also visit the website and find us on Facebook. Just search for The Neurodiversity Podcast, and you can find us everywhere.

Diane Dempster: We know you have a gift for our audience, so we’ll make sure to include that link so people can find it.

Emily Kircher-Morris: Yes.

Diane Dempster: Emily, how do you want to wrap up? Is there something we haven’t covered that you’d like to address, or is there something from earlier that you want to revisit to wrap things up?

Emily Kircher-Morris: I think I just want to recognize and validate the parents who are going through this process with their kids. At the same time, they’re learning a lot about themselves, especially in ways they may not have been supported when they were young.

I just want to point out that as you're helping your child, you're also helping yourself. Being a parent to a child with ADHD is challenging because it requires a lot of executive functioning.

Diane Dempster: Absolutely.

Emily Kircher-Morris: To the parents watching or listening: you’re doing the best you can. Just by being here, you’re seeking out novel ideas to help both yourself and your child. Keep going. It’s not always easy, and it’s more complex than people often realize.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Absolutely. We’ll be discussing this in the summit with Catherine Ellison, so stay tuned for her talk about parenting with ADHD. Thank you for bringing that up, Emily.

Emily Kircher-Morris: I’m happy to.

Elaine Taylor-Klaus: Well, thank you for such a great conversation. We really enjoyed it and look forward to talking with you more in the future. I think we’ve really bonded over this!

Emily Kircher-Morris: Absolutely. Anytime!

Diane Dempster: Thanks so much, everybody.