Double Empathy in Autism: Why Autistic Kids Get Misunderstood

If you’re parenting an autistic child, you’ve probably heard some version of this.

“They need social skills.”
“They’re not communicating properly.”
“They don’t make eye contact.”
“They don’t seem empathetic.”
“They should know better by now.”

After a while, those comments get under your skin.

You start wondering:

Is it my child?
Are they missing something?
Do they need to change?

Let me say this clearly.

Most misunderstandings in autistic relationships aren’t caused by a lack of empathy. They’re caused by a mismatch in communication styles – especially when only one style is treated as correct.

That’s what the double empathy problem explains.

If you haven’t read the main guide to autism and relationships, start there. It lays out the full developmental picture – including autistic love, autistic limerence, monotropism, and how intensity shows up from childhood into the teen years.

This blogpost focuses on one piece of that puzzle: why autistic kids get misunderstood – and how neurodiversity affirming practice changes the way we respond.

Quick Summary

• Misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people are often mutual. The double empathy problem explains why communication breakdowns aren’t a one-sided failure.
• Autistic communication is different in structure, not lacking in empathy. Eye contact, tone, and small talk are cultural expectations – not proof of care.
• When children are pushed to conform, masking increases. And masking increases shame.
• Intensity in autistic love, autistic limerance, autistic special interests, and autistic hyperfixation is shaped by monotropism – a focused attentional style, not obsession.
• Early misunderstandings matter. They influence confidence, consent clarity, and how teens later experience relationships – including questions like “can autistic people have sex?”
• Translation – not correction – is part of neurodiversity affirming practice and protects relational safety.

What parents notice (and why it gets misread)

From the outside, it can look like your child didn’t respond properly. They didn’t comfort someone the “right” way. They spoke too bluntly. They avoided eye contact. They missed a social cue. They kept talking about their special interest when everyone else had moved on.

And when those moments stack up, it’s easy to label them.

Lack of empathy.
Poor social awareness.
Self-centred.
Not caring.

That’s usually where parents start to worry.

But here’s the hard question – what if that interpretation is incomplete?

What if your child is communicating… and we’re just not recognising the form it comes in?

What double empathy means

The double empathy problem, introduced by Dr Damian Milton, explains something simple. Misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people are usually mutual – not one-sided deficits.

But don’t let the name make it sound complicated.

For years, the assumption was that autistic people lacked empathy.

Double empathy challenges that.

It says the problem isn’t missing empathy.

It’s mismatch.

Not a developmental failure.
Not a deficit.
A difference in communication styles.

Research by Dr Catherine Crompton When autistic people communicate with other autistic people, they often connect clearly and comfortably. The conversations flow. The signals make sense.

Breakdowns are more likely to happen in mixed neurotype interactions – especially when non-autistic communication styles are treated as the “normal” standard and autistic communication isn’t recognised or adjusted to.

That matters.

Because once you see communication as a mismatch instead of a deficit, everything shifts.

What we’ve often labelled as “poor social skills” is usually just a different way of signalling, responding, or processing.

Differences only become problems when one style is treated as superior.

That’s double empathy.

And once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

How autistic communication is different – not less

Autistic communication often looks different from what schools, workplaces, and extended family expect.

It can be literal and direct. Eye contact may feel uncomfortable or distracting. Processing time might be longer. Conversations can centre deeply on one topic, often shaped by monotropism. Some autistic kids prefer talking side-by-side rather than face-to-face. Many speak to adults and peers in the same tone. And honesty can come without the usual social cushioning.

That isn’t something missing.

It’s a different structure.

When we understand this through a neurodiversity affirming practice lens, we stop asking, “How do we make this look more typical?” and start asking, “How do we understand what’s already here?”

Forcing eye contact doesn’t create empathy. It creates masking.

Teaching a child to override their natural communication style doesn’t increase connection. It increases performance.

And when adults insist autistic children must communicate “like everyone else,” it’s like asking someone who speaks a different language to abandon it completely – while no one makes any effort to learn theirs.

That’s not social skills.

That’s assimilation.

Autistic empathy is often misread

The belief that autistic children lack empathy is stubborn. It’s repeated so often that parents start questioning what they’re seeing.

But most of the time, what’s happening isn’t a lack of empathy. It’s a difference in how empathy is expressed.

For many years, autism was explained through something called “theory of mind” – the idea that autistic people struggle to understand other people’s thoughts and feelings. That framing shaped how empathy differences were interpreted.

But it never fully accounted for what actually happens in real relationships.

Research and lived experience now show that misunderstandings in autism are rarely about an inability to care. They’re about differences in communication, processing, and social signalling – especially in mixed neurotype interactions.

In other words, empathy may be present – but not always visible in the way others expect.

Emotional responses may be internal rather than outward. Processing time can delay visible reactions. Sensory overload can dampen facial expression or tone. And a strong sense of fairness or justice may come out bluntly rather than gently.

That doesn’t mean there’s no empathy there.

It means you might not be fluent in the way it shows up.

Take autistic love, for example. It’s often intense, loyal, and deeply principled. When an autistic child cares, they care deeply. That same depth of attachment can later show up in adolescence as autistic limerance – an immersive, focused crush state that feels all-consuming, especially when first experienced.

The wiring underneath that intensity isn’t mysterious. It’s the same attentional structure that shapes autistic special interests and autistic hyperfixation. When parents begin learning about special interests versus hyperfixation, the pattern starts to make more sense. Autistic special interests are usually steady and identity-building. Autistic hyperfixation often shows up under stress and can feel harder to step away from.

Underneath both is monotropism – the focused attentional style that organises how energy and meaning attach to people and topics. Attention goes deep rather than wide. And when something becomes important, it can feel immersive.

Intensity isn’t the opposite of empathy.
It’s how attention is organised.

And when we understand monotropism, we stop asking, “Why are they so much?” and start asking, “What does this intensity tell us about how they connect?”

Why good intentions get misread

Misinterpretation goes both ways.

From the outside, neurotypical adults may read looking away as disinterest, when it’s actually sensory regulation. Silence can look like indifference, when it’s processing time. Directness can be labelled rude, when it’s honesty. Compliance can be mistaken for agreement, when it may be freeze or appeasement.

And this gets amplified when anyone in the interaction is dysregulated.

Under stress, sensory overload, urgency, or emotional activation, both autistic and non-autistic nervous systems lose access to nuance. Tone is misread. Silence is misinterpreted. Directness feels sharp. Delayed responses look deliberate. These are nervous-system states – not character flaws.

That point about compliance matters.

Silence and compliance are often interpreted as comfort. But silence does not reliably equal consent. Especially not in children and teens who are still learning how to recognise and express internal signals.

When adults interpret behaviour without context, shame creeps in quickly.

The question should never be,
“Why didn’t they say no?”

A better question is,
“What was their nervous system able to access in that moment?”

When we mistake survival responses for personality traits, we create relational strain that doesn’t need to exist.

When expectations create strain in relationships

Many autistic children grow up hearing the same corrections over and over.

Make eye contact. Speak more politely. Don’t talk about that so much. Smile. Say sorry. Join in properly.

None of those instructions sound harsh on their own. But repeated often enough, they send a message: the way you naturally communicate isn’t acceptable.

Over time, that creates masking.

Masking is not social success. It’s nervous-system override.

It usually develops in response to repeated correction, adult urgency, or visible discomfort. When adults push for faster responses, more eye contact, softer tone, or “better” participation, children learn that authenticity carries risk. They learn to perform instead.

That isn’t a child failure. It’s a relational pattern – and relational patterns can be redesigned.

When relationships depend on performance, safety decreases. And when safety decreases, honesty decreases with it.

This is why double empathy matters in autistic relationships. If misunderstanding is mutual, then correction cannot be one-sided. Neurodiversity affirming practice asks more of adults, not less of children.

Helping kids navigate social feedback safely

This isn’t about social skills training.

It’s about clarity.

There’s a difference.

Instead of telling a child, “You were rude,” we can say, “When you said that, they thought you meant X. Is that what you meant?” That invites reflection without attaching shame.

Instead of insisting, “You need to make eye contact,” we can explain, “Some people expect eye contact to feel connected. If that’s uncomfortable for you, let’s find other ways to show you’re listening.”

We’re not teaching children to mask.

We’re teaching translation – in both directions.

If misunderstandings are mutual, then adaptation must be mutual. Autistic children should not carry the full burden of translation in relationships. Adults, teachers, and peers also need to understand how autistic communication works, including differences in eye contact, processing time, tone, and intensity. When only the child adapts, shame increases and safety decreases.

That’s why this is part of neurodiversity affirming practice. We protect dignity while building awareness.

And we do all of it with the nervous system in mind.

Intensity becomes concerning when distress increases and the environment is not providing clarity, boundaries, or regulation support.

Reducing shame around miscommunication

Shame is one of the biggest relational risk factors for any child.

When a child repeatedly hears, “You got it wrong,” “You should know better,” or “That’s not how we do it,” something internal starts to shift. Not behaviour – belief.

Internal doubt grows quietly. And internal doubt increases vulnerability later, especially in romantic relationships.

That’s why the broader conversation about autistic relationships has to include autistic love, autistic limerance, autistic special interests, autistic hyperfixation, and monotropism. These aren’t side topics. They’re part of how connection, attention, and attachment are wired.

It also has to include real conversations about consent, power, and eventually the question many parents are hesitant to ask out loud: Can autistic people have sex?

The answer is yes. But healthy sexual relationships depend on self-trust, clarity, and confidence in your own internal signals.

Intensity itself is not the risk.

Risk increases when intensity is shamed, dismissed, or misinterpreted – especially in unequal power situations. When autistic love or autistic limerance is framed as “too much” instead of understood through attentional wiring and attachment patterns, young people can start doubting their own instincts.

And that internal doubt – not intensity – is what increases vulnerability.

If early misunderstandings are framed as deficits, teens grow up believing something is fundamentally wrong with them.

If early misunderstandings are understood as mutual mismatches, teens grow up curious instead of ashamed – and far more able to protect themselves in relationships.

What this means for autistic kids and their relationships

Your autistic child is communicating.

You might not be fluent in their language yet – but that doesn’t mean there’s nothing there.

The goal is not to correct them into a more neurotypical version of themselves. The goal is mutual understanding.

Double empathy reminds us that relationships are two-way systems. When we expect autistic children to do all the adapting, misunderstanding grows. When adaptation becomes shared, safety increases.

Understanding double empathy changes how we interpret autistic communication.

That’s what neurodiversity affirming practice looks like in real life. Not lowering expectations. Not ignoring impact. But recognising difference without attaching shame.

And when we stop asking autistic children to carry the full burden of translation, relationships become safer – for everyone involved.

If you want the full developmental roadmap – including how autistic love, autistic limerence, monotropism, and consent connect from childhood through the teen years – return to our guide to autism and relationships.

That’s where the bigger picture comes together.

FAQs

What is the double empathy problem in autism?

The double empathy problem explains why misunderstandings between autistic and non-autistic people are often mutual. It challenges the idea that autistic people lack empathy and instead recognises differences in communication styles. When both sides assume their way is the “right” way, connection breaks down.

Do autistic children lack empathy?

No. Autistic children do not lack empathy. They may express it differently. Some process emotions internally. Some show care through action rather than facial expression or tone. Just because empathy doesn’t look typical doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

Why do autistic children avoid eye contact?

For many autistic children, eye contact is distracting or overwhelming. Looking away can actually improve processing and emotional regulation. Eye contact is a cultural expectation – not proof of honesty, attention, or care.

Is social skills training necessary for autistic children?

Support can be helpful. But forcing children to communicate in a neurotypical way often increases masking and shame. A neurodiversity affirming practice approach focuses on translation, not conformity. Children can learn how others interpret behaviour – while adults also learn how autistic communication works.

How does double empathy affect teen relationships?

If children grow up being told they are socially “wrong,” they can start doubting their own instincts. That doubt can shape autistic love, attachment intensity, and experiences like autistic limerance in adolescence. Early understanding reduces shame. Less shame means safer relationships later.

How is double empathy connected to monotropism?

Monotropism describes a deep, focused attentional style common in autism. That wiring influences communication, emotional intensity, autistic special interests, and autistic hyperfixation. When others expect quick social switching instead of depth, misunderstandings increase.

Can autistic people have healthy romantic and sexual relationships?

Yes. Autistic people can have healthy, fulfilling romantic and sexual relationships. Clear communication, consent, and mutual understanding are important in any relationship – and especially important when communication styles differ. Reducing shame in childhood strengthens confidence and self-trust later.

What should parents do when misunderstandings keep happening?

Pause before correcting. Ask what your child meant. Explain how others may have interpreted it. Focus on translation, not suppression. When shame decreases, trust increases. And trust is what makes children come back to you – with harder questions later.

References

This page draws on current research and professional guidance about autism, sexuality, puberty, consent, relationships, and wellbeing, alongside my clinical experience supporting parents with sex education.

• Bolis, D., Lahnakoski, J. M., Seidel, D., Tamm, J., & Schilbach, L. (2021). Interpersonal similarity of autistic traits predicts friendship quality. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 16(1–2), 222–231.
• Butera, C. D., Harrison, L., Kilroy, E., Jayashankar, A., Shipkova, M., Pruyser, A., & Aziz-Zadeh, L. (2022). Relationships between alexithymia, interoception, and emotional empathy in autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 27(3), 690–703.
• Crompton, C. J., Ropar, D., Evans-Williams, C. V., Flynn, E. G., & Fletcher-Watson, S. (2020). Autistic peer-to-peer information transfer is highly effective. Autism, 24(7), 1704–1712.
• Khaw, J., & Vernon, T. (2025). Relationship satisfaction among autistic populations: How partner neurotype influences relationship satisfaction factors for autistic adults. Autism in Adulthood.
• Milton, D. E. M. (2012). On the ontological status of autism: The ‘double empathy problem’. Disability & Society, 27(6), 883–887.
• Motamed, M., Hajikarim-Hamedani, A., Fakhrian, A., & Alaghband-rad, J. (2025). A systematic review of sexual health, knowledge, and behavior in Autism Spectrum Disorder. BMC Psychiatry, 25, 410.
• Parchomiuk, M. (2019). Sexuality of persons with autistic spectrum disorders (ASD). Sexuality and Disability, 37, 259–274.
• Sala, G., Hooley, M., & Stokes, M. A. (2020). Romantic intimacy in autism: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(11), 4133–4147.
• Sivaratnam, C., Newman, L., Tonge, B. J., & Rinehart, N. J. (2018). Emotion-recognition and theory of mind in high-functioning children with ASD: Relationships with attachment security and executive functioning. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 53, 31–40.
• Soares, L. S., Alves, A. L. C., Costa, D. S., Malloy-Diniz, L. F., Paula, J. J., Romano-Silva, M. A., & Miranda, D. M. (2021). Common venues in romantic relationships of adults with symptoms of autism and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 593150.
• Tissot, C. (2009). Establishing a sexual identity: Case studies of learners with autism and learning difficulties. Autism, 13(6), 551–566.