Autism isn’t an excuse - it’s Gregg Wallace who needs to answer questions about right and wrong

Let’s get one thing straight: autistic people, as a rule, know the difference between right and wrong.

Why do I feel the need to say that? Two words…Gregg Wallace.

Earlier this month, the axed MasterChef host appeared to blame his late autism diagnosis for the allegations of misconduct which he faced, related to his time at the reality cooking show.

Wallace, who has since seen an investigation uphold 45 out of 83 allegations of inappropriate behaviour against him, claimed his neurodiversity means he “struggles to read people” and is “still learning”.

It’s not for me to doubt Wallace’s diagnosis, but I don’t think his comments are particularly helpful to the autistic community, a community which regularly faces stigma and prejudice.

The last thing they need is a celebrity suggesting his autism caused his inappropriate comments and behaviours.

So, let me be clear. Autism is not to blame for Wallace’s criminal actions.

It’s true that autistic people are stereotyped as being unaware of social cues, saying things out of turn, and not matching or understanding people's emotions. For example, if you say to an autistic individual that it is ‘raining cats and dogs’, then you may spark confusion as to where the pets dropping from the sky are.

But the vast majority of the autistic community have morals which are just as strong as their neurotypical counterparts. They are also likely to have a more rigid, black-and-white view of right and wrong, with little to no room for grey areas.

Interestingly, in the last week, Wallace has been made a patron of the Disability Advice and Welfare Network, a charity which works to provide benefits advice to vulnerable, disabled, or disadvantaged individuals, including members of the autistic community.

The charity’s founder, Annie Sands, told reporters that commentary suggesting autistic people don’t make inappropriate remarks is “ridiculous”. While I agree with her follow-up assertion that every autistic person presents differently, I don’t believe that this excuses Wallace’s behaviour.

It is worth looking at some of the other commentary from those who work with autistic people.

Take Emily Banks, the founder of neurodiversity training body Enna, who said being autistic is “never an excuse” for misconduct, adding that having the condition doesn’t absolve someone of responsibility or mean they can’t differentiate between wrong and right.

Seema Flower, from the disabilities consultancy Blind Ambition, also told the BBC that there is no excuse for being inappropriate, and Dan Harris, who founded the charity Neurodiversity in Business said while people like Wallace may miss out on social cues, autism “is not a free pass for bad behaviour”, and that comments like Wallace’s stigmatise autistic individuals, bringing a negative focus on the community.

I want to pick up on that last comment. For me, Wallace’s comments sound like an excuse for bad behaviour, and when that happens it is other neurodivergent people who suffer. People get tarred with the same brush.

It is this same prejudice that leads some people to characterise anyone who is perceived as a Muslim to be a terrorist, solely because of the actions of the 7/7 bombers. 

Worse, some bad apples within the autistic community may decide to follow Wallace’s example and blame their own wrongdoings on autism. That is a dangerous road to go down. The more people that do that, the harder it is for those who follow the rules.

Instead, we need to open our minds to what neurodiversity can achieve.

In my experience working with autistic individuals, I have one client who has an incredible memory; they are able to remember lists of things like countries, financial data, and the entire Periodic Table. I've worked with another autistic individual who knew every single lorry in the Eddie Stobart fleet by heart, which I thought was pretty impressive.

Imagine the uses businesses willing to support and embrace autistic individuals could put such skills to.

And I do have to acknowledge that those aren’t abilities that every autistic person has. But as Annie Sands correctly identified, each autistic individual presents differently, and just like their neurotypical peers, they each have their own abilities that could benefit society.

With just a little bit of extra support and understanding from employers, autistic individuals could bring incredible advantages to a huge range of workplaces, and that goes for almost every type of neurodivergence and disability. 

So, the fact that people might now start to view all autistic people as being capable of the same actions as Wallace could have hugely negative connotations for us all.

Not only do employers risk missing out on a significant portion of the population, each of whom is an individual with their own experiences, beliefs, and talents, but this could also make other autistic people, some of whom can’t even access a diagnosis or any formal support, worry about what the condition might mean for them.

With Gregg Wallace, there seems to be a new excuse every day. Ultimately, the fact he has been investigated for inappropriate conduct is down to him and him alone.

Autism is not responsible. Autism didn’t touch someone inappropriately, nor did it expose itself to a non-consenting audience. Gregg Wallace did those things.

Wallace, and Wallace alone, is responsible for his actions, and any judgement, punishment, or help, should be directed towards him, not towards his diagnosis, nor the autistic community or its members.

As an autistic individual, and again I have no reason to doubt his diagnosis, Wallace will doubtless face challenges and misunderstandings, just like the over 700,000 suspected autistic individuals in the UK. But that doesn’t give him a free pass.

Autistic people, just like their non-autistic counterparts, know the difference between right and wrong. The real question is whether Gregg Wallace does.