Justice Beyond the Courts: The Role of Knowledge in Securing the Rights of Families with Neurodivergent Children

Access to justice (A2J) has been a prominent area of sociolegal scholarship, and its findings have significantly informed legal reform efforts. A2J scholarship has focused on disparities in court proceedings and has argued that the navigability of the legal system explains unequal access to the law more than knowledge of the law itself. However, courts are not the only venue for securing rights, and most rights disputes never reach them. In the United States, neurodivergent children possess legal entitlements and protections that are inconsistently and diffusely administered. This study tests the durability of A2J’s core findings by examining how knowledge disparities affect access to justice beyond the pursuit of remedies. Based on surveys and interviews with parents of neurodivergent children in Arizona, this study examines how knowledge disparities shape families’ ability to secure their rights and entitlements before engaging the courts. Substantive expertise explains rights inequality as families begin to actualize their rights and entitlements, while relational expertise remains significant in legal and non-legal rights contestation. The results add greater dynamism to A2J research, open new lines of inquiry, and demonstrate that reform efforts must look beyond improving remedial pathways to more equitably promote human rights.