https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Index ${session.getAttribute("locale")} 5 https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:23307 Wed 11 Apr 2018 16:43:41 AEST ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:22258 Wed 11 Apr 2018 16:35:43 AEST ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:35257 Louth v Diprose. However, a significant aspect of Ms Louth’s identity is missing from these discussions: her neurodivergence (or mental illness). This article analyses the stereo typical treatment of women through the lenses of gender and neurodivergence in ‘clouded judgment’ unconscionability cases. This analysis is focused on the comparison of the use of stereotypes in Louth v Diprose and Williams v Maalouf. Each case allows vastly different outcomes for the neuro divergent female parties, but both cases reinforce prejudicial stereotypes. The article concludes with a discussion of how a myopic focus on a singular category of identity can hinder the creation of decisions that are more mindful of intersectional realities.]]> Fri 05 Jul 2019 12:13:19 AEST ]]>