The Conceptual Ambiguity of Cassandra Syndrome in Workplace Settings: Can Its Boundary with Power Harassment Be Epistemologically Determined?

The term 'Cassandra Syndrome' has gained widespread circulation alongside growing public interest in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and neurodiversity. This paper does not seek to deny the phenomenon to which the concept refers. The experience of those in close relationships with neurodivergent individuals — marked by communication failures, emotional isolation, and an unequal burden of relational adjustment — is a phenomenon reported across support, counselling, and clinical-adjacent settings. What this paper examines is the conceptual difficulty that arises when this phenomenon is applied to workplace settings, specifically the question of whether a meaningful boundary can be drawn between 'Cassandra Syndrome' and 'power harassment.' The paper argues that such a distinction cannot be epistemologically determined in the absence of a formal diagnosis, while simultaneously maintaining that the evaluation of conduct is separable from the question of diagnosis. These two axes — the epistemological (causal attribution) and the practical-legal (conduct evaluation) — are shown to coexist without contradiction.