My "Picky" Manager is using pre-disclosure Autism symptoms to fail my probation....

I am a Junior Consultant at a "Big 4" style firm (think high-pressure, high-stakes). I am currently on a 3-month probation extension for "communication and logic" issues.

My manager already knows I’m Autistic, but I hadn’t explicitly disclosed it to my Project Lead for a voluntary role until she gave me a round of "mixed" feedback.

The Feedback Trap: The PM's feedback says I "proactively volunteer" and am a "strong contributor," but then hits me with:

"Often" misinterprets meeting outcomes (Auditory Processing).

"Regularly" needs step-by-step guidance on simple tasks (Executive Function/Logic mapping).

"Inappropriate" use of large chat channels for sensitive topics (Social Cues).

The Twist: When I saw this feedback, I disclosed to the PM. She was actually great—she documented the disclosure in her report and admitted: "It can be difficult to provide targeted support without clarity on what is helpful." She even recommended the specific tools I’m now using (Live Transcripts).

The Problem: My manager is "picky AF" and focuses on the words "often" and "regularly." I’m terrified he’s going to say, "You should have told Elise in 2025 so she could have managed you better. Because you didn't, these 'errors' are now on your formal record, and I have to fail your probation."

The Reality: Since my extension started in March 2026, I have used my accommodations (Transcripts + "Proposed Plan" tool) and my record is 100% clean. I have two other managers giving me glowing reviews.

My Questions for the Community:

How do I stop my manager from "punishing" me for the timing of my disclosure?

Since the PM literally wrote that she couldn't support me because she didn't know, doesn't that make the 2025 errors "invalid" as performance data?

How do I professionally argue that "often" only applies to the period where I was unsupported, not my actual capability?

It may help to focus less on whether the past feedback was caused by your disability and more on what you can do to improve.

If the accommodations you’re using now are working, then your strongest position is to demonstrate consistent performance with them in place. Framing it as “here’s what I’ve changed and here’s the result” is likely to be more effective than debating how earlier feedback should be interpreted.

At the same time, it’s worth being realistic about role fit. Some environments (like high-pressure consulting roles) place heavy demands on communication speed and ambiguity handling. If you find that meeting those expectations requires constant workarounds or is unsustainable long-term, it’s reasonable to consider whether a different role or environment would better play to your strengths.