Submission 1272
I am writing as a primary carer and solo parent living in Queensland. I am submitting this to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs in response to the NDIS Amendment (Securing the NDIS) Bill 2026.
I am writing about the cumulative effect of the proposed changes in this Bill on primary carers and specifically on women. The NDIA’s own quarterly data (March 2025) shows that carer employment rose 6 percentage points (from 46% to 52%) with access to the NDIS*. This is not a coincidence; formal support enables primary carers to participate in paid work. When support is cut, that participation is reversed. This is the direct, documented relationship between NDIS funding and workforce participation for carers.
Primary carers of autistic children and adults are disproportionately women. In 2018, there were an estimated 1.2 million primary carers of people with disability in Australia**. The majority (two-thirds or 864,000) are women**. These carers consistently report reduced or ceased paid work, reduced superannuation, physical and mental health decline, and long-term financial disadvantage they do not recover from.
Amiam a single parent and the sole income earner in my household. Ihave two teenage children, both diagnosed with autism and assessed as requiring moderate support. For many years, our family has invested deeply in early intervention; a commitment of time, energy, and hope that has produced real progress for both of my children. I am deeply concerned that the proposed funding cuts will undo this hard-won progress at precisely the moment they need continued support most: adolescence.
The NDIS supports they receive are not a luxury, they are what make it possible for me to continue working. Without these supports in place, Ifacean impossible situation -I cannot leavemychildren without appropriate assistance, and yet Imustworktosupportourfamilyfinancially.
My careerhasalreadybeen significantly impacted by my caring responsibilities. Asasoleparent,thereisnos econdincome ,no secondadultinthehome,andnonet .EveryhourofNDISfundedsupportIlouseisan hourImus teitherfindfromsomewhereor anhou rIc annotwork. Theproposedcuts ifimplemented wouldleavemeunablet osustainm ycurrentemployment. This isnot hypothetical,thisismy reality .
W antto be clearaboutwhat‘moderatesu pportneeds’lookslikeinpractice. Itmeans mychildrenrequire supp orttonavigatesocialenvironments manag etransitions regulatetheiremotionsinp ublicsettings,anda ccesscommunityactivities safely. Thesearenottrivial needs. Theyarealso noteeds th atdisappearbec auseafundingtier says theyshould.Theimpact ofremovingsupportsath istof theirdevelopmentcouldhav elastingconsequences thatfaroutweigh theshortterm savings theGovernmenthopesto achieve.
Bothofmymy childrenalsocarrydiagnosesthat are notcurrently fundedbythe NDISbutwhichhaveaprofound impactontheir dailylives:ADHDandanxiety.Theseconditionsdonotin isolation fromtheirautism;theyinteractwith andcompoundone
Submission 1272
another. Managing all three simultaneously requires a level of support, patience, and structure that goes well beyond what any one person, working full-time and parenting alone, can sustainably provide without assistance. The NDIS has not funded these eeds directly, but the supports it does fund create the stability that makes it possible for my children to manage.
I am acutely aware that the Bill seeks to define more of what my children need as ‘parental responsibility.’ I want the Committee to understand what that framing erases. My children’s peers of the same age are able to independently access the community: catching public transport, going to shops, spending time with friends without adult supervision. That is not my family’s reality. My teenagers cannot be left alone safely, and they cannot navigate the community without support. This is not a parenting choice; it is a reality of their disability. Labelling it as parental responsibility does not change what is actually required; it simply shifts who bears the cost . In a single-parent household, that cost falls on one person entirely.
Despite the challenges we navigate every day, my children have so much to offer. They are curious, creative, and deeply caring individuals, each with their own strengths, interests, and ways of seeing the world that enrich our family and the people around them. I look forward to seeing them grow into adults who are able to contribute mentally to their communities and I believe that is entirely possible, with the right s \support in place.
The proposed changes in this Bill, including pre-set funding tiers for autistic children, the requirement to demonstrate ‘appropriate treatment,’ and the diversion of children u\nder 9 off the NDIS, will each individually increase the care burden on families. Together, they will push more primary carers (predominantly women) out of the workforce entirely.
The Bill makes this worse still through new provisions in subsections 34(1G) and 34(1H), which create a legal presumption that parents are responsible for providing supervision, personal care, transport, emotional support, behavioural support, and other day-to-day assistance to their children with disability. Under subsection 34(1J), the NDIS would be directed to ignore the pressure this places on families when deciding whether to fund a support.
Families are already experiencing the consequences of this approach. During a Senate h\eering on eligibility reassessments, CYDA CEO Skye Kakoschke-Moore shared this account from a family:
“We were told that because my son was under 18 that everything was deemed parental responsibility. I was told that if I couldn’t fulfill my parental responsibility that I’d be reported to the department of Children’s Services.”
These provisions do not reflect the reality of raising a child with complex disability eeds. They reflect a policy decision to transfer costs from the NDIS onto families a\nd onto women in particular. This is a gendered economic harm. The financial isadvantage imposed on primary carers (lost income, lost career progression, lost
Submission 1272
superannuation) does not resolve when children grow up. It compounds. Women who exit the workforce to provide care that the NDIS no longer funds will carry that disadvantage into retirement.
I ask the Committee to:
- Remove subsections 34(1G), 34(1H) and 34(1J) from the Bill.
- Require a gender impact assessment of all proposed changes before this Bill proceeds.
- Commission modelling of the effect on carer workforce participation if the proposed funding reductions are implemented, specifically for single-parent households.
- Recognise that autistic teenagers with moderate support needs represent a cohort whose progress depends on sustained, consistent funded support and that cuts at this life stage carry disproportionate long-term costs.
The NDIS has given my family the ability to function and to participate in the community, to keep working, to keep hoping. These proposed changes would take that away. I urge the Committee to hear what families like mine are telling you, and to act accordingly.
Citations
- NDIS Quarterly Report Q3 202–26. [NDIS Website](accessed May 25, 2026). ** Australian Bureau of Statistics (2022), Disability, Ageing and Carers, Australia: Summary of Findings, [ABS Website](accessed May 25, 2026).