Submission 1619
Hello,
I am writing as the sole primary carer and parent of an autistic child 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 impact of the proposed changes in this Bill on autistic children and their families, particularly the proposed Thriving Kids program and the broader consequences for primary carers.
From 1 January 2028, the Thriving Kids program proposes to divert autistic children aged 8 and under assessed as having “low to moderate” support needs off the NDIS. The government has used the word “mild” to describe this group. Mild is not a clinical term. It does not appear in the DSM-5 or ICD-11 and has no diagnostic basis. It is a policy label being used to categorise children for the purpose of moving them off the scheme.
My child is autistic and does not communicate verbally. He rely’s heavily on visual and sensory supports to navigate daily life and participate in his environment. On paper, he may appear to have lower support needs, but in reality our family, and I as his sole care, provide intensive support every day to help him function and feel safe.
Analysis by Disability Support Consultants of the NDIA’s own consultation documents confirms the Agency has already determined that most autistic children will receive mid-range funding, with only a small number expected to receive top-level support. This contradicts the foundational NDIS principle that every participant is assessed according to their individual need.
The Thriving Kids program has not been co-designed with autistic families. There is no published evidence base for its support model and no guaranteed transition pathways back to the NDIS if a child’s needs increase. No autistic child should be diverted into a separate system without evidence that it delivers equivalent, individually assessed support.
Submission 1619
I am also deeply concerned about the broader impact these proposed changes will have on primary carers, particularly women.
The NDIA’s own quarterly data has shown that carer workforce participation improves with access to NDIS support. This is not accidental. Formal supports make employment possible. When support is reduced or removed, carers are forced to absorb that labour themselves.
Primary carers of autistic children and adults are disproportionately women, many of whom already experience reduced workforce participation, lower superannuation, financial instability, and long-term economic disadvantage as a result of caregiving responsibilities.
This has been my own experience. I reduced my work hours and earlier this year I had to leave my job entirely because I am my child’s sole carer and the level of support required cannot be managed alongside full-time employment. I am not able to return to work full time while providing the care and support my child needs. As a result, I have lost income, career progression, and superannuation that I will not recover.
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 under nine away from the NDIS, will each increase the care burden on families. Together, these measures risk forcing more primary carers out of the workforce entirely.
I am particularly concerned by subsections 34(1G), 34(1H) and 34(1J), 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 children with disability, while directing the NDIS to disregard the pressure this places on families when determining supports.
These provisions do not reflect the lived reality of raising a child with complex disability-related needs. They reflect a policy decision to transfer costs and responsibilities from the NDIS onto families, and onto women in particular.
Submission 1619
This is not only a disability issue but a gendered economic issue. Families are already carrying significant care burdens, often at great personal and financial cost. Policies that reduce support will not reduce need, they will simply shift that responsibility onto unpaid carers.
I ask the Committee not to divert autistic children into a separate system unless that system delivers equivalent individually assessed support, is fully co-designed with autistic families, and includes clear and funded pathways back to the NDIS. I also 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, and commission modelling on the impact these reforms will have on carer workforce participation.
Every autistic child deserves to be assessed as an individual, not sorted into a funding tier, and every family deserves a system that recognises the realities of disability care rather than shifting responsibility onto those already carrying the greatest burden.