National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 1687

I am writing this submission as a social worker who has worked in schools and disability-related support roles for over six years, including direct work with children, young people, and families navigating the NDIS system.

Through my work, I regularly see the significant positive impact that appropriate disability supports can have on a person’s wellbeing, emotional regulation, participation in community life, family stability, and long-term outcomes. I also see the consequences when supports are delayed, reduced, inaccessible, or removed.

I am concerned about aspects of the proposed changes to the NDIS Act, particularly around the definition of “permanence” and the expectation that participants may need to try all available treatments before accessing support.

In practice, many of the families I support are already exhausted emotionally, financially, and psychologically from attempting to access assessments, therapies, and interventions. The idea that a person may need to demonstrate they have tried every “available” treatment does not reflect the realities faced by many Australians, particularly those living in regional areas, those experiencing financial hardship, or those already struggling to engage with complex systems due to disability, trauma, mental health challenges, or caring responsibilities.

A treatment being technically “available” does not mean it is realistically accessible. Many interventions involve long waitlists, significant out-of-pocket costs, travel requirements, or limited local providers. Requiring families to continually pursue every possible treatment option before being considered eligible risks creating further distress and inequity.

Another significant concern I have relates to autonomy and informed choice and the implication that people with disability may be required to pursue or exhaust treatments before being considered eligible for support.

As someone working in the sector, this raises significant concerns around autonomy, equity, and informed choice. People without disabilities are generally able to make personal decisions about what medical treatments, therapies, or interventions they do or do not pursue without risking access to basic support or participation in society. People with disability should be afforded that same dignity and right to choice. Requiring individuals to continually prove they have attempted all “available” treatments before accessing support risks creating a system where people with disability have less bodily autonomy and less freedom in decision-making than others in the community.

Additionally, not all treatments are appropriate, accessible, affordable, evidence-based, culturally safe, or psychologically safe for every individual. Disability support should not become conditional on compliance with treatments a person may not want, tolerate, or realistically be able to access.

I am also concerned about the potential reduction or removal of capacity-building and social/community supports. In my professional experience, these supports are often misunderstood as non-essential, when in reality they are preventative and protective.

Social and capacity-building supports can:

- reduce social isolation,
- strengthen emotional regulation and coping skills,
- support school engagement,

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026

Submission 1687

• increase independence,
• reduce family stress and burnout,
• prevent escalation into crisis,
• reduce hospitalisation or restrictive practices,
• improve long-term participation and quality of life.

Without these supports, many individuals and families would likely experience worsening mental health, increased crisis presentations, school refusal, carer burnout, and greater reliance on more intensive and costly systems later.

I also believe the voices of people with disability, families, carers, and frontline workers need to remain central in these discussions. Many families already feel overwhelmed by navigating the NDIS, and changes of this scale require clear communication, transparency, and genuine consultation.

From a social work perspective, disability support should be grounded in dignity, inclusion, equity, trauma-informed practice, and early intervention, not only crisis response.

I urge the government to carefully consider the real-world impacts these changes may have on participants, families, and communities. After all, disability and vulnerability do not discriminate. Life is unpredictable and there’s always the chance any one of us will suddenly need the very systems and supports we are now debating from a distance. Anyone could find themselves relying on the compassion, dignity and humanity built into these systems, and that is exactly why they matter so deeply. We cannot deny the history of how disabled people in this country have too often been treated: controlled instead of supported, silenced instead of heard and dehumanised instead of respected. That history is uncomfortable, but it is real, and it is exactly why systems like the NDIS were meant to represent something better.