Submission 1862

Submission 1862

the same way, cope the same way, or require the same level of support. Every child deserves an individualised plan based on their actual day-to-day functioning and support needs, not a broad category.

It is frightening to think that children could miss out on vital early intervention during the most important developmental years of their lives due to changes in funding or eligibility.

I also currently have a 2½-year-old son who has been identified as autistic, and we are now going through the incredibly stressful and expensive process of obtaining a formal diagnosis. There is little financial support available for families during this process, and we expect to spend over $4,000 on assessments and appointments alone.

What is especially distressing is knowing that if my son is assessed as “Level 1†autistic, his may not receive adequate support under the proposed changes. Families should not feel as though they need their child to be considered “more disabled†in order to access essential therapies and supports. Early intervention should be based on need, not on whether a child fits into a narrow funding category.

The possibility that I may soon have two autistic children receiving support through two completely different systems is deeply unsettling. One child may continue to receive individualised NDIS funding, while the other may receive significantly less support despite also needing therapies and intervention during critical developmental years.

Parents of children with disabilities already spend enormous amounts of time advocating for their children. We manage assessments, referrals, paediatricians, therapists, school meetings, medications, behavioural challenges, emotional regulation, and daily care needs, often while being judged publicly for our children’s behaviours. It is exhausting emotionally, physically, and financially.

At the same time, the cost of living continues to rise. Families are already struggling with increasing costs of food, fuel, housing, and medical care. Reducing access to individualised supports will not reduce the need for therapy, it will simply shift the financial burden onto families who already cannot afford it.

In my opinion, the issue is not families receiving too much support. The issue is the increasing cost of therapies and services themselves. Providers are able to charge extremely high prices because services are linked to NDIS funding. Families should not lose support because of system-wide pricing issues that are outside of their control.

If my son were to lose access to his current therapies and support team, I genuinely do not believe he would cope in school. Without those supports, I would likely be forced to homeschool him despite knowing how difficult that would be for both of us. He would lose social interaction, imotional supports, and the progress he has worked so hard to make. I fear we would end up back where we started years ago, isolated, overwhelmed, burnt out, and struggling just to get through each day.

The NDIS has given my child opportunities, confidence, connection, and support that have genuinely changed his future. I strongly believe every child deserves access to individualised,

Submission 1862

appropriate support based on their unique needs, regardless of whether they are considered “mild,” “moderate,” or “severe.”

Families need clarity, reassurance, and genuine consultation before such significant changes are made.

No child should be left behind because they do not fit neatly into a funding category.

Sincerely,

Sent from my iPhone