Submission 1917

When our child was diagnosed in 2009 with “classic autism” on the autism spectrum using -then DSM-IV diagnostic criteria, the ONLY type of therapy that had been "scientifically" PROVEN of results was Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA). It was labelled the "gold standard
type of therapy. As his parents, my husband and I researched all the various types of therapy available at the time, considering what research had been done into their efficacy and moral/ ethical principles they were founded upon.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment

Submission: 1917

abusive by neurodivergent adults that received ABA therapy as children, and they have suffered mental health problems. Research shows autistic adults having higher unemployment rates compared others/disabilities/generals population; also suffer more bullying/victimisation/abuse etc., The community unfairly stigmatised/isolated from society, The original goal included early interventions moving away inequality state-based services; it was visionary based on being proactive improving outcomes future allowing autonomy/choice control person-centred approach. The proposed changes violate those principles directly. to remove people/deny entry means returning equality of state-based services socio-economic status where you live impacts lifelong health/independence outcome.

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

Submission 1917

Living in the rural community that we do, we have just lost the permanent GP that was here, and our rural community has only the inconsistency of locum doctors now. Which to be fair is better than some Tasmanian communities that don’t even have that. If we lost the NDIS, progression towards goals for our children would halt. Isolation would increase, and health would by extension most likely decrease. Not just for those that are NDIS participants, but also family members who are not participants would also decline going through isolation and, by extension, suffer reduced health outcomes. This would increase pressure on the state and federal governments via Medicare etc. Also, it is of grave concern to hear that child will be funnelled into the “Thriving Kids” program, annd that the NDIS would refuse applications if a person had not tried all treatments previously. Looking at our family’s example, if ABA was the Thriving Kids of today, if we had refused ABA treatment wwe could have been refused NDIS participation. At the time, ABA was considered the gold standard and now, decades later, wew see that iit haas actually bbeen harmful.A couple oof decades from nnoww meta-analysis peer reviewed research ccould show ththat Thhriivving Kiids ended up being jjust as hharmmful aa ABAA iss noow consiidered.Yet you arre lookingat making legislation tthhat woould rob people oo fthe autonomytto act according ttot he dictteatesofof their own consciencee.Youa re removinng choice annd control in bothhe particpants thaatt willl bee “lucky” ennoough too remainonnn teNNDIS,and also thosethaht might needtttoo applyinto then future. Not everyone hass teh capacityy to move intersttaateif thee Tasmanian health system cannot provide treatments that yyouu woouuld mandatenne assbeing necessaryyy tohave exhaustedall options before applying. And,given theTtasmanian state budget released this month showsseethe ststate government are planning torremove 700 million dollarsfrom rtherhealthsystem that is alreadycrumbling around us, this will only compound the impacts ofintergenerational cycles offpoverty. This legislatioinnis alreadly causing harm. People have been havingtheir packages drastically reduced in then last24 months or more.There iiss aalready aharm trackerrecordingharm and fatalities connectedtot these cuts so far. rThose numberswill increase exponentially. If you createlegislationthat causes hharmand fatalties, yoouare creating legislative eugenics.

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

Submission 1917

What happens in a couple of decades if there’s a class action against the government for making harmful therapy a prerequisite to NDIS eligibility? Or for the lack of duty of care that led people to suicide, as happened with Robodebt? I guess that’s where the earlier questions, of what constitutes improvement and what is the timeline for improvement, reappear as relevant. As politicians, if you can’t answer publicly, you need to at least ask yourself internally, what is the true purpose of these changes to the NDIS? Are they really to “safeguard” into the future, or to look tough short-term for votes? Safeguarding the future shouldn’t remove choice and control. Safeguarding doesn’t mean spending less now because you’ll be out of politics or dead before the children being pushed into Thriving Kids are old enough to take action against a program like ABA which showed short term improvement but resulted in longterm harm. I understand that data from Dec 2021 shows 33% of NDIS participants had autism listed as their primary disability. So in an environment wanting reduced NDIS spending it looks pretty cut-and-dry case just chop them off NDIS hero saving tax payers money The problem autistic people face still human beings no matter how many spin doctors demonise through propaganda; human rights remain intact. From any moral logical viewpoints makes sense invest young so older have independence capacity work “pay forward” taxes Investing federal level helps overcome inequality between states Allowing choice allows autonomy dignity prevents issues strict regime preapproved therapy not tested efficacy sufficient time ensure no harm falls those forced legislation. This submission hasn’t yet touched research Per Capita False Economy: The economic benefits National Disability Scheme consequences Government cost-cutting is report page conservative estimate multiplier effect NDIS range billion dollars under-funded significant negative outcomes occur economy.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment Submission

The consequences of under investing in the NDIS would disproportionately affect women, carers, and individuals living with a disability.

It doesn’t mention medical/quality-of-life implications where we see disabled persons discussing accessing voluntary assisted dying if funding decreases due to losing it from NDIS funds. This legislation will increase unemployment both through removing necessary supports for equal access within communities so these can work alongside others employed supporting them as well increasing demand on state services already struggling keeping up because replacing NDIS provided support isn’t allowed anymore leading deterioration health isolation lack choice control being removed from NDIS or forced into government mandated therapy Thriving Kids Human rights should be equally accessible Autonomy must also have equality Unfortunately capitalist society mentality breeds idea human worth defined productivity interesting how seems used interchangeably symbolise effort People wth disabilties need more efforts than neurotypicals overcome barriers created by society order try productive However often these efforts produce unseen dismissed unacknowledged worse known met apathy judgement somehow less Therapy & Supports whether they’re workers assistive technology needed equitable community employment Removing this means reinforcing notion that people without disabilities have sufficient productivty determine their ‘worth’ ie are considered ‘less valuable’. Legislation makes decisions about which disabilities deserve help It’s saying autistic people don’t get fair access Community Employment Now remember at beginning said had highest unemployment rates compared other types of disability general population?

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

Submission 1917

If you wanted to safeguard people into the future to be “productive” members of society that pay taxes, you would want to spend the most amount of money on the group that had the least employment. That’s the autistic community.

Removing autistic people from the NDIS means that you are perpetuating barriers that keep autistic people unemployed and underemployed, with an attitude that it will be somebody else’s problem down the track. Because the research shows that therapy that forces neuroconforming behaviour in childhood results in long term harm in adulthood. Which, by extension, will create a financial “burden” in the future to remedy. Hitler used propaganda and power to kill millions of people, including the disabled. This legislation will kill countless people. Politicians hands aren’t clean just because they didn’t build a gas chamber and march people in. Allowing legislation that will see people end their own life by choice or from waiting for access to medical services, surgery, hospitals, mental health etc., knowing that those things will result means you will have as much blood on your hands to maintain the “status quo” for your rich donor mates. While I would love to add all the academic references I have to show l’m not making things up, i simply don’t have time as an autistic mother of autistic children trying to balance all the things required o me. And t he government knows this It did’nt want allow proper consultation scrutiny has given ridiculously short time submissions sent here is part smoke mirrors campaign propaganda designed cause irrevocable damage lives disabled care them To clear: I was before late diagnosed still autism even if change criteria DSM-VI say Autism level 12 renamed something else deemed disability permanent because DSM isn’t about helping truth money insurance companies conflict interest arises there, don’t go changing definition disability now also flawed current DSM-V clearly states different levels autism should NOT be used create one size fits supports rather individual needs which NDIS already breach.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026 Submission 1917

Using AI algorithms or templates of funding based on diagnosis is not in line with the current DSM-5.

My family and I voted Labor in the election that brought Labor back to power. But now, none of us will ever vote for Labor again. You have lost our trust, and the trust of the entire disabled community, with these proposed draconian changes. And unless this legislation is reversed, the damage Labor will do to the disabled community will also result in a major swing against you. Because let’s be honest, the only thing you truly care about is whether or not you retain power - that’s the only metric that you are considering in this entire legislation. And I hope to be proven right that this decision you have made will be your political undoing.

Sincerely, a concerned Autistic mother of autistic children\n Tasmania