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

Submission 1962

SUBMISSION: NDIS FUTURE GENERATIONS BILL 2026

As an Occupational therapist I wish to raise concerns about the NDIS Future Generations Bill 2026. The following raises concerns both me and those with whom I work:

• Redefining Functional Capacity: assessment of ability independent from others’ assistance or assistive technology without considering environmental factors can lead people appearing ‘functional’. For example morning assessments might show more independence than afternoon due cognitive fatigue; home modifications making a space accessible but requiring community adaptations highlight reliance on extensive supports already provided;
• Tightening Definition “Permanent” Disability: lifelong disability requires ongoing interventions which should be considered permanent after exhausting all appropriate treatments rather than waiting until no further treatment is possible. Ongoing therapy maintains function quality life, so access shouldn’t depend solely upon exhaustion of options;
• Supports Must Arise “Directly” From Impairment: need arises through interaction between impairment & environment not just one alone as in case where client needs support finding their way out yet less at home because familiar surroundings reduce this requirement;
• Changes To Value Money: while acknowledging scheme sustainability may prioritize lower cost solutions that don’t provide same safety/independence/long-term benefits cheaper alternatives aren’t always comparable leading increased risk e.g., cheap shower commode lacking postural support for clients needing manual handling by carers maintaining equipment’s safety;
• Effective And Beneficial Evidence Hierarchy: ideal world would have research evidence every detail therapists do however reality doesn’t allow it equally weighting participant-specific clinical reasoning and lived experience essential given individualized support needs often unmet within the scope.

National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment

• Increased reliance on informal support and parents: In my clinical experience formal supports provided by family always result in care giver burden burnout It not reasonable a member quality affected need specific disability support family member majority work significant levels already providing unsustainable increase expectation likely result increasing formal due burnout adverse health effects. • Change Whole Person Assessment: Concern about scheme moving away from whole person assessment interaction multiple impairments environment barriers requirements Occupational Therapist significant experience assessments know thorough assessment persons environments contexts vital ensuring appropriate level function safely. • Controlling Scheme Plan Inflation concern planned extension reassessment decision timeframes 21 days may result without adequate during times crisis period deterioration carer burnout inability provide informal supports. • Funding Cuts Caps Ministerial Powers grave concerns around proposal funding cuts caps participants groups removal of does remove people’s need for social impact participant ability out into do shopping attend appointments complete essential based tasks message with disability seen cut this sends generalised assessment will allow individual differing functional needs same diagnosis impairment example cognitive range mostly independently daily occasionally completely dependent requires hour support often have multiple combinations results vastly different between individuals concern that resulting insufficient to maintain safety participation independence provision I been able mobility within homes community via driving vehicle modifications; safety the participant their workers increased activities. I want Parliament change proposed bill ensure participants having thorough individualized capture their functional no blanket reductions access occupational therapy capacity building or community participation.