Submission 217
My name is and I am a single mother, full-time carer, advocate, emotional support person, and safe person for my 12-year-old son, . has Autism Level 3, ADHD, significant anxiety, and severe school trauma. I have 100% care of him, and he is with me in person for almost all of the week. Every part of our daily life revolves around ensuring he feels safe, regulated, supported, and able to participate in the world around him.
has been on the NDIS since 2019. He currently receives support through occupational
therapy, behavioural support, speech pathology, support workers, and social engagement funding. These supports are not luxuries. They are the reason he has any level of independence, safety, connection, and future at all.
We live in a rural area where services and opportunities are already extremely limited. There are no appropriate schooling alternatives available for him locally, no peer groups, and very few community supports. Due to his experiences of unmet needs and trauma within mainstream schooling, is now homeschooled. Without the NDIS, he would be completely isolated.
The supports funded through the NDIS make it possible for to leave the house safely, participate in the community, learn life skills, and slowly build confidence and independence. His support workers provide not only practical support but also the only regular social connection he has with people outside of myself. He has no friends his own age. These relationships matter deeply to him and have become essential to his wellbeing.
The NDIS also provides something that is rarely spoken about honestly enough: survival support for carers. As ’s full-time carer, I carry the emotional, physical, and mental load every hour of every day. When is with his support workers, I can complete essential life tasks, recover mentally, and have brief moments where I am not operating in crisis- mangement mode. Without that support, there is a very real risk of severe carer burnout.
I am deeply concerned about several provisions in this Bill because I do not believe they reflect the reality faced by families like mine.
The proposed parental presumption provisions under sections 34(1G)-(1J) are especially alarming. The assumption that parents will naturally absorb “substantial care and support” ignores the enormous and often invisible labour already being carried by families. Parents like me are already giving everything we have emotionally, financially, physically, and psychologically. The idea that this can simply be expanded further without consequence is unrealistic and dangerous. Families are not an unlimited resource.
Submission 217
The proposed changes around funding supports below total cost under section 34A also concern me greatly. A “cheaper alternative” may appear acceptable on paper, but disability support is not one-size-fits-all. The cheapest option is not always effective, safe, or appropriate. For children like , consistency, trust, specialised understanding, and relationship-based support are critical. Replacing effective supports with cheaper substitutes risks undoing years of progress and stability.
I am also deeply worried about section 25B(4), relating to “alternative supports.” In rural areas especially, these alternatives often do not exist in any meaningful or accessible way. Families may be directed toward systems that are underfunded, unavailable, waitlisted, or incapable of meeting complex needs. A support cannot realistically be considered an “alternative” if it does not actually exist for the person who needs it.
The proposal to allow automated decision-making under section 59B(4) is another serious concern. Families like mine already struggle to feel heard within the system. The idea that decisions involving human complexity, disability, trauma, and daily functioning could be made by algorithms rather than people is frightening. is not data. He is a child with complex needs whose life cannot be understood through automated assessments.
If our supports were reduced or removed, the impact would be devastating.
would lose opportunities to build independence and participate in the community. He would likely become isolated at home, disconnected from the outside world, and lose the small amount of autonomy he has worked so hard to develop. His emotional wellbeing and future prospects would suffer significantly.
For me personally, the consequences would also be severe. I live with bipolar disorder, and the current support system plays a major role in helping me maintain stability while caring for my son full-time. Without respite or practical support, my mental health would be heavily impacted. I would have no meaningful break from caring responsibilities and very limited ability to meet my own basic needs. When carers collapse, children suffer too.
This Bill appears to focus heavily on cost containment without properly understanding the human cost that will follow. Reducing support does not remove disability or need. It simply transfers the burden onto already exhausted families, overloaded health systems, emergency services, schools, and communities.
Submission 217
I strongly urge the Senate Committee to reject this Bill in its current form.
At minimum, the legislation should not proceed until there has been a truly independent review involving disabled people, carers, advocates, and those with extensive lived experience of the NDIS system. Safeguards must be properly embedded in legislation, not left to temporary rules that can later disappear. Families need certainty, protection, and genuine consultation.
The long-term consequences of these changes have not been adequately understood. If this Bill passes without substantial revision, the impact on vulnerable Australians, carers, and the broader system will be immense.
I ask the Committee to listen carefully to the voices of families living this reality every single day. The NDIS was created to give people with disability dignity, inclusion, and opportunity. Those principles must remain at the centre of any reform.
Thank you for considering my submission.