Submission 2411
Submission on the NDIS Amendment Bill
Introduction
My name is , and I am submitting this response as both an experienced disability support worker and a person living with disabling chronic illnesses and chronic pain. I do not support this Bill because I believe it will reduce access to essential supports in ways that directly impact safety, independence, and participation in the community. From both lived and professional experience, I have seen how NDIS supports are not “extra” or optional. They are what makes daily life possible. Supports enable people to leave their homes, attend appointments, maintain health routines, connect with the community, and stay safe. When these supports are delayed, reduced, or disrupted, the consequences can be severe and, in some cases, life-threatening.
My key concerns
Automated decision-making: I am concerned about increased reliance on standardised or automated systems within the NDIS. Disability is complex and deeply individual. Automated systems cannot fully understand fluctuating illnesses, invisible disabilities, trauma, or the realities of daily functioning. As someone with chronic illness, I know that functionality can vary dramatically from day to day. A rigid system risks overlooking the reality of lived experience. Participants deserve human-centred decision-making with flexibility, nuance, and compassion.
Crisis/“not contactable” rules: This is one of my biggest concerns. People may become “not contactable” for many legitimate disability-related reasons. Pausing or impacting supports during these times could place people at even greater risk. The times people struggle to engage are often the exact times they need support the most.
Administrative burden: The NDIS is already incredibly difficult for many participants to navigate. Increasing administrative requirements may create additional stress and instability. Many disabled people are already using most of their energy simply surviving day to day. Expecting people with chronic pain, fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, mental illness, or intellectual disability to constantly manage complex systems can become harmful and inaccessible. Support workers and carers are already spending increasing amounts of unpaid time helping participants manage administrative tasks rather than providing meaningful support.
Funding/ministerial powers: I am concerned about broader powers to adjust categories of supports at a system level. Supports should remain individualised and responsive to actual participant needs. Broad funding adjustments risk creating blanket decisions that do not reflect the realities of disabled people’s lives.
Lived experience
Through my work, I support NDIS participants with daily living, community access, emotional support, appointments, and navigating systems that are already extremely difficult to manage. I have seen participants become distressed, exhausted, and fearful when dealing
Submission 2411
with the NDIS system. Many already feel they are constantly being assessed, questioned, or required to justify their disability.
I also have lived experience of chronic illness and understand firsthand how unpredictable disability can be. I have also personally experienced how chronic illness affects communication, energy levels, concentration, and the ability to complete everyday tasks. Some days, responding to an email or phone call can feel impossible due to pain, fatigue, brain fog, or emotional exhaustion. Disability does not operate on strict timelines or bureaucratic expectations. The people most impacted by these changes are often those already struggling the most.
What this Bill gets wrong
I believe this Bill risks framing disabled people as administrative problems to manage rather than people requiring support and dignity. The Bill does not appear to adequately recognise:
fluctuating capacity communication barriers crisis situations trauma-informed approaches the realities of chronic illness and psychosocial disability
A system designed for disabled people should adapt to disability, not punish people for symptoms of their disability.
What needs to be changed
The following protections are important:
stronger safeguards before supports can be paused or changed flexibility for participants experiencing crisis or fluctuating capacity accessible communication processes meaningful human review processes trauma-informed approaches recognition of invisible and fluctuating disabilities participant-centred decision-making preservation of individualised funding and supports
Participants should not lose access to essential supports because they are unwell, overwhelmed, hospitalised, or unable to navigate complex systems independently.
Conclusion
I ask the committee to carefully consider the real-world impact these changes may have on disabled people, particularly those with chronic illness, psychosocial disability, communication barriers, and fluctuating conditions. From both lived and professional experience, I believe these changes risk creating further instability and harm for people who are already vulnerable. Disabled people deserve systems that are accessible, compassionate,
Submission 2411
flexible, and human. I ask the committee to consider my lived and professional experience when reviewing this Bill.