Submission 2600
Submission on the NDIS Amendment Bill
Name: Shellee Watt
I am the Parent of a 14 year old Participant. I also work in Admin for a Registered Provider of SIL, CAS and ASC.
I am a single parent of a 14 yr old and a 16 yr old, my youngest is medically diagnosed with Level 2 ASD, ADHD and Anxiety. My oldest does not want to be formally diagnosed but has been assessed as Level 2 ASD with ADHD, Dyslexia and Depression. I have also been assessed and diagnosed with ADHD. The first assessment I did, for $3,000 for both ASD and ADHD, I cannot actually use as the psychologist who completed the assessment was provisional, this was not made clear at the time, and there was no one able to sign off on her work at the Practice. The
Submission 2600 doctor that actually confirmed my ADHD diagnosis, only works with ADHD clients, and will not look at anything else. I cannot afford to do another assessment for ASD. Many of my friends cannot afford assessment.
I can only work 4 days a week so I can take my youngest child to appointments on Friday and sometimes I still need to take time off work for her appointments.
I also work in the Disability Sector for a Registered Provider as an Admin, mainly handling invoices to NDIS and Plan Managers as well as support worker compliance.
My overall position on this Bill I do not support it and I have serious concerns. Why:
Submission 2600 Instead of targeting providers, plan managers, therapists/ allied health and the (poorly setup) claiming system that wastes funds, over charging and over claiming, this proposed Bill is targeting the people that actually need assistance. The bill punishes disabled people in way that is unfair, unjust and frankly un Australian. It makes me ashamed to have ever voted for Labor.
Just in case it never occurred to the policy makers, politicians or administrators - ANY AND ALL policies, changes thereof, and anything that will effect or is regarding Disabled people should be discussed, consulted and reviewed by the Disabled community, advocates and carers. The disabled community should not be an after thought in policy that impacts their everyday lives.
Submission 2600 Having a computer generated Al, or a random unqualified office worker or whatever Minister is in currently charge make decisions regarding supports, health concerns or funding for disabled people that goes against recommendations or medically stated information from medical professionals is completely horrifying. More and more of my friends and many participants at my work are being outright rejected or being told their supports and funding are being significantly reduced despite expensive clinical reports, medical opinion and information stating the supports are required.
My key concerns explained:
□ Administrative burden falling back onto me as a single parent struggling to manage full time
Submission 2600 work, a household, 2 teenagers plus my own ill health - the constant level of overwhelm is already making me sick and affecting my ability to attend work. Add in the severe lack of clarity to what exactly is changing, how it will change and when -it is a terrifying - the uncertainty is making my entire family stressed and unwell.
□ Loss of supports or reduced supports - If my daughter losses funding for her OT, Psychology or Community Access, it will significantly impact the balance in our family, my son moved into their father’s home as he could not cope being here full-time with his sister and I. The capacity building these supports provide is ESSENTIAL for my daughter to be able to live a full and meaningful life. I am unable to afford these supports without her funding. If her funding is reduced I am concerned she will slip back into school refusal, were she only attend 2 or 3 days
Submission 2600 a week - meaning I could not work full time ever .again.
□Crisis/ “not contactable” rules What exactly does reasonable attempts to contact mean? Contact was attempted twice in a week? Once in a month? Who will be asking for further reports related to planning? A medical professional? Is the report to be funded from the current plan, a future plan, or some other undeterminded/ undisclosed funding? What if the information requested makes no impact to the decision? Will the person who requested a medically unnecessary report be reimbursung that wasted funding?
□ Children and early intervention Oh yes because punishing the youngest of society is such a good look. Please do not push children and their struggling families off into the
Submission 2600 void of non-existent supports. Governments past and present have made the ndis an oasis. We would welcome with open arms further supports outside the scheme. Just don’t throw young families off a cliff to fend for themselves in an already struggling healthcare system were only the rich actually get anywhere.
□ Eligibility/ assessment changes The Federal Court has already made the ruling that NOIA is to take into account the interaction between so-called ineligible impairments and the person’s eligible impairment/s. Why does the current government think they should meddle with this? What gives them the right to change this? What will it achieve? Who actually benefits from it? To look good in front of camera and media spruiking dehumanising bugdetary savings?
Submission 2600 Because currently, that utterly unclear section is causing fear, anxiety, loss of sleep, stress for myself and my family just to name a few things.
□ Automated decision-making - absolutely not. This smacks of Robodebt under a different banner.
□ Funding/ ministerial powers - This is frankly abhorrent. Some random politician with no medical background or a qualified understanding of what a specific individual’s diagnosis means or how this impacts their life. Every person with a disability is different regardless of whether the diagnosis is the same, My children and I have similar diagnoses but we all are affected differently. Comorbidity is extremely common~ We must be looked at as a whole person, not just the NDIS eligible disability.
Submission 2600 □ Foundational supports / system changes What foundational supports are you even expecting us to use? The ones that simply do not exist? Should we just hope these supports are functioning before we are kicked off the Scheme?
What needs to change or be protected Support workers are required to have qualifications. Should this not also extend to the people running registered providers and disability support organisations? If anyone handling funding and finances was required to obtain qualifications, would this not alleviate a significant portion of the accidental fraud and funding mismanagement? If all plan managers were required to hold finance qualifications? What about if regular clear language, low cost workshops were provided by the NOIA, NQSC or
Submission 2600 NDIS for running SIL and SDA programs to ensure everyone operating them understands completely?
Look at the monetary figures allied health charge. That comes out of funding that could be spent on supporting a disabled person to build capacity. Supports must be ongoing for many disabled people. It is not a one and done sort of thing.
I have run out of capacity to try to elucidate the rest of my thoughts for this submission, especially considering how small the feedback window was. There is so much conflicting information around what is happening. Scaremongering is rampant from both government and media. Disabled people are not scam artists or evil or a blight on the community. We are people just like everyone else, we simply
Submission 2600 have quirks. Stop trying to dehumanise us to the public - any one can become disabled at any point in their life, through no fault of their own. The NDIS Bill should be for supporting the disabled community not for judging us or making us out to be money hungry. We know changes need to be made. We welcome changes that will make improvements to our lives. We just ask that you include us, talk to us, consult us, LISTEN TO US.
In closing, please, I ask the committee to consider my words and lived experience when reviewing this Bill.