Submission – National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Securing
the NDIS for Future Generations) Bill 2026
To:
Committee Secretary
Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
From:
Naomi Thompson
Orange, NSW, 2800
Date: 1 June 2026
Introduction
I am an NDIS participant living with Autism, ADHD, cPTSD from a history of trauma, BPD, Depression, Anxiety, Diabetes secondary to PCOS/PMOS & numerous other conditions. I rely on modest but essential supports currently including support workers, cleaning assistance and psychology in order to maintain basic safety, routine, health management and community connection.
I am deeply concerned that the proposed NDIS reforms may disproportionately harm participants with complex psychosocial and/or neurodevelopmental disabilities whose impairments can fluctuate, be heavily masked, be trauma-shaped and difficult to measure through standardised assessments.
Key Concerns About the Proposed Changes
While the argument for reform could be made for the NDIS, I do not believe this bill seeks to reform and improve the NDIS. I am concerned these reforms will result in reduced access to supports for participants, particularly those with complex or fluctuating disabilities, due to increased eligibility thresholds, narrower definitions of support, and broader cost containment pressures on the scheme. As such there are a number of items that concern me about the proposed changes including but not limited to:
Page 1 of 4
A) Assessment and evidence of disability Greater reliance on functional capacity assessments rather than diagnosis alone Increased use of standardised or snapshot-style assessments that may not capture fluctuating, masked, or trauma-shaped disability Increased requirement to demonstrate permanence and ongoing impairment Reduced reliance on treating professionals and long-term therapeutic relationships
B) Eligibility and access thresholds Narrower interpretation of “reasonable and necessary” supports Increased eligibility reassessments Increased scrutiny of psychosocial disability supports Funding restricted only to supports directly linked to qualifying impairments Increased expectation that informal, mainstream, or community systems provide support before NDIS access
C) System structure and funding design Expansion of foundational supports outside the NDIS, with concerns about adequacy and availability New structured funding categories and fixed funding periods Narrowing of what is recognised as an “NDIS support” Reduced flexibility in how participants can use funding
D) Administrative control and discretion Increased NDIA power to vary plans without full reassessment Greater use of administrative decision-making processes Increased ministerial ability to define or exclude eligible supports through legislative rules Expansion of debt recovery and compliance mechanisms
Participant & Non-Participant Impact
There are many aspects of the bill which both concern and worry me. The impact is so broad as to cause harm to both current and future people requiring support from the NDIS. There is a real risk that these proposed changes will endanger the life of various people both now and in the future. I cannot speak for how it will impact other people but I can tell you how it will impact me both directly and indirectly.
Page 2 of 4
Unreliable and Unsustainable Functioning
My disabilities are not defined by whether I can occasionally complete a task. They are defined by whether I can complete tasks reliably, consistently, safely and sustainably without severe deterioration afterwards. My functioning is highly inconsistent and energy limited.
Partial Completion and Crisis Functioning
I frequently exist in states of partial task completion, such as washing clothes but being unable to put them away, or washing dishes but leaving them on the rack indefinitely. Tasks are often only completed once they become urgent or dangerous.
Interoception and Safety
My disabilities affect my ability to reliably recognise hunger, thirst, fatigue and bladder fullness. This can result in hypoglycaemia episodes, dehydration, delayed medical responses and near accidents.
Masking and Misinterpreted Capacity
As an autistic person with significant trauma history, I mask heavily. I can often appear articulate and temporarily functional despite severe underlying exhaustion and instability. I fear assessments may mistake masking and emergency functioning for genuine independence. The masking and apparent functioning often comes at a high price by overtaxing and pushing through thus requiring recovery time and reduced capacity for days afterwards.
Importance of Support Workers and Cleaning Assistance
My supports are not luxury services. They provide education, structure, prompting, emotional regulation support, practical assistance and functional stabilisation. Without them, I fear returning to severe crisis-based functioning, increased isolation and suicidal deterioration.
My supports provide me with scaffolding to prevent complete collapse. They assist me to manage basic needs such as eating which in turn prevents life threatening hypoglycemia. Task completion prevents environmental overwhelm which ensures I remain psychologically well which assists with other tasks such as basic needs.
My supports also help me to maintain a stability in life which helps me to maintain both limited work and my current housing.
Relationship and Energy Limits
Because my functioning and emotional regulation can become resource-limited, I often ration energy carefully. At times, maintaining relationships becomes difficult because social interaction requires masking, recovery time and emotional regulation. Reduced or loss of supports would likely worsen isolation and hopelessness as well as exacerbate an already challenging aspect of life.
Page 3 of 4
Failure of Public and Community Services
I have engaged with multiple medications, therapies and health/mental health systems. I have also been rejected by public and community mental health systems because I was considered too complex. I am concerned participants with severe psychosocial disability will fall into a gap where mainstream systems cannot support them, while the NDIS simultaneously reduces support.
Lack of Informal Supports
I do not have safe or reliable informal supports due to severe trauma and family abuse history. Policies that assume family support is available do not reflect reality for many participants.
Fear of Deterioration
My fear is not abstract. I fear that reductions in support would trigger worsening executive dysfunction, increased isolation, inability to sustain work, suicidal crisis and potential hospitalisation or suicide attempts in my case. I have a quite significant history which shows that lack of supports causes complete deterioration followed by collapse and the inevitable hopelessness leading to suicide. I have tried twice previously to take my own life. For me, this is not an exaggeration or imagined risk. This is lived and real.
Conclusion
The supports I receive do not remove my disabilities. They reduce harm, reduce crisis, reduce isolation and reduce the likelihood of hospitalisation or suicide. They provide me with the capacity to live, to have a quality of life, to contribute to my community and to have hope in a future.
I urge the Senate to carefully consider the impact these reforms may have on participants with complex, fluctuating and/or heavily masked disabilities who rely on modest supports to maintain stability and safety. I call on the Committee to recommend that this bill not be passed in its current form.
Page 4 of 4