NDIA Accountability Project

Submission 283 — Eating and Feeding Pty Ltd — Inquiry into the Thriving Kids initiative

‹ PrevPage 1 of 12 · Source p. 1Next ›

Inquiry into the Thriving Kids Initiative

Submitted by: Eating and Feeding Pty Ltd
Date: 3rd October 2025
Contact: Natasha Lane Pty Phone: 0480 203 381
redacted
Submission Status: Public

Executive Summary

Feeding difficulties are among the earliest and most visible signs families notice, and they are one of the clearest indicators that developmental support may be required (Putnick et al., 2022). Within maternal child health, primary care, and early childhood services, however, these concerns are frequently minimised as “fussy eating.” While a degree of selectivity is developmentally appropriate in the early years, caregivers are routinely reassured that adequate growth is sufficient evidence of wellbeing. This approach overlooks the fact that persistent feeding difficulties can signal broader developmental differences, representing a missed opportunity for timely recognition and intervention. When parents are advised their child will “grow out of it,” or are provided guidance that is deficit-based and prescriptive, early pathways to support are closed. Research shows that sensory processing challenges are highly prevalent and persistent in children with neurodevelopmental conditions (Rodríguez-Armendáriz et al., 2024), and selective eating is linked to ongoing impairment rather than spontaneous resolution (Zucker et al., 2015; Kuschner et al., 2015). The result is delayed identification of developmental needs, erosion of parental confidence, and preventable distress for children.

The consequences of failing to address feeding difficulties are substantial. Restrictive and selective diets that are not overseen by experienced, appropriately trained, neurodiversity-affirming health professionals place children at risk of nutritional deficiency, poor growth, fatigue, and chronic constipation. Recent studies confirm that preventable conditions such as scurvy continue to occur in children with autism and selective eating (Ceglie et al., 2019), and large-scale data demonstrate a rising trend in paediatric scurvy hospitalisations, with neurodevelopmental diagnoses frequently present (Cooper et al., 2024). Beyond physical health, persistent feeding difficulties also contribute to emotional regulation difficulties, impaired learning, and traumas

These challenges are also reflected in policy. Dietitians were only formally recognised on the Medicare 135 schedule in July 2025, and the current NDIS framework continues to undervalue and overlook their role in feeding support. Families are routinely denied funding for dietetic services and are told that only occupational therapists and speech pathologists can provide support for feeding challenges. While these disciplines are essential to multidisciplinary care, they are not qualified to provide nutrition advice, cannot monitor or manage nutrient deficiencies, and do not have the expertise to ensure nutritional adequacy alongside sensory and developmental needs. This position is not consistent with NDIS guidelines and policies, and reflects a broader lack of knowledge and understanding of the value of dietitians within a multidisciplinary team. “As a consequence, preventable conditions such as scurvy (Ceglie et al., 2019; Cooper et al., 2024), rickets and other bone health complications (Munns et al., 2012), and severe

malnutrition requiring hospital admission (Joosten & Hulst, 2011) continue to emerge, often only recognised once they become acute. Without dietitians in early intervention pathways, families are denied access to the specialised skills needed to maintain nutritional adequacy, support safe and positive mealtime experiences, and lower the escalating risk of eating disorder development (Sharp et al., 2013; Koomar et al., 2021; Westwood & Tchanturia, 2017).”

Thriving Kids has an opportunity to address this gap by embedding feeding into developmental frameworks and ensuring families receive accurate, affirming, and practical support at the earliest stage. This requires formal recognition of dietitians as essential contributors to early childhood feeding support. It also requires investment in workforce training for maternal child health, primary care, and early education professionals, and the development of co-designed resources that reflect neurodiversity-affirming and trauma-informed practice. Finally, clear referral pathways into feeding therapy must be established as a core developmental service, rather than treated as discretionary intervention. These measures would not only improve outcomes for children and families but also reduce avoidable pressure on health and education systems. To achieve this effectively, government timeframes must be realistic. The scale of reform required cannot be delivered well by 2027 without compromising quality, sustainability, and workforce capacity.

Early recognition and support for feeding difficulties would allow families to be heard, children to thrive, and systems to reduce the long-term burden of delayed or inadequate intervention. Without this shift, children with feeding challenges will continue to be overlooked, families will remain unsupported, and the incidence of eating disorders will continue to rise, particularly in the neurodivergent population where prevalence is already significantly higher. The financial costs and pressure on an already limited health workforce will continue to escalate. Early intervention would reduce harm, promote equity, and deliver stronger outcomes across developmental, health, and education systems. When this support is grounded in neurodiversity-affirming practice, it also enables children to develop a positive understanding of themselves and to be understood by those around them, fostering resilience and wellbeing across their developmental trajectory.

Introduction

Who we are

Eating and Feeding is a neurodiversity-affirming allied health practice specialising in feeding therapy and dietetics. Our team includes dietitians credentialed in eating disorder care, and we work extensively with children, adolescents, and families experiencing complex feeding and eating challenges. More than 90 percent of our clients are neurodivergent. The practice is owned by a neurodivergent clinician, and almost every member of our team brings lived experience of neurodivergence and eating or feeding disorders. This perspective underpins our commitment to delivering care that is both clinically informed and grounded in lived realities.

Our experience and perspective

Our clinicians have daily experience supporting families whose concerns about feeding are routinely minimised or dismissed. As a result, children are frequently left without early intervention, leading to preventable nutritional deficiencies, family exhaustion and distress, and in many cases the development of eating disorder behaviours that require intensive, long-term care. Families often come to our clinic after attending other services or interventions that have brought little or no improvement. We regularly support clients who were not offered early intervention and have since developed eating disorders. We provide care to families across Australia, and many travel up to two hours each way to attend our services, reflecting both the scarcity of specialised support and the high level of trust placed in our practice.

Our position

Feeding difficulties are among the earliest observable indicators of developmental difference. Recent longitudinal evidence confirms that feeding difficulties are among the earliest and most visible indicators that a child may require developmental support (Putnick et al., 2022). Despite this, they remain overlooked in maternal child health, primary care, and early education settings. The Thriving Kids initiative will only succeed if feeding is embedded into developmental frameworks and dietitians are recognised as essential contributors to early identification, intervention, and ongoing support. Our lived experience, combined with a specialist caseload of neurodivergent families, gives us a unique perspective on the consequences of delayed intervention and the reforms required to achieve better outcomes.

Feeding Difficulties as Early Indicators

Feeding difficulties are among the earliest observable signs that a child may require developmental support. Despite this, they are frequently minimised as “fussy eating,” particularly when growth is within expected parameters. Reliance on growth alone as a measure of wellbeing obscures important developmental information and delays appropriate intervention.

The inclusion of sensory processing differences within the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorder (DSM-5, 2013) underscores their clinical significance. Feeding is one of the most immediate and visible contexts in which these sensory differences manifest. Children whose restricted eating patterns are dismissed as trivial are often demonstrating pronounced sensory responses to taste, texture, smell, or appearance. When such presentations are overlooked, a key diagnostic and developmental marker is missed.

Research consistently demonstrates the strong link between feeding difficulties and neurodevelopmental differences. Prevalence studies estimate that 46% to 89% of autistic children experience feeding challenges, far higher than in non-autistic peers (Ledford & Gast, 2006; Sharp et al., 2013). Longitudinal research has also shown that early feeding problems predict later rigidity, sensory sensitivities, and eating disorder risk (Zucker et al., 2015). These findings position feeding difficulties as an important developmental signal rather than a passing phase.

Our clinical experience highlights three recurring patterns in how families are met when they raise concerns about feeding.

  1. Reassured without action: Many parents are told not to worry and that their child will “grow out of it.” This reassurance delays early intervention, during which children remain on highly restricted diets and miss opportunities for support at a stage when change is most achievable.
  2. Reassured without investigation: Families are also reassured despite no attempt to rule out micronutrient deficiencies. Several children we have supported have later required medical intervention for preventable conditions such as iron deficiency anaemia, vitamin D deficiency rickets, and scurvy — deficiencies that could have been identified and treated far earlier.
  3. Provided with non-affirming advice: Some families are given guidance, but it is deficit-based and not neurodiversity-affirming. Strategies such as pressuring children to eat, imposing rigid food rules, or

repeatedly presenting rejected foods without supportive scaffolding frequently intensify distress at mealtimes. These approaches can create trauma around food, reinforce health anxiety, and contribute to guilt and shame for both children and parents. They do little to improve nutritional status and, in many cases, deepen the difficulties families face.

Across these scenarios, the outcome is consistent: prevention is missed, children’s health and wellbeing are placed at unnecessary risk, and families are left carrying guilt, isolation, and mistrust of the health system. Recognising feeding difficulties as an early developmental marker would enable earlier identification of children at risk, reduce preventable nutritional and psychological harm, and strengthen pathways into appropriate, neurodiversity-affirming support.

Consequences of Non-Affirming Practice and Delayed Support

Autistic children and others with developmental differences should be supported to eat in ways that respect their preferences and sensory needs. Ensuring safety and nutritional adequacy in this context requires the oversight of a dietitian. Affirming practice enables parents to gently stretch food variety in ways that are respectful, child-led, and free from distress. This stands in contrast to behavioural or desensitisation protocols, which often frame feeding difficulties as compliance issues. Such approaches risk undermining trust, increasing anxiety, and contributing to trauma, rather than building positive, sustainable change.

Concerned families are frequently told not to worry about feeding difficulties if their child is growing within expected ranges. While this reassurance is intended to reduce parental concern, it obscures nutritional risks and delays investigation. Growth alone is not a reliable indicator of nutritional adequacy. An Australian multi-hospital audit found that 15 percent of paediatric inpatients were malnourished and a further 44 percent were at high nutritional risk, despite many appearing to grow acceptably on growth charts (Joosten & Hulst, 2011). Surveillance studies have further documented preventable conditions such as vitamin D deficiency rickets (Munns et al., 2012) and scurvy (Shaw et al., 2019) in Australian children, many of whom presented with restricted eating patterns and neurodevelopmental differences. These findings highlight the consequences of reassurance without adequate screening or referral to dietetic care.

Persistent feeding challenges in childhood are associated with later disordered eating. Longitudinal research shows that early selective eating predicts eating difficulties in adolescence, independent of weight status (Zucker et al., 2015). Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) is highly comorbid with autism, with recent reviews reporting markedly elevated prevalence in autistic populations compared with non-autistic peers (Koomar et al., 2021). Similarly, anorexia nervosa occurs at disproportionately high rates among autistic people, with some studies estimating that up to one third of women in specialist anorexia services are autistic (Westwood & Tchanturia, 2017). When feeding difficulties are minimised or addressed through non-affirming approaches, children are left more vulnerable to entrenched eating difficulties that carry long-term physical, psychological, and financial costs.

Non-affirming practice also undermines autonomy and erodes a child’s trust in their interoceptive and sensory signals. For autistic children who already experience differences in interoception, being taught to override hunger, fullness, disgust, or distress to comply with generic nutrition advice not only increases anxiety and rigidity but also compromises self-protection and body autonomy. This has safeguarding

implications. A systematic review found that children with disabilities are more than twice as likely to experience abuse compared with non-disabled children (Jones et al., 2012). Autistic people, in particular, face markedly elevated rates of physical and sexual victimisation (Weiss & Fardella, 2018). Teaching children to ignore their bodily cues increases vulnerability to exploitation and harm, when affirming support could instead foster safety, trust, and self-advocacy.

The consequences of non-affirming practice extend into education and health systems. Children experiencing fatigue, micronutrient deficiency, or gastrointestinal pain struggle to participate fully in learning and social activities. Schools frequently misinterpret behavioural signs of distress as oppositional or inattentive, rather than recognising underlying nutritional or sensory causes. Families, meanwhile, report guilt, isolation, and a loss of trust in services when concerns are repeatedly dismissed. From a systems perspective, the outcome is predictable: preventable deficiencies progress to hospital admissions; early feeding difficulties escalate into eating disorders requiring intensive specialist treatment; and health professionals’ time is consumed managing crises that could have been mitigated with timely, dietitian-led support. Each of these represents a missed prevention opportunity and an unnecessary burden on already stretched health and education systems.

Case Examples from Clinical Practice

Our clinic’s caseload demonstrates how the systemic issues outlined above play out in practice. Families presenting to us for feeding support consistently describe the same patterns, regardless of whether they are privately funded or NDIS-funded, and whether they are based in metropolitan or regional areas.

Reassured that their child would “grow out of it.” Families are frequently told not to worry, and that feeding differences will resolve with time. Without early intervention, children continue to rely on their safe foods to cope with sensory and interoceptive challenges. Without dietetic oversight, this puts them at risk of low energy, reduced capacity for learning, and difficulties with regulation. The failure to recognise feeding difficulties as legitimate developmental markers represents a systemic barrier to early, affirming care.

Reassured without nutritional screening. Growth is often used as the only measure of wellbeing, without nutritional screening. This has real consequences. Our clinic has received multiple discharge referrals over the past three years for children who required inpatient treatment for severe energy and protein malnutrition and scurvy. More than 60 percent of the children we see have a diagnosed micronutrient deficiency. These cases demonstrate the urgent need for systematic dietetic involvement in early screening and support.

Given non-affirming advice. Families are often provided with advice that is deficit-based and compliance-focused. Strategies such as pressure to eat, rigid food rules, or repeated presentation of foods without appropriate scaffolding have been reported by parents as worsening distress at mealtimes. These approaches create shame and health anxiety, can leave children traumatised around food, and do not improve nutritional adequacy. This reflects a workforce gap in knowledge and training. Feeding challenges require affirming, evidence-based strategies led by professionals with the skills to support both nutrition and mealtime experience.

Dismissed when seeking support. Many families report that their concerns were not taken seriously by GPs or maternal child health nurses, leaving them feeling invalidated and discouraged from seeking further help. This reflects a breakdown in referral pathways and highlights the need for clear guidance and professional education. When families are dismissed at this stage, opportunities for prevention are lost, and conditions progress to a level that requires more intensive intervention.

These patterns have been observed consistently across our caseload in recent years. Their recurrence demonstrates that the challenges are systemic, not incidental. Without affirming, dietitian-led early intervention, families are left unsupported, preventable deficiencies are missed, children develop heightened anxiety around food, and the risk of later eating disorder behaviours increases.

Policy and Workforce Gaps in Affirming Care

Current policy frameworks and workforce training models do not support the delivery of affirming, nuanced care for children with feeding difficulties. These gaps perpetuate the systemic failures seen in practice and increase the burden on families and services.

Dietitians continue to be undervalued in federal and disability policy. Dietetic services were only formally recognised under Medicare Item 135 in July 2025 (MBS Online, 2025), and in the NDIS feeding support is still often assumed to be within the scope of occupational therapy or speech pathology, despite those professions lacking the training to monitor nutrient status or tailor nutrition interventions. This under-recognition is inconsistent with the NDIS’s own objectives and reflects a broader lack of understanding of the role dietitians play in multidisciplinary care.

Workforce gaps extend beyond recognition in policy. Nutrition content in nursing, medical and allied health education is introductory and intended for general health promotion. It does not prepare clinicians to assess nutrient status, diagnose or manage deficiencies, or develop sensory-responsive, tailored nutrition interventions. These are dietetic competencies. Without clear scope boundaries and referral to dietitians, families are offered generic advice that neither protects nutritional adequacy nor meets the needs of children with feeding differences (Crowley, Ball, & Hiddink, 2019).

This gap is particularly problematic given the overlap between autism, feeding difficulties, and eating disorders. Prevalence studies consistently document high rates of food selectivity in autistic children compared with non-autistic peers (Kuschner et al., 2015). Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) is also more common in autistic populations, and eating disorder services report disproportionately high representation of autistic traits, with estimates of 20–35 percent of women in specialist anorexia services being autistic (Westwood & Tchanturia, 2017). Without affirming, dietitian-led care, children’s adaptations to cope with feeding challenges risk evolving into entrenched eating disorder behaviours.

Diet culture bias further undermines affirming care. When health professionals prioritise weight, appearance, or rigid “healthy eating rules” above lived sensory experience, children with feeding differences are pressured to conform and families are left unsupported. These biases make it harder for parents to advocate and easier for children’s needs to be dismissed (Bacon & Aphramor, 2011).

For First Nations and culturally and linguistically diverse families, these issues are compounded by a lack of cultural safety. In these communities, concerns about feeding difficulties are more likely to be

dismissed, and parents may feel less able to advocate in health settings. This delay in intervention results in poorer nutrition for longer periods, with compounding effects on children, families, and the healthcare system (AIHW, 2015).

Thriving Kids has the opportunity to close these gaps. To do so, government must:

  • Recognise dietitians as core providers in feeding support within Medicare, NDIS, and child development frameworks.
  • Mandate and fund training in affirming, sensory-informed feeding practices across maternal and child health, primary care, allied health, and early education.
  • Incorporate education about eating disorder risk in neurodivergent populations into professional curricula so early signs are not missed.
  • Reform guideline frameworks to remove diet culture bias and prioritise lived experience, sensory respect, and nutritional safety.
  • Ensure cultural safety is embedded in dietetic service design to build trust and accessibility for First Nations and CALD communities.

Equity and Access

Feeding difficulties intersect with broader issues of equity and access, with some families experiencing additional barriers to timely and affirming care.

First Nations families and those from culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) backgrounds face significant power imbalances when raising concerns about feeding. When their concerns are dismissed by health professionals, families are less likely to challenge or re-seek support, which delays intervention. This results in children experiencing longer periods of poor nutrition, increased family distress, and missed opportunities for prevention. Research shows that families from marginalised backgrounds are more likely to encounter systemic bias, cultural misunderstanding, and communication barriers when accessing care (AIHW, 2015; Kirmayer et al., 2014).

Socioeconomic disadvantage compounds these inequities. Families with limited resources are less able to access private services or travel to specialised care. For families dependent on NDIS or Medicare-funded supports, systemic under-recognition of dietitians further limits access to appropriate feeding intervention. This reinforces cycles where children in disadvantaged households are least likely to receive timely, affirming support despite often being at the greatest nutritional risk (AIHW, 2020).

Access is further restricted by current Medicare arrangements. While the Eating Disorder Plan (EDP) previously included paediatric feeding disorders, this was removed, leaving a significant gap in care. At present, Medicare Item 135 is limited to children with a formal diagnosis of complex neurodevelopmental disorder, which requires costly and time-consuming assessment. This creates unnecessary barriers for families and delays access to early dietetic support until risks become severe. It is inequitable that children with feeding disorders are excluded from timely care unless their families can secure an expensive diagnosis. An overhaul of the EDP to include all eating and feeding disorders is essential to restore access, reduce financial strain on families, and ensure that no child is excluded from support on the basis of diagnostic technicalities.

Neurodivergent families also experience unique barriers. Many report that their children’s sensory and interoceptive differences are dismissed as “fussy eating” rather than recognised as indicators of

developmental difference. Without affirming care, families face blame and invalidation, and children internalise shame about their needs. This erodes trust in healthcare providers and contributes to delays in accessing appropriate support (Kinnaird et al., 2019).

Equity in feeding support requires more than equal access; it requires culturally safe, neurodiversity-affirming, and financially accessible services. Thriving Kids must embed equity at the centre of its design by:

  • Ensuring cultural safety training and co-design with First Nations and CALD communities.
  • Funding and recognising dietitians as essential providers under NDIS and Medicare so disadvantaged families can access feeding expertise.
  • Reforming the EDP to include all feeding and eating disorders, restoring access that was previously available.
  • Training all frontline professionals to respond to feeding concerns as legitimate, regardless of a child’s growth status or background.
  • Embedding trauma-informed and neurodiversity-affirming practice as standard, so families are met with understanding rather than dismissal.

Pathways to Better Outcomes

  • Early intervention: Embed feeding into child health checks, GP consults, and early childhood education screening.
  • Formal recognition of dietitians: Both Medicare and NDIS must acknowledge dietitians as essential providers of feeding support.
  • Workforce training: All child-facing professionals trained in ND-affirming, trauma-informed feeding approaches.
  • Co-designed resources: Parent resources created with ND families that are affirming, practical, and accessible.
  • Referral pathways: Feeding therapy recognised as a core developmental service, not discretionary.
  • Realistic timeframes: Reform of this scale cannot be meaningfully implemented by 2027

Recommendations

To ensure the success of the Thriving Kids initiative, feeding must be embedded as a core developmental priority and supported through neurodiversity-affirming, trauma-informed practice. The following recommendations outline essential reforms:

  1. Recognise dietitians as core providers in early childhood feeding support.

    • Embed dietitians within Medicare, NDIS, and child development frameworks.
    • Acknowledge their unique role in assessing nutrient status, managing deficiencies, and tailoring nutrition interventions to sensory and developmental needs.
  • This is critical because more than 60 percent of children seen in our clinic present with diagnosed micronutrient deficiencies, and some have required hospital treatment for malnutrition and scurvy, issues that could be prevented with early dietetic involvement.
  • Current Medicare arrangements remain restrictive. Item 135 is only available to children with a formal diagnosis of complex neurodevelopmental disorder, which creates unnecessary cost and delays for families seeking help with feeding or eating disorders. Expanding the Medicare Eating Disorder Plan (EDP) to cover all feeding disorders and eating disorders would reduce this barrier and ensure timely access to specialist dietetic care.
  • Implementation could include strengthening Medicare Item 135, reforming EDP eligibility to explicitly include feeding disorders, and updating NDIS guidelines to recognise dietitians in multidisciplinary feeding teams.
  1. Strengthen workforce training in affirming, evidence-based practice.
  • Mandate training across maternal child health, primary care, allied health, and early education sectors to ensure feeding concerns are recognised as legitimate and developmentally significant.
  • This is necessary because most non-dietetic health professionals receive only introductory nutrition education, which does not equip them to assess nutrient status or support children with sensory-responsive needs (Crowley et al., 2019).
  • Implementation could include funded continuing professional development in sensory-informed feeding support, eating disorder prevention, and neurodiversity-affirming practice for all frontline services.
  1. Remove reliance on generic and non-affirming nutrition advice.
  • Clarify scope boundaries so that nutrition interventions are delivered by dietitians, not by professionals without the training to assess or manage deficiencies.
  • This matters because generic advice such as “just eat more vegetables” or “keep offering until they accept it” is ineffective for children with feeding differences and can increase distress, shame, and health anxiety.
  • Implementation could include national clinical guidelines on feeding support, explicitly embedding affirming practice and scope-of-practice boundaries.
  1. Embed cultural safety and equity in service design.
  • Co-design Thriving Kids initiatives with First Nations and CALD communities to ensure culturally safe, accessible services.
  • This is essential because families from marginalised backgrounds face power imbalances that make them less likely to advocate when concerns are dismissed, delaying intervention and prolonging poor nutrition outcomes (AIHW, 2015).
  • Implementation could include dedicated funding for culturally safe dietetic programs, community-led training, and service KPIs linked to cultural safety standards.
  1. Establish early referral pathways and routine nutritional screening.
  • Make nutritional screening and feeding assessments a standard part of maternal child health, primary care, and early education systems.
  • This is important because growth alone is not a reliable safeguard; our clinic has received referrals for children requiring inpatient treatment for severe deficiencies despite “adequate” growth being recorded earlier.
  • Implementation could include integrating dietitians into maternal child health nurse teams and developing standard referral pathways into feeding therapy services
  • Increase maternal health nurse key visits to provide opportunities to review growth and development more regulalrly.
  1. Commit to realistic implementation timelines.
  • Review current government targets to ensure that changes are phased in with sufficient workforce capacity, training, and resources.
  • This is necessary because the scale of reform required cannot be achieved by 2027 without compromising quality, cultural safety, and workforce readiness.
  • Implementation could include a staged rollout with pilot sites, co-design processes, and incremental expansion of dietetic workforce funding.

Conclusion

Feeding difficulties are among the earliest and most visible indicators that a child may require developmental support. Yet they are still routinely minimised, dismissed as “fussy eating,” or addressed through generic advice that fails to meet children’s needs. The evidence is clear: without early, affirming, dietitian-led intervention, families remain unsupported, preventable deficiencies are missed, children develop heightened anxiety around food, and the risk of later eating disorder behaviours increases.

Thriving Kids has an opportunity to change this trajectory. By embedding feeding into developmental frameworks, recognising dietitians as essential providers, training the workforce in affirming practice, and ensuring equity across cultural and socioeconomic contexts, the initiative can address long-standing gaps that have compounded distress for families and increased costs for the health and education systems.

The reforms we propose are realistic, evidence-based, and necessary. They would not only improve outcomes for children and families but also reduce avoidable pressure on already stretched health and education services. Early, affirming intervention is both a moral and economic imperative.

Without this shift, children with feeding differences will continue to be overlooked, families will remain unsupported, and the incidence of eating disorders will continue to rise, particularly in neurodivergent populations where prevalence is already higher. Thriving Kids can and should take a leadership role in ensuring that every child’s feeding needs are recognised, respected, and supported from the earliest opportunity.

References

AIHW. (2015). Cultural competency in the delivery of health services for Indigenous people. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/indigenous-australians/cultural-competency-in-the-delivery-of-health-serv

AIHW. (2020). Australia’s children: Nutrition. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/children-youth/australias-children-nutrition

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Bacon, L., & Aphramor, L. (2011). Weight science: Evaluating the evidence for a paradigm shift. Nutrition Journal, 10(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2891-10-9

Ceglie, G., Macchiarulo, G., Marchili, M. R., Marchesi, A., Rotondi Aufiero, L., Di Camillo, C., & Villani, A. (2019). Scurvy: still a threat in the well-fed first world? Archives of Disease in Childhood, 104(4), 381–383. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2018-315496

Cooper, A. C., Dyer, R. A., Shah, S. S., Ratnayaka, A., Weaver, M. S., Keim, S. A., & Puls, H. T. (2024). Characteristics of paediatric scurvy hospitalisations, 2006–2021. Pediatrics, 154(4), e2024065782. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2024-065782

Crowley, J., Ball, L., & Hiddink, G. J. (2019). Nutrition in medical education: A systematic review. The Lancet Planetary Health, 3(9), e379–e389. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30171-8

Joosten, K. F., & Hulst, J. M. (2011). Malnutrition in pediatric hospital patients: Current issues. Nutrition, 27(2), 133–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2010.06.001

Jones, L., Bellis, M. A., Wood, S., Hughes, K., McCoy, E., Eckley, L., Bates, G., Mikton, C., Shakespeare, T., & Officer, A. (2012). Prevalence and risk of violence against children with disabilities: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. The Lancet, 380(9845), 899–907. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60692-8

Kinnaird, E., Norton, C., & Tchanturia, K. (2019). Clinicians’ views on working with autistic women with anorexia nervosa: Qualitative study. BJPsych Open, 5(2), e16. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2018.88

Kirmayer, L. J., Guzder, J., & Rousseau, C. (2014). Cultural consultation: Encountering the other in mental health care. Springer.

Koomar, T., Thomas, T. R., Pottschmidt, N. R., Lutter, M., & Michaelson, J. J. (2021). Estimating the prevalence and genetic risk mechanisms of ARFID in a large autism cohort. Frontiers in psychiatry, 12, 668297.

Kuschner, E. S., Eisenberg, I. W., Orionzi, B., Simmons, W. K., Kenworthy, L., Martin, A., & Wallace, G. L. (2015). A preliminary study of self-reported food selectivity in adolescents and young adults with autism spectrum disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 15–16, 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2015.04.005

MBS Online. (2025). Medicare Benefits Schedule Item 135. Services Australia. https://www.mbsonline.gov.au

Munns, C. F., Simm, P. J., Rodda, C. P., Garnett, S. P., Zacharin, M. R., Ward, L. M., Geddes, J., Cherian, S., Zurynski, Y., & Cowell, C. T. (2012). Incidence of vitamin D deficiency rickets among Australian children: An Australian Paediatric Surveillance Unit study. Medical Journal of Australia, 196(7), 466–472. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja11.11636

Ledford, J. R., & Gast, D. L. (2006). Feeding problems in children with autism spectrum disorders: A review. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 21(3), 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576060210030401

Putnick, D. L., Bell, E. M., Ghassabian, A., Polinski, K. J., Robinson, S. L., Sundaram, R., & Yeung, E. H. (2022). Feeding problems as an indicator of developmental delay in early childhood. The Journal of Pediatrics, 240, 184–191.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2021.11.010

Rodríguez-Armendáriz, E., González-López, M. J., Muñoz-González, C., Martínez-García, I., & García-Martínez, A. (2024). Sensory processing challenges in children with neurodevelopmental disorders and genetic conditions: An observational study. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 12, 1355980. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2024.1355980

Sharp, W. G., Berry, R. C., McCracken, C., Nuhu, N. N., Marvel, E., Saulnier, C. A., Klin, A., Jones, W., & Jaquess, D. L. (2013). Feeding problems and nutrient intake in children with autism spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis and comprehensive review of the literature. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(9), 2159–2173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-1771-5

Shaw, N., Mughal, M. Z., & Mughal, Z. (2019). Scurvy in children in a developed country. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 104(6), 527–528. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2018-316183

Weiss, J. A., & Fardella, M. A. (2018). Victimization and perpetration experiences of adults with autism. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9, 203. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00203

Westwood, H., & Tchanturia, K. (2017). Autism spectrum disorder in anorexia nervosa: An updated literature review. Current Psychiatry Reports, 19(7), 41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-017-0806-9

Zucker, N., Copeland, W., Franz, L., Carpenter, K., Keeling, L., Angold, A., & Egger, H. (2015). Psychological and psychosocial impairment in preschoolers with selective eating. Pediatrics, 136(3), e582–e590. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2014-2386