22/9/25
To Whom it May Concern,
I am writing in regard to my concerns as a Speech Pathologist working in Private Practice with children from 0-12 years old about the proposed structure of the Thriving Kids program.
Term of reference: Identify gaps in workforce support and training required to deliver Thriving Kids. and Identify mechanisms that would allow a seamless transition through mainstream systems for all children with mild to moderate support needs.
Response: people who are not speech pathologists cannot remediate the difficulties of children in a group. Individual, targeted, evidence-based therapy is required.
-
The gap in the workforce is speech pathologists, the answer: continue to provide early intervention funding for children to receive individual therapy services even when they are ‘mild-moderate’ or do not have a diagnosis.
-
Mechanism needed: funding for children with ‘mild-moderate’ or do not have a diagnosis.
The removal of the early intervention framework for individual therapy funds for children without a lifelong condition though the NDIS is a grave concern of mine. It is this funding that has allowed so many of my clients to progress to the point of not needing therapy anymore. Without the early intervention funding through the NDIS the domino effects are dire. Parents cannot afford the necessary therapy to remediate the difficulty → child does not progress in their development at the normal rate → child falls significantly behind their peers → child’s self esteem falls → child starts to refuse to go to school/interact socially with others → significant impact on the child’s mental health → as time progresses the child’s mental health, job prospects and outlook on life are negative and concerning. Had the child receive the intensive, targeted speech pathology support in their early intervention years when their brains were ‘primed’ to change (neuroplastic) these negative knock-on impacts would be reduced or eliminated. The ‘knock-on’ impacts threaten to pose a significant impact on the economy through mental health care, more juvenile crime (incarceration rates of minors have a high correlation with difficulties with language and communication), poorer job outcomes and more reliance on government financial support. You either spend the money when they are little and remediate an issue, or you end up spending the money when they are older. Why not choose the younger age group.
The difficulties I am referencing are difficulties that are not able to be remediated or supported by a maternal and child health nurse, a GP, a speech pathologist consulting with a school/kinder/childcare, a ‘group program’, or a teacher.
Case study:
Why my client, James*, (and so many others) would not have progressed in their therapy without the funded early intervention from an allied health professional…
Background: James is 6 months old. James’ family want to do the best for him. They discussed on multiple occasions to the maternal and child health nurse, GP and to his childcare the fact he was slumping to the right in his high chair and his pram, and was not rolling, refusing many foods, not using his right side the same as his left. People told mum to ‘wait and see’ as James had no genetic conditions, no family history of difficulties. Mum saw a paediatric physiotherapist and immediately they required ongoing weekly sessions. James’ mum worked hard on the physio exercises each day, started seeing an occupational therapist (OT) for fine motor supports and body coordination. He also started seeing a speech pathologist (SP) for the feeding difficulties as they had become severe and he was only eating 2 foods. James also received NDIS early intervention funding from 9 months old.
Now: James is now 6 years old and is a health and happy child who can run, walk, skip, hop, is learning to write and happily eats a variety of foods. What is not seen is the countless hours of therapy that went into supporting him to be who he is today. An intelligent child with the whole world ahead of him. He will not require NDIS funding ongoing as his difficulties have mostly been supported and improved. Without the NDIS support he would unlikely be able to run, may never play sport (most likely would’ve had a ‘dead’ leg and arm), he would be malnourished and his mental health would’ve suffered considerably.
Some government officials have said that there is ‘too much therapy’ in a year for a child. I disagree, no therapist wants to see a child who does not need therapy. This child is a perfect example of how the system has worked! The early intervention of this therapy, targeted with allied health professionals in a one-to-one setting allowed the parents to learn therapy techniques and use them to support their child daily to reach his goals.
*not his real name.