7 October 2025
Supplementary Submission: Parliamentary Inquiry into Thriving Kids Initiative
Further to my submission dated 3 October 2025, including the contextual issues it raises in relation to autism in particular, I request that the information contained in this supplementary submission be carefully considered by the Committee as a relevant focus prior to its formal recommendations. This is particularly important given the human rights implications, obligations and potential future breaches surrounding the current Thriving Kids proposal (particularly by the nature of its targeting of autism as a disability in the NDIS), along with the proposal’s relationship to the Government’s current direction and approach to general NDIS reform.
Rather than summarising the key information, this submission aims to draw the committee’s attention directly to relevant submissions, including by the Australian Human
Rights Commission to the Department of Social Services regarding NDIS Support Rules,
along with relevant information contained in the recent NDIS review. These have particular significance to the current direction of the Thriving Kids initiative/NDIS reform.
Australian Human Rights Commission submission
On 1 August 2025, the Australian Human Rights Commission published the following information and recommendations regarding its submission to the Department of Social Services (https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/legal/submission/ndis-support-rules, accessed 7 October 2025):
The Australian Human Rights Commission (Commission) made a submission to the Department of Social Services’ (DSS) consultation on NDIS Support Rules.
The Disability Discrimination Commissioner (Rosemary Kayess), National Children’s
Commissioner (Anne Hollonds) and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner (Katie Kiss) have also submitted a joint letter of concern urging the government to address the Commission’s recommendations to ensure the rights of people with disability are upheld in NDIS reforms.
Human rights and the NDIS
The submission calls for a stronger human rights framework to ensure the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) delivers on its promise and legislated objective to give effect to the human rights obligations under the United Nations Convention
1
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), particularly Article 19 on the right to live independently and be included in the community.
Article 19 requires governments to ensure that people with disability are included and can participate fully in the community and make choices about their lives on an equal basis with others. This involves ensuring people with disability have access to personalised, rights-based disability support services, that are flexible, self-directed, and responsive to individual needs. Prescriptive models of support that segregate or restrict personal autonomy are incompatible with Article 19. In line with Article 4(3) and Article 33(3), governments should also closely consult and actively involve people with disability, including children, in decisions affecting their lives and rights, including the development of law and policies.
The Commission is concerned that NDIS reform is regressing from its legislated, rights-based intent, and is being rushed without transparency or the meaningful involvement of people with disability. Narrowly defined and prescriptive support lists are incompatible with the CRPD and the original intent of the Scheme because they restrict individualisation, flexibility and choice and control.
Recommendations
The Commission makes 4 recommendations to ensure the development of NDIS Support Rules and further reform to the NDIS upholds human rights standards and principles:
-
Governments should respond to the NDIS Review as a matter of priority.
-
The Australia Government should ensure that the development and implementation of NDIS Support Rules, and other NDIS reforms, is contingent on co-design that meets international human rights law principles and standards for participation and consultation.
-
The Australian Government should take a rights-based approach to NDIS reform, including NDIS Support Rules, by:
-
addressing the concerns raised in this submission by embedding the principles and standards of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Convention on the Rights of the Child and Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into policy design and implementation
-
ensuring NDIS participants can self-direct and determine their own supports based on their unique needs, preferences, goals and aspirations, and the barriers they face
-
ensuring NDIS participants have access to disability-related supports and services that are flexible and individually responsive
-
providing increased transparency and accountability around decision- making
-
ensuring government decision and policy makers receive adequate training on human rights obligations, and specifically Article 19 of the CRPD.
- Governments should commit to ensuring no NDIS participant is worse off or loses continuity of essential support due to the introduction of NDIS Support Rules, in the absence of broader eco-system reform.
2
NDIS Planning Review, ‘Chapter 10 Administrative Appeals Tribunal Appeals’
Contrary to the Disability Minister’s current dominant narrative surrounding autism, NDIS and the Thriving Kids initiative, it is requested that the Committee carefully consider issues raised during the NDIS review and, in particular, how the outcome of unpublished conciliations/external appeals to NDIS reviews may be relevant to the current Thriving Kids proposal / NDIS reform, including the majority of decisions falling in participants’ favour when an independent external legal process is initiated. Such initiation and follow-through is of course limited to participants’ and/or their carers’/advocates’ capacity to initiate or continue with a burdensome external legal process, which is a deterrent in itself. Furthermore the Tribunal’s individual overturning of NDIA’s pattern of decisions have not led to broader policy change in relation to decisions, despite recommendations to at least publish detailed data.
It could well be argued that autistic individuals (including children) will be disadvantaged and discriminated against due to omissions of such information along with the current pressure being placed on the NDIA around autism as a neurodevelopmental condition and disability. This is contrary to the evidence and recommendations contained in the NDIS review about fairness and transparency and to the Government’s human rights obligations. (Please refer to https://www.aph.gov.au/ParliamentaryBusiness/Committees/Joint/NationalDisabilityInsuranceScheme/NDISPlanning/FinalReport/section?id=committees%2Freportjnt%2F024487%2F73192#footnote9target , accessed 7 October 2025).
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That the Committee:
-
considersandinvitesevidencefromahumanrightsperspectiveinrelationtothe currentGovernment’sapproachtoThrivingKidsandfutureNDISreform,particularly regardingtheacceptance(ornon-acceptance)ofAutismasabroadlyeligible conditionforNDISsupportacrossagegroups.Thismayincludeadirectinvitationofa submissionbytheAustralianHumanRightsCommissioninrelationtothecurrent ThrivingKidsproposalanditsrelationshiptoautism.
-
considersinformationbykeystakeholdersandcontributorstotheNDISPlanning
Review,inparticularrelevantinformationalreadyprovidedinrelationtotheNDIS
AdministrativeAppealsprocess(Chapter10),andthatsuchcontributorsbeinvitedto
provideasubmissiontotheThrivingKidsinquiryinrelationtoautismasatargeted condition.
Kind regards
Monika Schofield
PACFA Registered Clinical Counsellor
Disability & School Advocate
NDIS Support Coordinator / Psychosocial Recovery Coach Mental Health Support Worker
3
BA,GradDipPsych,MSocSc(CounsStud), *MasterofAutismandNeurodivergentStudies(*inprogress)
4