Rejecting the Thriving Kids Model: Protecting Neurodivergent Children’s Right
to Individualised Support
About Our Family and Professional Background
We are the parents of two neurodivergent children, both diagnosed with autism spectrum
disorder (Level 2), ADHD, and Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID). One of our
children also has Tourette’s syndrome.
Our children rely on NDIS-funded therapies and supports – not because we expect more
than others, but because they cannot participate meaningfully in everyday life and learning
without them. Without individualised early intervention, our family would have been in
crisis. That individualised support has been life changing.
We are also deeply embedded in our local school and health communities:
My wife is a registered nurse, with over a decade in Victorian public hospitals. She
now works as a school nurse in a government primary school, supporting hundreds
of children – many with developmental, behavioural, and learning needs. She has
also completed post graduate study in Autism Studies at Griffith University.
I have served for the past four years as Vice President of this government school
council.
Together, we lead a neurodivergent parent support group at the school.
I am also an ordained Baptist minister, working with families, schools, and
communities for over 12 years.
We write not only as parents, but as professionals with firsthand insight into what’s working
and what isn’t, across health, education, and disability systems.
Why We Reject the Thriving Kids Model
We are not only concerned about the rollout timeline of Thriving Kids, but we
fundamentally reject the model itself. This model will divert children with autism and
developmental delays away from the NDIS and into mainstream systems that are already
under-resourced. This is not a reform – it’s abdication! It shifts responsibility away from
disability-rights framework and towards fragmented, generalised systems that are neither
funded nor equipped to meet these children’s needs. It removes essential individualised
support based on a dangerous assumption: ‘mild’ or ‘moderate’ needs are not serious
enough to deserve individualised and structured intervention.
But every child’s development matters – and children don’t wait. The support they miss at
age three cannot always be made up at age ten.
The Thriving Kids model, as currently designed, risks:
Leaving vulnerable children without timely support.
Placing unrealistic expectations on schools and GPs without the staff, training or
funding to deliver.
Eroding the rights-based foundation of NDIS.
Entrenching disadvantage, particularly for children in lower-income, rural, or
culturally diverse communities.
Concerns about ABA practices and conflicts of interest
A major concern with the Thriving Kids model is its reliance on Applied Behaviour Analysis
(ABA) as a primary therapeutic approach for autistic children. While ABA is widely
promoted, there is substantial and growing evidence – including from autistic self
advocates, independent researchers, and many families (including our own) – that ABA can
be damaging and harmful to children. It often focuses on compliance and ‘normalising’
behaviour rather than supporting autistic children’s well-being and autonomy.
Our son initially received therapy from an occupational therapist who employed ABA
methods. The experience was traumatic for him, and he is still recovering three years
later. Rather than progressing, he regressed during this time.
What’s more, many ABA providers stand to financially benefit from it’s expanded rollout,
creating a direct conflict of interest. This financial incentive risks driving policy decisions that
prioritise profit over children’s best interests, pushing families toward therapies that may
not only fail to support their child, but actively harm them. We must ensure that
government disability programs do not become vehicles for perpetuating harmful practices.
Any early intervention model must be child-led, trauma-informed, and respectful – not
profit-driven or one-size-fits-all.
We urge the government to:
Listen to autistic voices and families who have experienced harm.
Ensure strict oversight and regulation of funded therapies.
Promote a diversity of evidence-based, child-centred approaches that prioritise
dignity and well-being.
Without these measures, Thriving Kids risks institutionalising harm and failing the very
children it claims to support.
What we see in schools and health systems daily – Nurse perspective
As a registered nurse working in a government primary school, I see first-hand the realities
of supporting neurodiverse children in mainstream settings. I work with hundreds of
students, many with developmental, behavioural, and health challenges. I see how:
Teachers are not adequately trained in neurodiversity, sensory regulation, or
trauma-informed practice.
Educations Support (ES) staff who are tasked with one-on-one student support,
often have no formal training in disability or development delay.
Health issues, behavioural distress, and school refusal are rising – and there are no
consistent pathways to care without NDIS involvement.
Schools cannot – and should not – be expected to take on the full weight of early
intervention. It is both unfair and unsustainable.
What I see as a Pastor and School Vice President
As school vice president, I work closely with school leadership, teachers, and families.
Despite best intentions, we constantly encounter barriers: insufficient training, limited
specialist resources, and inadequate support for behavioural and communication needs.
One of our children receives Tier 3 Disability Inclusion funding through the Department of
Education. Yet only through the NDIS do we access therapies, behavioural supports, and
regulation strategies that make daily life manageable and learning possible.
A dangerous shift in our social contract
Thriving Kids is more than a policy proposal – It signals a deeply concerning shift in how we
value and respond to childhood disability. If implemented, it would represent:
A step away from individualised support and toward group-based, generic care.
A step away from evidence-based disability inclusion, and towards administrative
convenience.
A step backwards from the progress made under NDIS in recognising the rights and
dignity of every child.
The result? Children will go without help. Teachers will burn out. Families will be left to pick
up the pieces. Society will pay the price in long-term health, education, and mental health
costs.
What should we do instead?
We support investment in foundational and mainstream services – but not as a replacement
for the NDIS:
Keep access to NDIS based on functional need, not diagnostic labels.
Build real capacity in schools and the health system. o Fund workforce training in neurodiversity and trauma-informed practice. o Employ embedded allied health professionals in early learning and primary schools. o Ensure every mainstream service complements, rather than replaces, disability-specific supports.
Keep NDIS open until a new system is genuinely ready – and demonstrably better.
Final words
This is a defining moment in the story of disability inclusion in Australia. We call on the
Australian Government to reject the Thriving Kids model in its current form – not just it’s
timeline, but it’s very foundations.
We don’t need to dismantle the NDIS for our children to thrive. We need to build around it,
improve what isn’t working, and reinforce the vision it was built on: a fair go for every
Australian, no matter their needs. If our systems are failing children at the start of life, they
are failing all of us. The cost of doing nothing – or doing the wrong thing – will be measured
in long-term harm, not short-term savings.