I'm writing this on the same day it happened, while I'm still angry. I'm not going to pretend I'm okay. What happened today was wrong, it has happened to me before, and it is happening to autistic adults across Australia right now. You deserve to know about it – and you deserve to know what you can do.

The phone call

At some point this morning, a woman named Sheree from the NDIA called me. She opened with: "I've approved your plan."

What followed was an interrogation of every support I currently access. By the end of the call, she had verbally communicated reductions to every single category. My psychology, cut from fortnightly to monthly and eventually removed entirely. My cleaning support, cut and scheduled to disappear. My consumables, slashed from $500 to $100 a year. Noise-cancelling headphones, recommended in writing by my psychologist, declined as an "everyday item."

Then she told me these decisions were "based on what your psychologist has said."

I have my psychologist's report in front of me. He recommends fortnightly psychology. He recommends noise-cancelling headphones. He writes that interrupting my therapy "would pose a material risk of regression, including worsening sleep, increased emotional dysregulation, further withdrawal from relationships/community, and reduced capacity to maintain employment."

Sheree's decisions are the opposite of every specific recommendation he made. She didn't misread the report. She inverted it. Then she told me she was following it.

Context: this is not an incident, it is a pattern

To understand today, you need to know what came before it.

Approximately 2.5 years ago, the NDIA created my previous plan without any planning meeting, without any discussion of my needs, and without any engagement with my clinical presentation. The plan was created unilaterally and sent to me. When I raised that the support levels were insufficient, this was declined.

The consequences were predictable. My psychology funding ran out mid-plan because the approved frequency didn't reflect my clinical needs. I had been communicating from the outset that fortnightly sessions were necessary. The depletion of funds was not overuse. It was the predictable result of a plan that did not reflect my actual requirements.

In late December 2024 I submitted a Change of Circumstances request to increase my depleted Capacity Building funding. The NDIA's own Service Guarantee commits to a 21-day processing timeframe. Two months passed. My provider had no access to funding during that entire period. Then, without warning, rather than a simple targeted variation, the NDIA triggered a full plan reassessment. The result: further reductions, against clinical advice, with no accountability for the delay.

Three planning cycles. Three failures to engage with clinical evidence. Three sets of decisions made about my life without me. At some point a pattern stops being a series of mistakes and starts being a system working as designed.

The wheelchair analogy

During the call Sheree said the following, which I recorded in notes immediately after:

"I understand how hard it is with your black and white thinking, your routine, but we want you to grow."

"We want you to grow and become better."

"We want to reduce your reliance on support."

I want you to imagine those words said to a person who uses a wheelchair because they have no legs.

"We want to reduce your reliance on your wheelchair. We want you to grow and become more independent. We know it's hard but we believe in your capacity to build the strength to walk on your own."

Nobody would say that. Nobody would frame the removal of a mobility aid as personal development. Nobody would cite the physical characteristics of someone's disability as evidence they need to grow beyond it.

But this is said to autistic adults constantly. The language of "capacity building," "reducing reliance," and "growing toward independence" is applied to lifelong neurological conditions as if autism is a phase to be overcome with sufficient effort. It is not. The written plan Sheree sent me the same day repeats this framing throughout. It literally states that my cleaning support "will cease" after two years, on the assumption that an OT will have taught me to vacuum independently. No functional assessment exists to support this. The OT assessment is funded in year one of the plan – meaning it hasn't happened yet. They built the conclusion in before gathering the evidence.

What the plan actually says, and why it matters

When I received the written plan, I found this sentence in the declined supports section:

"I made this decision against the requirements of rule 5.1(d) of the NDIS Rules."

Read that again. The planner wrote, in the official document, that she made a decision against the applicable rules. If you receive a plan and find language like this, screenshot it immediately. It is legally significant and it is grounds for review.

I also note that when I asked during the call what consumables were covered for autism, Sheree said "virtually none." Ten minutes later she quoted $100 per year. She wasn't working from accurate information. She was making it up as she went.

This is not just my story

People with disability in Australia are four times more likely to die by suicide than the general population, according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. For those with psychosocial disabilities using disability services, the rate is nine times higher. The Disability Royal Commission, which handed down its final report in September 2023 after four and a half years of inquiry, documented systemic violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of disabled Australians at scale. In 2025, Australia's Human Rights Commissioner directly linked recent NDIS reform changes to family deaths, stating: "We are seeing reforms that reduce supports or make them harder to access, leaving families anxious and frightened."

When you reduce psychological support from someone in autistic burnout, against their treating clinician's explicit recommendation, you are not building capacity. The clinical literature is unambiguous on this. Autistic burnout increases the risk of regression, loss of employment, and suicide. My psychologist documented this in the report Sheree told me she was following.

The NDIA has no accountability mechanism for what happened today. There is no consequence for breaching the Service Guarantee. There is no consequence for misrepresenting clinical evidence. There is no consequence for making a decision "against the requirements" of their own rules and writing that in the document. The complaints process exists, but it is buried behind layers of bad UX designed, intentionally or not, to exhaust the people trying to use it.

I have lodged three formal documents today: a Section 100 internal review, an NDIA internal complaint, and a conduct complaint with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission. I am documenting this publicly because sunlight is the only accountability mechanism that actually works.

Your rights – everything they make hard to find

1. Request a Statement of Reasons

You have the right to a written Statement of Reasons for any NDIS planning decision. Request this immediately after receiving any plan you disagree with. Email enquiries@ndis.gov.au quoting your NDIS number, or call 1800 800 110.

2. Section 100 Internal Review

Under Section 100 of the NDIS Act 2013 you can request a review of any planning decision by a different delegate. You have 3 months from the decision date. Email enquiries@ndis.gov.au with subject line: Section 100 Internal Review Request – [Your Name] – [Your NDIS Number]. Attach your clinical reports and the plan. State specifically which decisions you are challenging and why.

3. NDIA Internal Complaint

Separate from the s100, you can lodge a formal process and decision complaint. Email enquiries@ndis.gov.au with subject line: Formal Complaint – Plan Reassessment – [Your Name] – [Your NDIS Number]. Or via MyNDIS portal. Or call 1800 800 110.

4. NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission – Conduct Complaint

The independent body that investigates planner conduct. If a planner misrepresented evidence, used inappropriate language, or behaved unprofessionally, report them here. Online: ndiscommission.gov.au/complaints. Email: contactcentre@ndiscommission.gov.au. Phone: 1800 035 544.

5. Administrative Appeals Tribunal

If your s100 review fails, escalate to the AAT. Free to lodge for NDIS matters. You can represent yourself. aat.gov.au/apply-for-a-review/ndis. Phone: 1800 228 333.

6. Commonwealth Ombudsman

For systemic or repeated NDIA failures. ombudsman.gov.au/complaints. Phone: 1300 362 072.

Free advocacy support

Disability Advocacy Network Australia – find a free local advocate: dana.org.au/find-an-advocate

NDIS Appeals Support Service – free legal help for reviews and appeals: ndisappeals.com.au

Before your next "planning meeting" – what they don't tell you

It is not a meeting. It is not a discussion. Know what it actually is.

I want to be direct about something that took me too long to understand, and that nobody in the system will tell you.

When the NDIA calls you for a "planning meeting," there is no meeting. There is no discussion. There is a predetermined outcome, and the planner is looking for evidence – or the absence of resistance – to support it. The social warmth, the questions about your life, the language of care and growth: these are not the features of a collaborative process. They are techniques to get you talking, to lower your guard, and to extract information that can be used to justify decisions that were likely already made.

In my case, the planner opened by telling me my plan had been approved. She then asked about my wellbeing and my work. She used friendly, caring language throughout. She told me she wanted me to grow and become better. And she reduced every single support I access, against my psychologist's written recommendations, in a call I had no warning was coming.

The framing – "capacity building," "reducing reliance," "growing toward independence" – is not neutral language. It is ableist language that treats disability as a personal failing to be corrected rather than a condition to be supported. Applied to autism, a lifelong neurological condition, it is not just offensive. It is clinically wrong. And it has consequences.

When recklessness has a body count

In 2019, Tom Oliver – an autistic man with severe depression – died by suicide after his NDIS plan did not provide sufficient mental health services. His family had repeatedly raised concerns. The NDIA did not act in time. His death prompted calls for urgent review of how the NDIA handles participants with significant mental health needs. Those calls have not been adequately answered.

Tom Oliver is not an outlier. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare documents that people with disability are four times more likely to die by suicide than the general population. For those with psychosocial disabilities using disability services, the rate is nine times higher. The Disability Royal Commission, which finalised its report in September 2023 after nearly five years of inquiry into violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of disabled Australians, made 222 recommendations. As of early 2026, implementation is described by the Government as "ongoing."

In 2025, following the deaths of an autistic family in Western Australia, Australia's Human Rights Commissioner Rosemary Kayess made the following statement:

"We are seeing reforms that reduce supports or make them harder to access, leaving families anxious and frightened. Governments must recognise the harm this is causing and act urgently – with transparency, accountability, and genuine involvement of people with disability and their families."

Disability Discrimination Commissioner Rosemary Kayess, Australian Human Rights Commission, 2025

When a government agency makes decisions that contradict clinical evidence, ignores its own service guarantees, applies step-down funding models to lifelong conditions without functional assessment, and buries its complaints processes behind impenetrable UX – and when disabled people are dying at nine times the rate of the general population – the word for that is not mismanagement. It is recklessness. It is an agency operating outside the interests of the vulnerable people it was created to protect. It is, in the most precise sense of the word, lawless: an agency that writes its own rule violations into official documents and faces no consequence for doing so.

If you are experiencing distress: Lifeline is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week on 13 11 14. The Suicide Call Back Service is available on 1300 659 467.

My plan contains the sentence: "I made this decision against the requirements of rule 5.1(d) of the NDIS Rules." It was written by a government employee, in an official document, about a decision affecting a disabled person's access to clinical support. No one has been held accountable for it. No mechanism exists to hold anyone accountable for it in real time.

That is what lawless means. Not dramatic. Not hyperbolic. Precise.

Before the SMS arrives – what you need to know

The NDIA does not schedule planning meetings in advance. In many cases – including mine – you receive an SMS on the day, saying to expect a call, then it arrives from an unknown number. There is no warning. There is no preparation time. You answer a call from a stranger not knowing it will determine your supports for the next five years.

This is not an administrative oversight. An unprepared participant is easier to manage.

The call is not a discussion. Go in knowing that. Here is what to do instead:

1. You do not have to take the call same day. You are entitled to request a scheduled time that gives you adequate preparation. Say: "I'd like to schedule this call in advance so I can prepare my documentation." They may push back. Push back harder.
2. Understand what the call actually is. The planner has a predetermined outcome. They are looking for evidence to support it, or for your silence to be taken as compliance. Every friendly question is an opportunity to gather information. Be guarded. The NDIA is not your friend or advocate. 
3. Have your clinical reports in front of you. Know exactly what your psychologist or treating professional has recommended. If the planner claims a decision is "based on" your clinical report, you need to be able to challenge that in real time.
4. Do not be softened by small talk. The rapport-building at the start of the call is a manipulation tactic, a facade. Stay focused on the substance. Say less, not more.
5. You are allowed to push back. You are allowed to say "I don't agree with that." You are allowed to end the call if it becomes unproductive, or if NDIA's representative uses ableist language. Ending the call is their failure, not yours. 
6. Record your notes as you go. Write up everything immediately after the call with exact quotes, timestamps, and your own responses. These notes are evidence.
7. Assume nothing is agreed until you have it in writing. The written plan is what matters. Read every word including the declined supports section and any footnotes.
8. If the written plan contains any admission of a decision made "against" a rule – screenshot it immediately. It is legally significant and grounds for review.
9. Get a detailed functional capacity report from your treating professional before any reassessment contact. Ask them to specifically address what happens if supports are reduced. An AHPRA-registered clinician's written recommendation with a specific frequency is much harder to dismiss than a general support letter.
10. Write your own functional impact statement. Specific, factual, domain by domain. "I cannot reliably initiate or complete cleaning tasks due to executive dysfunction, which impacts my capacity to maintain employment" is evidence. "I find it hard to clean" is not.
11. A Change of Circumstances request can trigger a full reassessment. If you are submitting one, prepare as if your entire plan is on the table – because it might be, and you may not be told until the call is already happening.
12. Share your story. If you have experienced NDIS plan reductions made against clinical advice, a planning call with no advance notice, a Service Guarantee breach, or conduct from a planner that felt dismissive, manipulative or deficit-based – you are not alone and your experience matters. HeyASD is collecting accounts from autistic adults navigating the NDIS. Depending on the details, we may be able to help amplify your story, connect you with advocacy support, or contribute your experience to a broader body of evidence. Get in touch here. Your name will never be used without your explicit permission.

The NDIA is not your advocate. The planner on your call may be professional, may use the language of care, may genuinely believe they are helping you. None of that changes the structural reality: the system they operate within is not designed to maximise your supports. It is designed to manage a budget. The call is not a discussion. The outcome may already be decided. Document everything. Trust the written record. 

I'm not writing this to perform resilience or wrap a hard day in a lesson. I'm writing it because I know there are autistic adults reading this who have been through the same thing, who are going through it right now, or who will go through it and won't know what to do. You're allowed to be angry. You're allowed to not be okay. And you're allowed to fight back. The process exists. It's been made deliberately hard to find. Now you know where it is.

Daniel B is an autistic adult based in Adelaide, South Australia. He has lodged a Section 100 internal review, an NDIA internal complaint, and a conduct complaint with the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission regarding the events described in this article. A formal response is pending.