Should people who had disability before they turned 65, be allowed to become NDIS participants after 65? We asked 5 experts
- Replies 1
The question of whether there should be an age limit to joining the National Disability Scheme (NDIS) has been debated since its inception a decade ago.
It is being asked again as we wait for the NDIS Review to release its final report. The report is expected to explore eligibility, sustainability and how costs should be split between the scheme and other government departments to provide an ecosystem of supports for people with disability.
Currently, once someone turns 65 they are no longer eligible to apply for NDIS support, even if they had disability before then. (NDIS support can extend beyond 65 for people who are already participants in the scheme.) Some people and groups say this is discriminatory.
So, should people who had disability before they turned 65, be allowed to become NDIS participants after 65? We asked five experts.
Growing up in the 1960s and 70s, I used to watch my neighbor working tirelessly in his back yard. Born in 1944, he was a full-time lifelong taxpayer, a distinguished paralympian with gold medals, earning an OAM and AM for his contribution to the disability and sport sectors. Remarkably, he had designed a concept similar to the NDIS back in the 1980s.
As I began my career in the disability field, his profound impact became more evident. If anyone deserved lifetime care and support, it was my neighbor. However, already aged 70 when the NDIS was established, he was compelled to sell his home to afford an aged care facility.
Ageing with a disability is vastly distinct from typical ageing, and some impairments may not become problematic until people are older. A serious disability acquired at or even beyond 65 years will require much more than the inadequate aged care system can provide. This glaring inequity demands our urgent attention.
Yes, but it is complicated.
There will be a small group of people who may miss out on access to the NDIS because they acquire a significant and permanent disability close to the age of 65. Given the time it takes to gather evidence and be accepted onto the scheme, they may be over the age cap once considered.
The challenge for those who have had a disability for longer is that ageing can often change or make the impacts of disability more significant. For others with degenerative conditions (such as motor neurone disease) it may take time for the impacts of their condition to make significant levels of support necessary.
Aged-care services are not always well placed to appropriately support these people.The more pressing issues are why aged-care supports do not offer appropriate disability supports and whether an age cap in the NDIS is discriminatory.
The objectives of the NDIS and federally funded aged-care programs are to ensure care recipients receive the support they need to participate in life. Those with equal needs should receive the same subsidised support, however recipients should not receive services that have little benefit.
The NDIS age cut-off is somewhat arbitrary relative to need. It was likely introduced so people with disability over the age of 65 would not receive subsidised duplicate services from both the NDIS and aged care programs. That would lead to waste and inequity.
However, first-time access to disability services should not be different because someone is older than 65 years. That is unfair and potentially inefficient from a system perspective because aged care services may not deliver as much value if they do not account for specialist disability needs. Rather than changing the NDIS, federally funded aged-care programs should instead ensure the same types of services that would be funded under the NDIS are also funded through aged-care programs.
Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We cannot discriminate against people with disabilities, regardless of age. Further, the Age Discrimination Act (2004) states it is unlawful to discriminate against someone on the grounds of their age with respect to the provision of goods, services, and facilities.
Compliance with these laws and obligations mean we would need to change NDIS eligibility for people over 65, whether they had a disability before then or not. We would also need to reallocate funding from aged care and the Commonwealth Continuity of Support Programme to the NDIS. Australians must also understand ensuring equity may reduce NDIS funding allocations and support availability.
Alternatively, we would need to increase the NDIS budget. All Australians could benefit from changes to access. It is estimatedevery dollar spent on the NDIS creates $2.25 in the economy. Understanding this return on investment could foster support from all sides of politics, the media, and business leaders.
Ideally, mere citizenship would qualify anyone for sufficient quality flexible support at any age. Which scheme funds the support ought to be just an administrative detail. Yet, as the NDIS Review panel has commented, the NDIS has become an “oasis in a desert”. People who do not quite meet the NDIS eligibility criteria (because of age, diagnosis, or support needs) do it tough compared to similar others who just scrape in. So I cannot blame anyone who fights to get into the scheme. I would too.
In the long term, yes, the NDIS should soften the age limit, and grant access to people over 65 in some circumstances. However, first aged care and other support systems need reform. The sustainability of the NDIS depends on it not being the only ticket to support and inclusion. Which system one finds themselves in should not determine the quality of support.
This article was first published on The Conversation, and was written by, Lucy Beaumont, Health + Disability Editor
It is being asked again as we wait for the NDIS Review to release its final report. The report is expected to explore eligibility, sustainability and how costs should be split between the scheme and other government departments to provide an ecosystem of supports for people with disability.
Currently, once someone turns 65 they are no longer eligible to apply for NDIS support, even if they had disability before then. (NDIS support can extend beyond 65 for people who are already participants in the scheme.) Some people and groups say this is discriminatory.
So, should people who had disability before they turned 65, be allowed to become NDIS participants after 65? We asked five experts.
Four out of five said yes
Growing up in the 1960s and 70s, I used to watch my neighbor working tirelessly in his back yard. Born in 1944, he was a full-time lifelong taxpayer, a distinguished paralympian with gold medals, earning an OAM and AM for his contribution to the disability and sport sectors. Remarkably, he had designed a concept similar to the NDIS back in the 1980s.
As I began my career in the disability field, his profound impact became more evident. If anyone deserved lifetime care and support, it was my neighbor. However, already aged 70 when the NDIS was established, he was compelled to sell his home to afford an aged care facility.
Ageing with a disability is vastly distinct from typical ageing, and some impairments may not become problematic until people are older. A serious disability acquired at or even beyond 65 years will require much more than the inadequate aged care system can provide. This glaring inequity demands our urgent attention.
Yes, but it is complicated.
There will be a small group of people who may miss out on access to the NDIS because they acquire a significant and permanent disability close to the age of 65. Given the time it takes to gather evidence and be accepted onto the scheme, they may be over the age cap once considered.
The challenge for those who have had a disability for longer is that ageing can often change or make the impacts of disability more significant. For others with degenerative conditions (such as motor neurone disease) it may take time for the impacts of their condition to make significant levels of support necessary.
Aged-care services are not always well placed to appropriately support these people.The more pressing issues are why aged-care supports do not offer appropriate disability supports and whether an age cap in the NDIS is discriminatory.
The objectives of the NDIS and federally funded aged-care programs are to ensure care recipients receive the support they need to participate in life. Those with equal needs should receive the same subsidised support, however recipients should not receive services that have little benefit.
The NDIS age cut-off is somewhat arbitrary relative to need. It was likely introduced so people with disability over the age of 65 would not receive subsidised duplicate services from both the NDIS and aged care programs. That would lead to waste and inequity.
However, first-time access to disability services should not be different because someone is older than 65 years. That is unfair and potentially inefficient from a system perspective because aged care services may not deliver as much value if they do not account for specialist disability needs. Rather than changing the NDIS, federally funded aged-care programs should instead ensure the same types of services that would be funded under the NDIS are also funded through aged-care programs.
Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. We cannot discriminate against people with disabilities, regardless of age. Further, the Age Discrimination Act (2004) states it is unlawful to discriminate against someone on the grounds of their age with respect to the provision of goods, services, and facilities.
Compliance with these laws and obligations mean we would need to change NDIS eligibility for people over 65, whether they had a disability before then or not. We would also need to reallocate funding from aged care and the Commonwealth Continuity of Support Programme to the NDIS. Australians must also understand ensuring equity may reduce NDIS funding allocations and support availability.
Alternatively, we would need to increase the NDIS budget. All Australians could benefit from changes to access. It is estimatedevery dollar spent on the NDIS creates $2.25 in the economy. Understanding this return on investment could foster support from all sides of politics, the media, and business leaders.
Ideally, mere citizenship would qualify anyone for sufficient quality flexible support at any age. Which scheme funds the support ought to be just an administrative detail. Yet, as the NDIS Review panel has commented, the NDIS has become an “oasis in a desert”. People who do not quite meet the NDIS eligibility criteria (because of age, diagnosis, or support needs) do it tough compared to similar others who just scrape in. So I cannot blame anyone who fights to get into the scheme. I would too.
In the long term, yes, the NDIS should soften the age limit, and grant access to people over 65 in some circumstances. However, first aged care and other support systems need reform. The sustainability of the NDIS depends on it not being the only ticket to support and inclusion. Which system one finds themselves in should not determine the quality of support.
This article was first published on The Conversation, and was written by, Lucy Beaumont, Health + Disability Editor
.png){kind=icon}
