By Patricia Falcetta | Neurodiversity Advocate, Speaker & Inclusion Consultant
When Health Minister Mark Butler referred to “mild to moderate autism” during a recent National Press Club address, it sent a wave of concern and frustration through neurodivergent communities across Australia.
As a neurodivergent woman, a mother, and someone who has supported hundreds of autistic and neurodivergent families through my work at Social Living Solutions, I want to be crystal clear:
There is no such thing as “mild,” “moderate,” or “severe” autism.
There are simply individuals with neurodivergent brains, and each of them experiences the world in uniquely human, and often fluctuating, ways.
My Journey Into Advocacy
I am both an advocate and a parent. The whole reason I founded Social Living Solutions originallywas because of the lack of services and supports for children and their families. I have lived the overwhelm, the stress, the worry that comes with parenting an autistic child. I’ve been the parent standing in the supermarket, copping judgmental looks from strangers who assume my child just needs more discipline. I’ve had close family members say those words too.
When I first began working in this space, the dominant approach was about fixing the child, making them fit in. Social skills programs, compliance-based interventions, and behavioural techniques like ABA were still common. These programs taught autistic people to mask. They told them, implicitly and explicitly, that something about them was broken.
That mindset caused real harm, and we’re still seeing its ripple effects today.
As I’ve grown in this work, I’ve seen the importance of shifting to neuro-affirming, strength-based, co-designed supports. I now speak nationally through Patricia Falcetta, on how to build inclusive schools, workplaces, and public spaces, from physical design to policy frameworks. This moment in our national discussion is no different. It requires design thinking grounded in lived experience.
The Problem With This Language
The use of terms like “mild autism” reflects a deficit-based, medicalised understanding of neurodivergence. It does not align with lived experience, modern research, or inclusive practice.
It also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be autistic or otherwise neurodivergent in Australia today.
The Continuum of Traits Not Levels of Severity
Whether someone is autistic, ADHD, OCD, dyslexic, or experiences sensory processing differences, neurodivergence is not a fixed “level.” It is a continuum of traits that can shift depending on environmental demands, stress, sensory input, and emotional regulation.
Here are just some of the traits that fluctuate for neurodivergent individuals:
- Sensory sensitivities
- Emotional regulation capacity
- Executive functioning
- Masking and burnout
- Rejection Sensitivity Dysphoria (RSD)
- Interoceptive awareness
- Communication needs
- Relationship to time and control
- Energy availability and cognitive load
We don’t grow less autistic on the good days or more autistic on the hard ones, we are always neurodivergent. What changes is how well we can function within the environment we’re placed in.
A quote that encapsulates this beautifully comes from Chris Bonelli of autisticnotweird.com:
“If you have it (autism) mildly, you are at the awkward mid-point of being ‘normal enough’ for everyone to expect the same from you as everyone else, but ‘autistic’ enough not to reach these expectations.”
My Lived Experience
I received a late diagnosis of ADHD, and I also have autistic traits. I know the damage masking has done to me, mentally, emotionally, physically. I’ve spent years in therapy, learning to unlearn the shame I internalised from trying to be something I’m not. I’ve had to rebuild my sense of self and learn to embrace the creativity, insight, and beauty that being neurodivergent brings.
This is also the lived experience of my children. My eldest son is autistic and ADHD. I remember feeling devastated at his diagnosis because, like so many parents, I didn’t yet understand what autism really meant. Now, I see his brilliance. He writes and produces music that moves people. He is creative, empathetic, and expressive in ways that enrich the world.
My younger son is dyslexic, and his out-of-the-box thinking constantly impresses me. The way he solves problems, the way he questions the world these are gifts.
This is what we risk losing when we try to erase or suppress neurodivergent traits.
My Personal Experience
I am ADHD and have autistic traits. I do not “have” ADHD, I am ADHD. It is not a disease; it is a different neurotype. Some days, I can present in ways that might be perceived as “high functioning.” But under stress, overwhelm, or sensory overload, I can become non-verbal.
In those moments, would someone call me low functioning? Or severely ADHD?
The problem is that these labels don’t reflect reality. They reflect how uncomfortable others feel when we stop masking.
This is why I speak out. Because I know that many children and adults are misjudged, dismissed, or denied support simply because they don’t look “disabled enough”.
What We Risk Losing
When we teach children to mask, we are not helping them. We are silencing them. We are teaching them that their natural behaviours are wrong, that they must perform neurotypicality in order to be accepted. The long-term research is clear: masking is linked to anxiety, depression, identity confusion, and even suicidality.
There is no long-term evidence that Inklings or equivalent preschool programs like PACT are safe or effective. There is no proper risk assessment for exposing infants to behaviour change experiments. Parents are being denied informed consent, as the risks of teaching masking and compliance behaviours are not disclosed.
Autistic traits are not deficits. They are expressions of how a person experiences the world. They are the foundation of the creativity, innovation, and integrity that society so often benefits from.
The Harm in “Over-Servicing” Narratives
Minister Butler’s suggestion that children are being over-serviced is not only harmful, it is offensive.
It ignores the well-documented link between neurodivergence and trauma, especially when support is denied, delayed, or conditional. It reinforces the idea that neurodivergent children are a financial burden rather than valued, diverse members of our society with rights, needs, and dreams.
Yes, our system is flawed and in need of reform. But that reform must be:
- Constultative
- Inclusive
- Evidence-informed
- And most importantly, co-designed with neurodivergent people and families
Community-Led Voices Are Speaking Loudly
The response from autistic-led and disability advocacy organisations has been powerful, united, and clear. Here’s what they’re saying:
1. Language Matters
Advocacy groups and autistic individuals are united in their concern. Yellow Ladybugs CEO Katie Koullas responded:
“There is no such thing as mild autism. So many of us, especially our girls and gender-diverse kids, work so hard to mask and internalise their struggles. Without access to affirming supports, we are at greater risk of burnout, school refusal, poor mental health, and even self-harm.”
“The Minister’s language is not only outdated, it’s dangerous.”
“Mild to Moderate Autism” is Not a Diagnostic Term
Groups such as ANPA, RAEN, Amaze, and Yellow Ladybugs have all condemned the use of non-clinical terms like “mild to moderate autism.”
They argue this language:
- Is outdated and medically pathologising
- Ignores the lived experience of masking, burnout, and trauma
- Fails to align with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)
2. The Inklings Program and Lack of Evidence
The government’s proposed Thriving Kids initiative includes behaviour-based early intervention models like Inklings, which have come under fire for:
- Teaching masking and compliance
- Lacking long-term safety data
- Operating without transparent protocols
- Failing to consult with autistic people or First Nations communities
ANPA and RAEN have launched a national boycott and introduced a “DPRO Tick of Approval” – a new community-led framework to ensure programs meet standards of human rights, transparency, and Disabled leadership
Sarah Langston, President of the Australian Neurodivergent Parents Association, spoke to ABC Radio Sydney:
“There’s no long-term safety data around Inklings. It is not individualised support, which is what the UNCRPD requires. We’ve raised these concerns repeatedly with the government and they’ve not been addressed.”
“These are ‘tick and flick’ programs — you go in, do a set number of sessions, and then you exit. There’s no follow-up. This is not safe or evidence based.”
3. A Dangerous Narrative
“The so-called Thriving Kids program is being presented as evidence-based,” said RAEN advocate Heidi La Paglia, “but in reality it is designed to suppress autistic traits and reduce diagnoses — a dangerous and fundamentally flawed logic.”
“Teaching children to mask their autism does not make their disability disappear. It leads to burnout, poor mental health, and in the worst cases, suicidality.”
“Mark Butler’s suggestion that autism is not permanent, and his use of functional labels like ‘mild to moderate,’ is beyond comprehension. This rhetoric is outdated, harmful, and misinformed.”
“This is not co-design. It is not evidence-based. And it is not safe for our community.”
4. A Call for Genuine Co-Design and Compliance with Human Rights Law
The community is calling for:
- Meaningful consultation with Disabled People’s Representative Organisations (DPROs)
- Transparency around program safety and intent
- Full compliance with UNCRPD and UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)
Quotes from RAEN, ANPA, and First Nations advocates emphasise the importance of:
- Informed consent
- Disabled oversight
- Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) for First Nations communities
5. Fear of a System Collapse Without a Safety Net
I have a deep concern that the government may dismantle NDIS supports before a new system is fully designed, tested, and co-signed by the community.
Families are already falling through the cracks, particularly:
- Those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds
- Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) families
- Children with complex or invisible presentations
As Katie Koullas from Yellow Ladybugs said:
“Taking kids off the NDIS before safe, affirming, and properly funded alternatives are in place is reckless. Families will be left stranded.”
Final Thoughts: What Now?
Sometimes the world of autism and neurodiversity can be very dark, and it is government messaging like this that makes it darker.
If we want a system that truly supports children to thrive, we cannot base it on masking, labelling, or removing supports before we build new ones.
We must reject language that reduces people to clinical categories. We must challenge any system that denies neurodivergent children the support they need because they don’t look “disabled enough.”
And we must ensure that reform is done with, not to, our community.
This is My Advocacy. This is My Opinion.
Everything I’ve shared here is my professional perspective and lived experience.
I want families, educators, and policymakers to understand that the conversation around support needs is not just political, it is personal.
And I will continue to speak out until the supports we offer are affirming, rights-based, co-designed, and safe.
