ADHD Aotearoa

16/06/2026

AI AND DISABILITY ASSESSMENTS – SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED?

SERIES PART 4: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN PEOPLE CANNOT ACCESS DIAGNOSIS OR TREATMENT?

Across New Zealand, many people are already experiencing long waiting times for mental health services, ADHD assessments, specialist appointments, and disability support services.

Some wait months.

Others wait years.

Many pay privately because public services are unable to meet demand.

Now consider this question:

If people are already struggling to obtain diagnoses, specialist reports, and medical evidence, what happens if future systems require increasingly detailed documentation to satisfy automated processes?

For many people, the biggest barrier is not proving they have a condition.

The barrier is gaining access to professionals who can confirm and document it.

The disability and mental health communities have spent years advocating for improved access to services.

Should our focus be on improving access to diagnosis and treatment before introducing new technologies into support systems?

I would love to hear from people who have experienced long waits for diagnosis or treatment.

How long did you wait?

What impact did that delay have on your life?

11/06/2026

AI AND DISABILITY ASSESSMENTS – SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED?

SERIES PART 3: THE COST OF GETTING IT WRONG

For many people, a benefit or disability payment is not simply extra money.

It pays for rent.

It pays for food.

It pays for medication.

It pays for transport to appointments.

It helps keep families afloat during periods when illness, disability, injury, or mental health challenges make work impossible.

This is why many people are concerned about the possibility of increased automation in welfare systems.

When a human makes a mistake, there are usually processes to challenge and review the decision.

But when an automated system gets something wrong, people often don't know how the decision was made, who made it, or how to challenge it.

For those already struggling with ADHD, executive functioning difficulties, anxiety, depression, cognitive impairments, or chronic illness, navigating a complex review process can be overwhelming.

This is not an argument against technology.

It is a discussion about accountability.

If a person's support is reduced, delayed, or declined because of information processed by an automated system, who should be responsible?

The computer?

The agency?

The government?

What safeguards would you want to see in place before AI is used in decisions that affect people's livelihoods?

09/06/2026

AI AND DISABILITY ASSESSMENTS – SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED?

SERIES PART 2: CAN A COMPUTER UNDERSTAND INVISIBLE DISABILITIES?

One of the biggest concerns being raised about the increased use of AI in social services is how technology may interpret conditions that are not always visible.

Many people living with ADHD, autism, anxiety disorders, depression, PTSD, chronic fatigue, chronic pain, and other conditions often hear:

"But you don't look disabled."

The reality is that many disabilities are hidden.

A person may appear fine during a short appointment yet spend the next three days recovering.

Someone with ADHD may manage one task brilliantly but struggle with ten others.

A person with severe anxiety may attend one meeting while battling overwhelming distress internally.

A medical certificate might explain a diagnosis, but it often cannot fully capture how that condition affects day-to-day functioning.

This raises an important question.

If a person struggles to explain their condition to family members, employers, schools, or government agencies, how effectively could a computer system understand those challenges?

Technology may be able to process information.

But can it understand human experience?

What has your experience been when trying to explain your condition to others?

Have you ever felt misunderstood because your disability or mental health condition wasn't visible?

06/06/2026

AI AND DISABILITY ASSESSMENTS – SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED?

SERIES PART 1: WHAT IS ACTUALLY BEING PROPOSED?

There has been a lot of discussion recently about the Government's proposal to allow greater use of artificial intelligence and automated decision-making within New Zealand's social security system.

For many people, this raises concerns about whether computers could eventually be involved in decisions that affect disability support, sickness benefits, financial assistance, and other forms of welfare support.

For those of us in the ADHD, disability, and mental health communities, this is particularly important because many conditions cannot be measured by a simple checklist. The impact of ADHD, autism, anxiety, depression, PTSD, bipolar disorder, chronic illness, and other disabilities often varies from person to person.

Many people already face lengthy waits for assessments, difficulty accessing specialists, and challenges obtaining the evidence required to access support. Understandably, some are concerned that increasing automation could create additional barriers.

Supporters argue that technology could make systems faster and more efficient.

Critics argue that efficiency should never come at the expense of understanding a person's individual circumstances.

Over the next week, I will be sharing information from multiple perspectives so we can have an informed discussion.

My question for you:

Should decisions affecting disability and mental health support always involve a human decision-maker, or are there circumstances where AI could play a role?

Please share your thoughts respectfully below.

Part 2 will explore invisible disabilities and how they are understood in automated systems - Tuesday.

05/06/2026

HOMESCHOOLING AND THE IMPORTANCE OF CONSULTATION

Whether you support homeschooling, public schooling, charter schools, or a combination of educational options, one principle should remain the same: families deserve to be consulted when significant changes are proposed that directly affect their children's education.

This article reports that the Government has stepped back from proposed homeschooling law changes after concerns were raised by homeschooling families and community groups about the lack of consultation and the potential impact of the proposed requirements.

Many families choose homeschooling because their children have unique educational, behavioural, disability, health, or learning needs that they feel are not being adequately met in traditional settings. For some ADHD, autistic, and neurodivergent learners, homeschooling has provided an opportunity to learn in an environment tailored to their individual needs.

Regardless of where you stand on homeschooling, this situation raises an important question: should major policy changes affecting families and children's education be developed with those families at the table from the beginning?

The Government's decision to pause these changes demonstrates that community feedback can make a difference.

What are your thoughts? Should parents have greater input into educational policy decisions that directly affect their children?

The Education Minister last week suddenly announced the introduction of new requirements on parents homeschooling their children.

05/06/2026

IS AI THE FUTURE OF DISABILITY AND MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS?

Over the coming weeks, I will be sharing a series of articles and information relating to the Government's proposals around increased use of AI and automated decision-making in social services.

As someone who has spent years working alongside individuals, families, and advocates in the ADHD, disability, and mental health communities, I find myself asking some important questions.

Can an AI system truly understand the impact that ADHD, autism, anxiety, depression, PTSD, chronic illness, or other disabilities have on a person's daily life?

Can a computer recognise the challenges that are often invisible to others?

Can an algorithm understand the difference between what a person is capable of on their best day compared to what they experience most of the time?

Or should decisions that affect a person's income, support, wellbeing, and future always involve a human being who can consider the full picture?

Technology undoubtedly has a place in modern government services, but where should the line be drawn?

I am genuinely interested in hearing from people with lived experience.

🔹 Would you feel comfortable if AI was involved in assessing your eligibility for support?

🔹 What safeguards would you want to see in place?

🔹 Should AI only assist human decision-makers, or should it be able to make recommendations and decisions on its own?

🔹 Have you ever had to explain your condition to someone who simply didn't understand it? How do you think AI would do?

Please keep the discussion respectful. This is an important conversation for our disability, neurodiversity, and mental health communities, and your experiences matter.

I'd particularly like to hear from people living with ADHD, autism, learning disabilities, mental health conditions, chronic illness, and from parents and carers who support family members through these systems.

05/06/2026

AI AND DISABILITY ASSESSMENTS – SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED?

This video raises concerns about proposed changes that could allow greater use of AI and automated systems within New Zealand's welfare system. Supporters argue it could improve efficiency. Critics question whether technology should be making decisions that can have a profound impact on a person's wellbeing, income, and access to support.

For the ADHD, disability, and mental health communities, this raises an important question: can an algorithm adequately assess the real-world impact of complex conditions, or is human judgement an essential part of ensuring fair and compassionate outcomes?

I encourage everyone to watch the video and consider what these changes could mean for vulnerable New Zealanders.

05/06/2026

CHARTER SCHOOLS – ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE

As many of you know, I have generally supported charter schools because they can offer alternative educational approaches, greater flexibility for students who struggle in mainstream settings, and a different level of accountability around outcomes.

One aspect I had not previously considered was highlighted in this RNZ article. According to Associate Education Minister David Seymour, some state schools that have explored converting to charter schools have decided not to proceed because they would become responsible for significant property and maintenance liabilities, including issues such as ageing infrastructure and asbestos remediation.

This raises an interesting question: should schools be expected to take on the financial risks associated with school property in exchange for greater operational independence?

Whether you support or oppose charter schools, understanding both the opportunities and challenges is important. Education policy is rarely as simple as "for" or "against". There are real questions around funding, property management, accountability, staff conditions, student outcomes, and the ability of schools to meet diverse learning needs.

I found this article provided a perspective I had not previously considered and thought it was worth sharing to encourage discussion.

David Seymour claims about 20 state schools have investigated the charter model and a conversion could happen at "almost any moment".

29/05/2026

Here is a news item that is urgent and important that will affect our followers on WINZ benefits for Sickness, Invalids and Disabilities.