Jayden and Cadence

‘We never thought that seeking help from appropriate government services would make everything worse, much worse.’

Cadence’s son, Jayden, is under 10 and has autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder.

‘When not hyper-aroused, [Jayden] can be a delight,’ Cadence told the Royal Commission. ‘However, despite much love and effort, we could not help [Jayden] sufficiently to make our home safe for his two younger brothers.’

When Jayden became violent, Cadence couldn’t find the help she needed.

‘When a crisis occurs, there is no place for parents of autistic children with behaviours of concern to turn to.’

Worried about the safety of her younger children, Cadence asked the state’s child protection service for help ‘in the hope of getting better expert advice and services’.

‘I want to make it clear that [Jayden], despite his behaviours of concern, was much loved and cared for at home … The basis of this was not because my partner or I were neglecting or hurting [Jayden].’

Child protection ordered a review of Jayden’s circumstances and received a ‘positive assessment’ of his parents.

‘For a brief moment, I felt relieved that greater expertise would help [Jayden] and our journey would improve.’

Child protection then placed Jayden with a service provider that specialised ‘in helping children through family trauma. But, as Cadence pointed out, Jayden ‘had no trauma’, and the provider had ‘absolutely no expertise in disability’.

‘I soon felt that child protection were treating my partner and I as if we were irresponsible or bad parents, and the cause of [Jayden’s] behaviours of concern.’

Cadence said that to control Jayden’s behaviour, the service provider physically restrained him at school drop-offs and medical appointments.

‘It is beyond belief that child protection’s service provider justified to me the use of physical restraint as “therapeutic restraint”. The restraint was not “therapeutic”. There was no benefit to [Jayden]. It was simply an assault.’

Cadence said physically restraining him caused bruises and trauma.

‘[Jayden] hides under his bed to seek a safe space. [He] flinches away from support workers when he is distressed.’

Cadence said the service provider conducted no behavioural assessment and child protection had no ‘coherent case management plan’ for him.

‘If we had been provided with the evidenced-based practices that we had requested from the outset, I believe [Jayden] would have been supported to get on top of his behaviours of concern.’

Jayden was eventually reunited with his family ‘because child protection realised that nothing they were doing was improving the situation’.

‘Organisations like child protection need to understand the difference between parental neglect and children who display challenging behaviours as part of their disability.’

Cadence said that much of Jayden’s NDIS funding was spent on the service provider that restrained him, leaving ‘insufficient funding to provide appropriate services that were more likely to help him’.

‘We have lost a number of years where [Jayden] could have received intensive evidence-based behaviour support … It is incredibly distressing and frustrating to know what the next steps should be [and] to be inhibited by the very support services you entrusted your son and your family with.’