In Johnstone and National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS) [2025] ARTA 106 the Tribunal has considered funding of a subscription to ChatGPT as part of support under the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth), aka the NDIS.
The Decision states
The issue before the Tribunal is whether the certain supports are reasonable and necessary and should be included in the Applicant’s statement of participant supports (SPS) under sections 33 and 34 of the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (Cth) (the NDIS Act). The Applicant is a 57-year-old man who lives with his spouse in Cairns. He is passionate about engaging in outdoor activities such as kite-flying, wildlife photography and bushwalking. He is also a keen volunteer with the State Emergency Services (‘SES’). The Applicant lives with a complex combination of significant physical, psychosocial and medical impairments.
As part of the Application for support Johnstone sought
a subscription to ‘ChatGPT’, which is the (well known) Artificial Intelligence application developed by Open AI. Mr Widmer, in his report of 23 November 2023, recommends the subscription version, which currently costs around $30 per month. Mr Widmer identified a number of benefits for the Applicant, including:
- Summarising and simplifying complex information;
- Providing a less overwhelming interface compared to navigating websites and paperwork;
- Text-to-speech recognition;
- Offering a consistent and reassuring mode of communication; Facilitating reminders and storing important information;
- Breaking down larger tasks into more manageable action;
- Providing on‑demand assistance and information; Providing guidance in emergency situations; and
- Helping build a support network.[143]
While there is a free version, the Applicant says that he has trialled this version and it was not sufficient for his needs. The Applicant say that the advantages of the subscription version include:
- Enhanced buffer capacity allowing for more extensive and complex requests;
- More consistent and reliable responses;
- Improved leaning and adaption to the Applicant’s communication style;
- Capacity to access and process external documents; and
- Support for other Artificial Intelligence tools or ‘plug-ins’.
The Agency submits that a subscription to ChatGPT is not reasonable and necessary as it is likely to pose a risk of harm to the Applicant and does not represent value for money, relative to the free version.[144] The risk identified by the Agency is that the use of ChatGPT may increase the possibility that the Applicant could be exploited because ChatGPT is still being developed and may not always provide accurate information. I am not satisfied that the risks identified by the Agency mean that the use of ChatGPT is likely to cause harm to the participant for the purpose of Rule 5.1(a) of the Support Rules. I accept that the Applicant is aware of these risks and would be able to respond appropriately.
In her oral evidence, Mrs Johnstone explained how ChatGPT reduced the burden on her in helping the Applicant to understand documents and write and proof-read responses. Mrs Johnstone added that the paid version of ChatGPT assisted by remembering the history of previous requests.
The Applicant also referred to the Tribunal’s decision in Gelzinnis,[145] which I have considered. In Gelzinnis the Applicant sought better internet access to implement an assistive technology plan, which was in turn intended to reduce reliance on support workers. The facts in Gelzinnis were quite specific to the Applicant and included poverty, limited internet availability in her accommodation and inability to access free public networks due to concerns with her disassociate episodes. I do not consider that the reasoning in Gelzinnis applies to Mr Johnstone’s situation.
I agree with the Agency’s contention that the paid version of ChatGPT does not represent value-for-money compared with the free version. I cannot see anything specifically in Mr Widmer’s report that deals with the additional advantages of the paid version. The bulk of the features which would reduce carer burden on Mrs Johnstone appear to be available in the free version. The Applicant’s lived experience with the free version not being suitable is of some weight, but ultimately provides little else to support a finding that the paid version is value-for-money. I am not satisfied that the subscription to ChatGPT is a reasonable and necessary support.
