{"id":"F2013L01070","name":"National Disability Insurance Scheme (Children) Rules 2013","slug":"national-disability-insurance-scheme-children-rules-2013","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":437825,"registerId":"F2013L01070-fast-fetch-1775954516833","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-12","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"National Disability Insurance Scheme (Children) Rules 2013","content":"---\nmeta-content-style-type: text/css\nmeta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8\n---\n\n![](image.001.png)\n\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Children) Rules 2013\n\n \n\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (the Act)\n\nThe Act establishes the National Disability Insurance Scheme (the NDIS).\n\nPeople who are participants in the NDIS will be assisted to develop a personal, goal-based plan about how they will be provided with general supports and reasonable and necessary supports.\n\nThe NDIS will respect the interests of people with disability in exercising choice and control about matters that affect them.\n\n \n\nNational Disability Insurance Scheme (Children) Rules 2013\n\nThese Rules are made for the purposes of sections 74, 75 and 76 of the Act.\n\nThese Rules are about persons who are responsible for undertaking acts and making decisions on behalf of children (known as child’s representatives).\n\n \n\nThese Rules commence on 1 July 2013.\n\n \n\n\nThe Hon Jenny Macklin MP  Minister for Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs  Minister for Disability Reform   \n\n18 June 2013\n\n\n\n\nContents\n\n \n\n[National Disability Insurance Scheme (Children) Rules 2013](#_Toc358792060)\n\n[Part 1 What these Rules are about](#_Toc358792061)\n\n[Part 2 Outline of these Rules](#_Toc358792062)\n\n[Part 3 Who is the child’s representative?](#_Toc358792063)\n\n[Part 4 Who has parental responsibility?](#_Toc358792064)\n\n[Children who have guardians](#_Toc358792065)\n\n[Children who do not have guardians](#_Toc358792066)\n\n[Part 5 When a child does not need a child’s representative](#_Toc358792067)\n\n[Part 6 Duties of child’s representatives](#_Toc358792068)\n\n[Part 7 Other matters](#_Toc358792069)\n\n[Citation](#_Toc358792070)\n\n[Interpretation](#_Toc358792071)\n\nPart 1 What these Rules are about\n\n1.1 These Rules are about persons who are responsible for undertaking acts and making decisions in relation to the Act on behalf of a child (referred to as child’s representatives in these Rules).\n\n1.2 It is recognised (for example, in the Convention on the Rights of the Child) that a child’s ability to undertake acts and make decisions on their own behalf increases as they develop. This principle is given effect by various provisions of the Act and these Rules that relate to child’s representatives, including rules that require children to be consulted in relation to, and involved in, decision-making that affects them, and in the ability of the CEO to decide that a particular child does not need a child’s representative (and to determine that the child will be able to undertake acts and make decisions on their own behalf).\n\n1.3 The existence of a child’s representative for the purposes of the Act does not affect duties or responsibilities of other carers who are responsible for undertaking acts and making decisions on behalf of children.\n\n1.4 The Act sets out a number of principles for the NDIS. The following principles are particularly relevant to these Rules:\n\n(a) the role of families, carers and other significant persons in the lives of people with disability is to be acknowledged and respected;\n\n(b) where acts or things are done on behalf of a child with disability, the best interests of the child are paramount, and full consideration should be given to the need to:\n\n(i) protect them from harm; and\n\n(ii) promote their development; and\n\n(iii) strengthen, preserve and promote positive relationships between them and their parents, family members and other people who are significant in their life;\n\n(c) positive personal and social development of people with disability, including children and young people, is to be promoted;\n\n(d) where acts or things are done on behalf of a person with disability:\n\n(i) they should be involved in decision-making that affects them, including making decisions for themselves, to the extent possible; and\n\n(ii) they should be encouraged to engage in the life of the community; and\n\n(iii) the judgements and decisions they would have made for themselves should be taken into account; and\n\n(iv) their cultural and linguistic circumstances, and gender, should be taken into account; and\n\n(v) their supportive relationships, friendships and connections with others should be recognised.\n\n \n\nPart 2 Outline of these Rules\n\n2.1 A child’s representative is usually a person with parental responsibility. Part 3 deals with determining whether a person other than a person with parental responsibility should be the child’s representative.\n\n2.2 Part 4 deals with determining who has parental responsibility.\n\n2.3 In some cases, a child does not need a child’s representative, and is able to make decisions for himself or herself for the purposes of the NDIS. Part 5 deals with determining whether a child does not need a child’s representative.\n\n2.4 Part 6 deals with the duties of a child’s representative.\n\n2.5 Part 7 deals with other matters, including interpretation of these Rules.\n\n \n\n \n\nPart 3 Who is the child’s representative?\n\n3.1 A child’s representative need not be an individual, and could, for example, be a State or Territory government agency.\n\n3.2 The child’s representative will normally be the person who has, or the persons who jointly have, parental responsibility for the child. (See section 75 of the Act and Part 4 of these Rules for how to determine who has parental responsibility.)\n\n3.3 However, in exceptional circumstances, the CEO might be satisfied that this is not appropriate. (For example, in a particular case, there might be a substantial degree of doubt as to what persons have parental responsibility under section 75 of the Act, and in view of this doubt, the CEO might be satisfied that it is not appropriate for the persons referred to in paragraph 3.2 to be the child’s representative.) In such circumstances, the CEO may determine that the child’s representative should be a different person, or a different group of persons. A person determined by the CEO in this way need not have parental responsibility.\n\n3.4 There is a special rule that applies in relation to such a determination when a State or Territory Minister, or the head of a Department of State of a State or Territory, has parental responsibility for the child. In such a case, the CEO is able to make this determination only with the written agreement of that person. A Minister or departmental head will normally delegate powers relating to parental responsibility. A delegation might include the power to make the agreement on that person’s behalf.\n\nParagraphs 3.1 to 3.4 summarise the effect of subsections 74(1) and (1A) of the Act.\n\n3.5 In deciding whether to make such a determination, the CEO is to have regard to the following:\n\n(a) the preferences (if any) of the child;\n\n(b) the desirability of preserving family relationships and informal support networks of the child;\n\n(c) who is best placed to carry out the duties set out in section 76 of the Act and Part 6 of these Rules;\n\n(d) for a particular person that the CEO is considering appointing:\n\n(i) any existing arrangements that are in place between that person and the child; and\n\n(ii) whether that person has responsibility for day-to-day parenting decisions; and\n\n(iii) whether that person can act in conjunction with other representatives and supporters of the child in the best interests of the child; and\n\n(iv) where the CEO has asked the person to answer any questions or provide any information in relation to the possible appointment of that person as a child’s representative (including requesting the person to consent to the release of information concerning their criminal history or suitability to work with children):\n\n(A) any answers or information that have been provided by the person; and\n\n(B) any refusal by the person to provide answers or information; and\n\n(v) any relevant conviction for an offence under Commonwealth, State or Territory law; and\n\n(vi) any relevant information relating to the suitability of the person to work with children.\n\n \n\n \n\nPart 4 Who has parental responsibility?\n\n4.1 There are different rules for determining who has parental responsibility, depending on whether or not the child has a guardian. Under these rules, in each case, the person with parental responsibility will either be:\n\n(a) the child’s guardian; or\n\n(b) 1 or more of the persons who satisfy parental condition 1 or parental condition 2.\n\n4.2 The parental conditions are as follows:\n\n parental condition 1 is that the person:\n\n(a) is a parent of the child; and\n\n(b) has not ceased to have parental responsibility for the child because of an order made under the Family Law Act 1975 or a law of a State or a Territory.\n\n parental condition 2 is that, under a parenting order (within the meaning of the Family Law Act 1975):\n\n(a) the child is to live with the person; or\n\n(b) the child is to spend time with the person; or\n\n(c) the person is responsible for the child’s long-term or day-to-day care, welfare and development.\n\nPersons who satisfy parental condition 1 or parental condition 2 will also satisfy paragraph 75(1)(a) or (b) of the Act.\n\nChildren who have guardians\n\n4.3 If a child has a guardian, the guardian normally has parental responsibility for the child (and will therefore normally be the child’s representative—see paragraph 3.2).\n\n4.4 However, the CEO is able to determine instead that 1 or more of the persons who satisfy parental condition 1 or parental condition 2 have parental responsibility for the child.\n\n4.5 In some cases, a State or Territory Minister, or the head of a Department of State of a State or Territory, will have guardianship of the child. If so, the CEO is able to make this determination only with the written agreement of that person.\n\nParagraphs 4.1 to 4.5 summarise the operation of subsections 75(1) to (3A) of the Act.\n\n4.6 When deciding whether to make such a determination, the CEO is to:\n\n(a) consult, in writing, with the child’s guardian; and\n\n(b) have regard to the following:\n\n(i) the preferences (if any) of the child;\n\n(ii) the principle that the child’s guardian should be the child’s representative unless the CEO is satisfied that this is not appropriate;\n\n(iii) whether the child’s guardian recommends that another person should be the child’s representative;\n\n(iv) the extent to which the child’s guardian is willing and able to perform the functions of child’s representative set out in section 76 of the Act and Part 6 of these Rules;\n\n(v) whether a person who satisfies parental condition 1 or parental condition 2 is more willing and able to carry out the duties to children set out in section 76 of the Act and Part 6 of these Rules.\n\nChildren who do not have guardians\n\n4.7 If a child does not have a guardian, then any person who satisfies parental condition 1 or parental condition 2 has parental responsibility for the child.\n\n4.8 Where this results in more than 1 person having parental responsibility for a child, the CEO is able to determine that 1 or more of those persons have parental responsibility for the child for the purposes of the Act. This is discretionary; the CEO does not need to make this determination.\n\nParagraphs 4.7 and 4.8 summarise subsections 75(1) and (3) of the Act.\n\n4.9 When deciding whether to make a determination referred to in paragraph 4.8, the CEO is to have regard to the following:\n\n(a) the preferences (if any) of the child;\n\n(b) the views of any person who has parental responsibility for the child;\n\n(c) whether 1 or more of those persons are best placed to carry out the duties to children set out in section 76 of the Act and Part 6 of these Rules, taking into account:\n\n(i) existing arrangements that are in place between those persons and the child; and\n\n(ii) which persons have responsibility for day-to-day parenting decisions; and\n\n(iii) which persons can act in conjunction with other representatives and supporters of the child in the best interests of the child;\n\n(d) whether 1 or more of those persons are willing and able to work together in the best interests of the child;\n\n(e) the desirability of preserving family relationships and informal support networks of the child;\n\n(f) for any of the persons:\n\n(i) where the CEO has asked the person to answer any questions or provide any information in relation to making a determination that applies to that person (including requesting the person to consent to the release of information concerning their criminal history or suitability to work with children):\n\n(A) any answers or information that have been provided by the person; and\n\n(B) any refusal by the person to provide answers or information; and\n\n(ii) any relevant conviction for an offence under Commonwealth, State or Territory law; and\n\n(iii) any relevant information relating to the suitability of the person to work with children.\n\n \n\nPart 5 When a child does not need a child’s representative\n\n5.1 Under the Act, a child will sometimes be able to do things for himself or herself. For this to be the case, the CEO must:\n\n(a) be satisfied that the child is capable of making their own decisions; and\n\n(b) be satisfied that it is appropriate in the circumstances for certain provisions of the Act not to apply to the child (essentially, the CEO must be satisfied that it is appropriate for the child to do things for himself or herself); and\n\n(c) make a determination about these matters.\n\nParagraph 5.1 summarises subsection 74(5) of the Act.\n\n5.2 When making a decision in relation to the matter referred to in paragraph 5.1(a) above, the CEO is to:\n\n(a) consult with the child and the child’s representative; and\n\n(b) have regard to the following:\n\n(i) whether the child:\n\n(A) is able to understand the kind of information relevant to decisions that need to be made under the NDIS; and\n\n(B) is able to use information of that kind when making decisions; and\n\n(C) is able to understand the consequences of decisions that need to be made under the NDIS; and\n\n(D) is able to communicate decisions in some way;\n\n(ii) whether there are people in the child’s life who can support them to make their own decisions.\n\n5.3 When making a decision in relation to the matter referred to in paragraph 5.1(b) above, the CEO is to:\n\n(a) consult with the child and the child’s representative; and\n\n(b) have regard to the following:\n\n(i) the preferences (if any) of the child;\n\n(ii) whether there are other people in the child’s life who would be willing and able to assist them in carrying out actions and making decisions under the NDIS;\n\n(iii) the need to preserve existing family relationships;\n\n(iv) any existing arrangements in place under Commonwealth, State and Territory schemes.\n\n \n\n \n\nPart 6 Duties of child’s representatives\n\n6.1 The Act provides guidance as to how a child’s representative is to act under the NDIS.\n\n6.2 One duty of a child’s representative is to:\n\n(a) ascertain the wishes of the child; and\n\n(b) act in a manner that promotes the best interests of that child.\n\n6.3 This duty is not breached if the child’s representative does a thing, or refrains from doing a thing, so long as:\n\n(a) the child’s representative reasonably believes that they have ascertained the wishes of the child in relation to the thing; and\n\n(b) the child’s representative reasonably believes that doing the thing, or refraining from doing the thing, promotes the best interests of the child.\n\nThe duty set out in paragraph 6.2 and the qualification set out in paragraph 6.3 summarise subsections 76(1) to (3) of the Act.\n\n6.4 A child’s representative also has a duty to consult, wherever practicable, with the following in relation to doing things under, or for the purposes of, the Act:\n\n(a) the guardian of the child (if any) and any other person who satisfies parental condition 1 or parental condition 2 (see paragraph 4.2) in relation to the child;\n\n(b) any other person who assists the child to manage their day-to-day activities and make decisions.\n\n \n\n \n\nPart 7 Other matters\n\nCitation\n\n7.1 These Rules may be cited as the National Disability Insurance Scheme (Children) Rules 2013.\n\nInterpretation\n\n7.2 These Rules include text that summarises provisions of the Act. The boxed notes identify such text, which does not form an operative part of these Rules.\n\n7.3 Terms and expressions that are used in the Act have the same meaning in these Rules unless these Rules display a contrary intention—see the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 and the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, which include definitions and rules of interpretation that apply to all Commonwealth legislation. For convenience, the more important definitions from the Act are identified or reproduced in paragraph 7.4.\n\n7.4 In these Rules:\n\nAct means the National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013.\n\nCEO—see section 9 of the Act.\n\nchild—see section 9 of the Act.\n\nchild’s representative means a person referred to in subsection 74(1) of the Act.\n\nConvention on the Rights of the Child means the treaty known as the Convention on the Rights of the Child done at New York on 20 November 1989. The text of the Convention is set out in the Australian Treaty Series 1991 No. 4.\n\nguardian means a guardian appointed under a law of the Commonwealth, a State or a Territory, and guardianship has a corresponding meaning.\n\nNDIS means the National Disability Insurance Scheme (see section 9 of the Act).\n\nparental responsibility—see section 9 of the Act.\n\nparental condition 1—see paragraph 4.2 of these Rules.\n\nparental condition 2—see paragraph 4.2 of these Rules.\n\nAppointment of child’s representative does not affect other duties or functions of carers\n\n7.5 In some cases, carers will have been appointed by an appropriate State or Territory body. Some such carers will have been delegated powers, functions or duties, and will have corresponding obligations under the State or Territory law. Nothing in these Rules is intended to impact on obligations of that nature.\n\n \n\n \n\n \n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"These Rules mainly interpret and implement the decision framework already set out in the NDIS Act (sections 74–76). They provide procedural detail about who counts as a child’s representative, how parental responsibility is determined, the criteria the CEO must consider, and the duties of representatives. They do not broaden substantive NDIS coverage or create new categories of entitlement beyond what the Act contemplates; rather, they operationalise the Act’s delegation of decision‑making authority to the CEO and set out consultation and suitability steps (see Parts 3–6)."},"complexity_factors":["Short instrument with 7 substantive Parts (Parts 1–7) and an interpretation section.","Directly tied to and cross‑references 3 sections of the Act (sections 74, 75 and 76) and to the Family Law Act 1975 (parenting orders) — requires readers to consult other statutes for full meaning.","Several discrete decision points for the CEO with enumerated criteria (paragraphs 3.5, 4.6, 4.9, 5.2–5.3) — lists rather than complex nested logic.","Special procedural exceptions (written agreement needed where State/Territory Minister or department head is guardian) (paragraphs 3.4, 4.5).","Inclusion of non‑operative explanatory boxed text (paragraph 7.2) which must be distinguished from operative provisions.","Limited number of defined terms reproduced (Act, CEO, child, guardian, parental conditions) — few terms but reliance on Act definitions increases cross‑reference complexity.","Some conditional discretion (CEO may or may not make determinations where multiple persons qualify) but no multi‑layered exceptions to exceptions."],"plain_english_summary":"**What these Rules do (short version)**\n\n- These Rules explain who can act and make decisions for a child under the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). That person is called the child’s representative. (See Parts 1–3 and paragraph 3.2.)\n\n**Who is normally the child’s representative**\n\n- Normally the child’s representative is the person or people who have \"parental responsibility\" for the child — typically a parent or someone named in a parenting order, or a legally appointed guardian. (See Part 4 and paragraph 4.2.)\n\n**When the CEO can choose someone else**\n\n- The NDIS CEO (the decision‑maker under the Act) can decide someone other than the usual parent/guardian should be the child’s representative in exceptional circumstances. That alternative representative can be an individual or an organisation (for example, a State or Territory agency). The CEO must consider a set list of factors (child’s wishes, family relationships, suitability and criminal history, current parenting arrangements, ability to act with other supporters, etc.). If a State/Territory Minister or department head is the guardian, the CEO needs that person’s written agreement before appointing someone else. (See paragraphs 3.1–3.5 and 4.3–4.5.)\n\n**How parental responsibility is determined**\n\n- If the child has a guardian, the guardian normally has parental responsibility. If the child does not have a guardian, parental responsibility falls to parents or to people who meet certain conditions in a Family Law parenting order (for example, people the child lives with or who have day‑to‑day care). If more than one person qualifies, the CEO may (but need not) choose which of them will be treated as having parental responsibility for NDIS purposes. In making that choice the CEO must have regard to the child’s preferences, the views of the people involved, whether they can work together, and suitability checks. (See Part 4, paragraphs 4.1–4.9.)\n\n**When a child can act for themself**\n\n- The CEO can decide that a particular child does not need a child’s representative because the child is capable of making their own NDIS decisions. Before doing so the CEO must be satisfied about the child’s capacity and that it is appropriate in the circumstances; the CEO must consult the child and any current child’s representative and consider specific capability factors (understanding relevant information, using it, understanding consequences, communicating decisions) and whether supports are available to help the child. (See Part 5, paragraphs 5.1–5.3.)\n\n**Duties of a child’s representative**\n\n- A child’s representative must: (a) find out the child’s wishes, and (b) act in the child’s best interests. The representative is not in breach of duty if they reasonably believe they have ascertained the child’s wishes and reasonably believe their action promotes the child’s best interests. Representatives should consult, wherever practicable, with the guardian (if any), other people who have parental responsibility, and other people who assist the child with day‑to‑day activities or decisions. (See Part 6, paragraphs 6.2–6.4.)\n\n**Why this matters (official rationale and what to check)**\n\n- The Rules implement principles in the NDIS Act that emphasise family involvement, the child’s best interests, and giving children increasing opportunity to make their own decisions as they develop (see paragraph 1.2 and the principles listed in 1.4). They operationalise how those principles are applied: who speaks for the child, when the state steps in, and what checks apply.\n\n- Practical consequences and implementation issues to note:\n  - Decision‑making power: these Rules allocate decision authority (who signs off on plans and supports) to parents, guardians, or, in exceptional cases, other persons or agencies (paragraphs 3.2–3.5; 4.3–4.9). That changes who must interact with the NDIA and who receives/consents to services on the child’s behalf.\n  - Administrative discretion and review risk: the CEO has explicit discretion to override the usual parental/guardian default in defined circumstances (paragraphs 3.3–3.5; 4.4–4.5; 4.8–4.9). This introduces implementation tasks (evidence, consultation, written reasons) and potential disputes where family members disagree.\n  - Information and suitability checks: prospective representatives may be asked to provide information (including consent to release criminal history and suitability to work with children) (paragraphs 3.5(d)(iv), 4.9(f)(i)). That imposes compliance steps and possible delay for approval.\n  - Child autonomy mechanics: the Rules specify how the CEO assesses a child’s capacity to act independently (paragraphs 5.2–5.3). This creates a pathway for older or capable children to manage their own NDIS affairs but requires assessment and support arrangements.\n  - Inter‑jurisdictional coordination: where State/Territory guardians or ministers are involved there are special procedural requirements (written agreement) and normal delegation practices (paragraphs 3.4 and 4.5), so coordination with state systems is required.\n\n**Who pays, who decides, what behaviour changes**\n- Who decides: the NDIS CEO is the primary decision‑maker for appointing or excluding a child’s representative under these Rules (see Parts 3–5). State/Territory guardians or ministers can block a CEO appointment in specific circumstances (written agreement requirement, paragraphs 3.4, 4.5).\n- Who pays: the Rules do not create new costs or fees charged directly to participants; implementation costs fall to the NDIS agency (administration, assessments, criminal‑history checks) and the time/effort costs fall to parents, guardians or other persons who must respond to consultations and information requests.\n- Behaviour changes: prospective representatives may need to provide suitability information, communicate with the CEO, and consult with other carers/guardians. Children judged capable may take on direct decision‑making and reduce the need for a representative.\n\n**Precise statutory hooks**\n- These Rules are made under sections 74, 75 and 76 of the NDIS Act and operationalise who counts as a child’s representative, how parental responsibility is determined, when a child may act for themselves, and the duties of representatives (see Parts 1–7, especially paragraphs 3.1–3.5, 4.1–4.9, 5.1–5.3, 6.2–6.4).\n\n**Limitations of the Rules**\n- The boxed explanatory text summarises the Act but is not operative law (paragraph 7.2). The Rules largely restate and interpret the Act’s decision framework rather than creating new, substantive entitlements or funding rules."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"Unauthenticated. Configure AI_GATEWAY_API_KEY or use a provider module. Learn more: https://ai-sdk.dev/unauthenticated-ai-gateway","source":"analysis-cron"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The Rules appear tightly scoped to their original purpose: operationalising sections 74-76 of the NDIS Act regarding child representatives. The content covers representative appointment, parental responsibility determination, duties, and interpretation without significant expansion beyond this mandate."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple overlapping categories for determining parental responsibility (guardians vs. parental condition 1 vs. parental condition 2)","Nested decision-making criteria: CEO must consider up to 6-7 specific factors when making determinations, some with sub-factors (e.g., paragraph 3.5(d)(iv)(A) and (B))","Cross-referencing between the Rules and the parent Act (sections 74, 75, 76) with boxed notes indicating non-operative summary text","Conditional logic requiring written agreement from State/Territory Ministers or departmental heads in specific scenarios (paragraphs 3.4 and 4.5)","Dual pathways for children with and without guardians creating parallel but slightly different procedural requirements","Defined terms section (paragraph 7.4) with 10 definitions, some referring back to the Act or other paragraphs within the Rules"],"plain_english_summary":"These Rules establish who can make NDIS decisions for children under 18 by creating “child’s representatives” — usually parents or guardians, but the NDIS CEO can appoint someone else in cases of conflict, safety concerns, or uncertainty. Mature children may be allowed to decide for themselves. Representatives must act in the child’s best interests and consult carers. It balances protection with growing autonomy in complex family or care situations."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-children-rules-2013","history":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-children-rules-2013/history","analysis":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-children-rules-2013/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-children-rules-2013/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-children-rules-2013/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/national-disability-insurance-scheme-children-rules-2013/documents"}}