The government’s decision Javier Milei to dissolve the National Disability Agency (ANDIS) and transfer its functions to the Ministry of Health reignited a conflict that affects thousands of families throughout the country. The measure, announced before the end of the year, adds to the Executive’s refusal to fully comply with the disability emergency lawsanctioned by Congress after months of complaints from the sector and which orders the updating of the nomenclatures and funds that support therapies, supports and transfers.
Among the voices that were raised the loudest is that of the actress Lola Berthetmother of a child diagnosed with autism, who in recent months became one of the public references of the group. For Berthet, the dissolution of ANDIS does not represent an administrative improvement but rather “a setback.”
“ANDIS was created in 2017 due to a historic demand from the sector so that disability be addressed in a comprehensive manner. It is not just health: it is education, transportation, social inclusion. Moving it to Health is going back,” he warned.
The concern is not just symbolic. The emergency law—which the Government refuses to implement in its entirety—seeks to restore values that were far below inflation and that today put at risk the continuity of therapies, therapeutic companions and support teachers. “We are no longer talking about an emergency, but about collapse,” said Berthet in an interview with Delta 90.3. “The nomenclature has not been updated for two years, but contributions continue to be collected. Someone is keeping that difference.”
At the center of the discussion a structural tension appears: the State is not the main direct payer of benefits, but rather the regulator of the system. “The State administers the nomenclature. Those who pay are the social works and the prepaid ones, with contributions that come from the workers’ salaries. Complying with the law does not break the fiscal balance,” the actress stressed.
From the Government, the official argument to close ANDIS points to the corruption scandals detected during 2024, with overpricing and diversion of funds that led to resignations and legal cases. However, for families, the answer cannot be institutional dismantling. “In August they said that the job was finished and that everything was in order. So, why close the agency now?” Berthet asked.
The human dimension runs through the entire claim. Juan Fidel, Lola’s son, is 11 years old and attends a public school with a support teacher. Her therapists—“her friends,” as she defines them—many times maintain the bond beyond the economic. “There are professionals who charge three thousand pesos an hour and continue for love. That should not happen. A vocation cannot replace public policy.”
The impact is not abstract: when a benefit is cut, the effect is immediate and cumulative. “When therapy falls, everything falls. It’s a domino,” he described. And he also warned about the fragility of educational institutions, which often lack tools and training to accompany inclusion. Asked by “El Disparador” about what she would say to the President, Berthet was direct:
“Let him stop. Let him stop with so much hatred. Let him explain to me why he calls our children useless, why he thinks they don’t produce. Let him say it to our faces, not in a tweet.”
The conflict over disability thus became one of the most sensitive fronts of libertarian adjustment. Not only because of the budgetary impact, but because it raises the question of what place acquired rights occupy in the new minimum State scheme promoted by Milei. While Justice set deadlines for the Executive to comply with the law and warned of possible sanctions, families continue to mobilize.
“We never give up,” said Berthet. “We have extra strength that our children give us.” Behind the political and administrative dispute, there are concrete lives that depend on decisions that are currently on hold. And a fundamental debate: whether disability is an expense to be cut or a right to be guaranteed.
by RN
Image gallery
