Dear Diversity Models, Doxxing Disabled Models Is Never Okay
Publicly sharing someone's NDIS number and medical history is not only unethical, it is illegal.
Diversity Models claims to be an agency that proudly “advocates for diversity and inclusion,” yet the founder just spent the last fortnight doxxing her former models.
The founder, Monique Jeremiah, has been facing online backlash after allegations were made on ‘A Current Affair’ claiming Monique was exploiting her disabled models.
Two former models spoke with ‘A Current Affair,’ claiming the founder was “pocketing more than her fair share” at the agency.
In the weeks since, Monique has consistently denied any wrongdoing.
However, her online behaviour has undermined her efforts in showing that Diversity Models is a place that welcomes ‘diversity and inclusion.’
On Tuesday 30th September Monique Jeremiah uploaded an hour long YouTube video in response to the allegations shared on ‘A Current Affair.’
She said this was “the start of an extensive attack on her professional and personal public image and company across Australia.”
In the video she doxxed one of the former models that was featured in ‘A Current Affair.’
She disclosed the model’s NDIS number, personal email, date of birth, her plan manager’s full name, her plan manager’s email, her plan manager’s phone number, her support worker’s full name, her support worker’s email, and even shared the model’s medical history.
In the now deleted video, Monique also admitted to using AI to track the model’s whereabouts using a recent Facebook photo.
She said the model was “unreliable,” “dishonest,” “driven by her greed for money” and “desperate for work and income from the NDIS.”
In the wake of the ‘A Current Affair’ drama, another model bravely came forward and shared her experience with Monique at Diversity Models.
She said in a photoshoot involving fifteen disabled models, “Monique would almost always place herself in the centre of the photos.”
She also saw Monique ask one of the models to hold a walking cane despite her not needing one.
“Monique called it a prop and the disabled girl was verbally upset about this,” the model shared in a recent Facebook post, “I felt so uncomfortable when this happened and realised she had no knowledge on people with disabilities.”
“The cover of the photoshoot was eventually released and of course Monique was on the front of the Disability Support Guide - I say this, not because I expected to be on the cover, but I expected actual disabled people to be featured (as this was what we were casted for!). She reached out to me to become a model for Diversity Models but expected a large sum of money for sign up fees, portfolio images and hair and makeup. It was extremely unaffordable for a disabled person, yet this is the community that her company is apparently supporting. I actually wrote to Monique in 2023 letting her know that the costs were unreasonable for disabled people to afford. I did not become a model with this agency and I’m so angry and upset to see that Monique is ripping off other disabled people continuously… I believe it is very important for her to be investigated by the NDIS and have her company shut down.”
In response to this post, Diversity Models doxxed the model and shared her full name in a Facebook post - her last name was anonymous on her Facebook profile.
Monique accused the former model of adding “more toxicity in the NDIS sector” and claimed she held a “two year grudge for not getting selected to be in the magazine.”
“We understand you’ve got to project your grudge somewhere, we are sure A Current Affair would love another interview, perhaps this time with evidence from us that will make a liar out of the show and of the participants who appeared,” as written on the Diversity Models Facebook page, “glad to see you got confidence being a troll online - that’s a great achievement nevertheless right.”
The controversy surrounding Monique and Diversity Models unsurprisingly doesn’t stop there.
In the original ‘A Current Affair’ story, reporters shared archive footage of Monique Jeremiah speaking about diversity on the SBS program, ‘Insight.’
During the 2024 episode, she proudly said Diversity Models “exercises positive discrimination,” adding that the agency does not welcome models that are “anorexic” or “excessively obese.”
“We [also] don’t really represent trans or gender fluids or that particular demographic because that’s not what our clients are looking for,” said Monique, “they’re looking for models that are traditionally male, traditionally female, but under the pillars of multicultural, curve, mature aged and disabilities.”
In the now deleted hour long YouTube video, Monique addressed her use of “positive discrimination.”
She said her agency doesn’t take on other types of diversity because it is “out of their scope” and “not in their skilled area.”
“We do not run a modelling agency which is just based on dreams,” said Monique, “I do not apologise for who we represent because I am proud of our Diversity Models and proud of the models we represent.”
“Yes I’m traditional but I also focus on the people I know I can actually achieve work for. Because I’m not going to sell someone a dream that will never happen. So for everyone that criticises who we represent, think about it, would you like a company to sell you a dream that’s never going to come true? I certainly wouldn’t do that. I represent the people that I know I would achieve employment with and I will still to my guns… I do not apologise for who we represent because I am proud of our Diversity Models and proud of the models we represent.”
Now Monique claims she’s been “the subject of malicious hatred attacks” by the LGBTQIA+ community.
As stated before, Diversity Models focuses on four diversity pillars - two of which include ‘multicultural’ and ‘disabilities.’
Yet just last month Diversity Models shared two videos praising One Nation leader Pauline Hanson - a woman most known for her harmful attitudes towards Muslims, First Nations people, immigrants and people with disabilities.
“Pauline Hanson is an incredible leader who sticks to her morals, stands her ground, telling it like it is and never playing the victim,” as shared on the Diversity Models Facebook page, “a real leader stays true to herself and the community she positively advocates for, no matter the critics.”
Just a reminder - Pauline Hanson told Parliament autistic children should be removed from mainstream schools.
She also said “people with mild autism” shouldn’t be eligible for NDIS funding and even claimed too many NDIS recipients are “wasting” their funding “for things like illicit drug purchases, new cars and over-priced holidays.”
This is the same woman Diversity Models calls an “inspiration.”
“Pauline Hanson is right, we are all for positive use of funding from both provider and participant perspectives,” as shared in a post on the Diversity Models Facebook page, “but there’s areas which can be improved.”
This baffling behaviour from Monique and Diversity Models has rattled the disability community.
The NDIS Participants and Providers Australia Facebook page has been using their platform to call out Monique Jeremiah and Diversity Models.
They first became aware of the company “when models and families in the disability community began raising concerns about their experiences with the agency.”
“Their stories echoed the very issues later exposed on A Current Affair — people with disability being charged thousands of dollars in fees, pressured to appear ‘more disabled’ for photo shoots, and underpaid for work while the agency allegedly pocketed the difference,” says the founder, “what stood out most was how vulnerable individuals, who simply wanted an opportunity to pursue modelling and representation, were left feeling undervalued, discriminated against, and financially taken advantage of.”
“The NDIS exists to empower participants, not to see them exploited through unfair contracts, excessive joining fees, or events where people were effectively paying to work.” - NDIS Participants and Providers Australia
The page’s founder says the reaction has been “overwhelmingly one of frustration, anger, and betrayal.”
“The community generally been shocked and disappointed by Monique’s behaviour over the last couple of weeks,” says the founder, “many are questioning how an organisation claiming to empower people with disability could fail so significantly in upholding consent, dignity, and ethical practice.”
Diversity Models has publicly called NDIS Participants and Providers Australia an “online bully,” and has even faced pushback from Monique’s partner, Luan Memishi.
Luan is a builder/carpenter at LMMJ Constructions.
He’s also a model at Diversity Models and is often featured on their social media, yet recent comments from Monique herself suggest otherwise.
“I am no longer associated with this individual as of 3rd Sept,” Monique wrote on social media last month, “I directly was informed they do not pay their contractors, have outstanding significant debts, leave jobs unfinished and I wish to not be associated with him and his unethical and dishonest practices in any capacity.”
It’s important to preface that I’ve met both Monique Jeremiah and Luan Memishi - my friend/client used to be a model at the agency.
As a disability support worker, I’ve witnessed two Diversity Models photoshoots.
From what I saw I found Monique’s behaviour somewhat cringeworthy, icky and quite aloof.
But then there were a few moments that made me feel uneasy.
I saw her take my client’s mobility stick and give it to another model to use as a prop during a shoot.
She even had all the models pass around a baby with down syndrome like a weird version of pass the parcel - I know this because she had me film it.
But Monique’s problematic behaviour went to new heights this past fortnight.
She showed zero accountability for her actions and wasted her time and energy attacking the disability community whilst playing the victim.
Disability advocate Jasmin, who runs the page Babes With Mobility Aids, says Monique could’ve used this time to “listen, learn, and rebuild trust.”
“Instead of addressing the very real concerns being raised by models and members of the disability community, she has deflected, attacked critics, and failed to take accountability,” says Jasmin, “for someone positioning herself as a champion of inclusion, the lack of transparency and respect shown has been deeply concerning.”
Jasmin says it’s important people now “channel that anger into collective action.”
She urges others to report their concerns to “the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission, support disabled-led initiatives, and amplify the voices of those directly impacted.”
“But we also need to push for systemic change: the NDIS’s slow and inadequate response has been deeply concerning,” says Jasmin, “it makes me question whether their priority is truly protecting participants - or just cost-cutting, even when that means stripping vital supports from disabled people who need them most.”
*Monique Jeremiah declined to comment on the article due to my association with a former model at Diversity Models.
*Both models featured in this story were contacted and made aware their already public stories would be shared in this article. For extra safety measures, I chose not to share their names. I also chose to blur the faces of all current and former models at Diversity Models (excluding Monique Jeremiah and her partner).
*The original Diversity Models page was removed due to reporting. They appear to now operate under ‘Diversity Models Academy’ on Facebook and ‘Monique Jeremiah Model’ on Instagram.
This story remains an ongoing investigation with Kaleidoscope News.
Just saw the tail end of her interview on ACA as I was walking through the room. And holy fucking shit what a trainwreck.
Saying she was in hospital with “symptoms of a stroke” and she's now eligible for the NDIS because she is at risk of a stroke???
i noticed the baby in the images and found it so cringeworthy - you get this ick feeling of some enforced "purity" in the shots, selling some kind of weird cult-vibe of "happy, free, people." The baby in the shoots looked out of place. I am so so disgusted by the fact that the Comission hasn't responded. They are responsible as they registered her. I wish there was a response and a swift one.