LONDON – 17 December 2025: A dispute in Telford over who provides hands‑on home care to a 33‑year‑old disabled woman has laid bare the human impact of squeezed local authority social care budgets and commissioning practices. The woman, who uses a wheelchair and lives with cerebral palsy, chronic pain and mental health conditions, says a decision to transfer her care to a different supplier would amount to a ‘‘safeguarding issue’’ and an assault on her dignity.
The client moved to Telford from Milton Keynes in August after experiencing multiple falls. She was initially supported on a short‑term basis by a domiciliary care agency, but that arrangement was only authorised for three months and has now ended. According to a letter seen by reporters from the woman’s GP, she requires ‘‘hands‑on care support for 12 hours a day’’ and any interruption would, in the doctor’s view, represent a ‘‘serious safeguarding issue’’ that could lead to further neglect.
Citing the need for continuity and a formal needs assessment, the woman has refused to allow a provider handover. She told Local Democracy Reporting journalists that she does not want to be faced with another group of carers she does not know while receiving intimate personal care, describing that prospect as degrading. She also accused a council manager who visited her of focusing on budgets and potential cuts to hours rather than the practical risks to her safety and dignity.
Telford & Wrekin Council has said it is facilitating a changeover to an alternative provider and insisted commissioned support would not stop. The authority confirmed, without commenting on the individual case, that those receiving services had been informed of the transition. The council has previously acknowledged significant financial pressures in adult social care, particularly for older people and working‑age adults with disabilities.
As councils across England contend with rising demand, workforce challenges and constrained resources, commissioning decisions — including which agencies appear on approved provider lists and the length of short‑term funding packages — are increasingly consequential for vulnerable people. Short‑term placements and restricted approved‑supplier frameworks can leave people dependent on an initial provider without a clear continuity plan when that arrangement ends, critics say.
Advocates and clinicians argue that provider changes for people receiving intensive personal care should only proceed following a fresh formal assessment and with the informed consent of the person receiving care. In this case, the GP’s letter explicitly warns of the risk to health and safety from any lapse or change in support before such an assessment is completed.
Campaigners for disabled people say the Telford dispute is symptomatic of a sector under strain: the interaction of commissioning constraints, limited local authority budgets and a fragile domiciliary care market can expose people to delays, changes in personnel and, in some instances, reduced hours. They are calling for clearer protocols to protect continuity of intimate care and for councils to prioritise safeguarding when managing provider transitions.
The woman at the centre of the row has a background in legal studies and said she is prepared to fight to protect her rights and dignity. The Local Democracy Reporting Service first reported the story, highlighting the tensions that can arise when fiscal pressures intersect with the needs of people who rely on sustained, intimate support in their own homes.
Contacted for further comment, Telford & Wrekin Council reiterated that support would continue while the changeover is arranged. The case is likely to prompt renewed scrutiny of how councils commission home care and manage provider lists where continuity is critical to safety and quality of life.
Source: BBC News
