“IN a life of caring for somebody with serious needs, everything’s a fight,” says Keynsham father Richard Franklin.

On top of the everyday demands of being a carer, parents of the young people in Bath and North East Somerset with the most severe needs have spent the last year fighting to save the respite care home which their children depend on. Finally they won.

Mr Franklin said: “It’s a big relief for us, and not just myself but all the families.”

Newton House, on the edge of Bath, is the only place in Bath and North East Somerset which offers young people with the most severe care needs a place to stay for a short break away from their families. The home has specially adapted space for people with complex physical disabilities, as well as learning difficulties. For the Franklins, the service is a “lifeline.”

Richard and Julie Franklin’s son, Ryan Probert, has an unbalanced translocation of chromosomes. This means he is small, is non-verbal, and needs medication and a very high level of care. Over time, the Franklins built up trust with the staff at Newton House, who learnt Ryan’s needs.

For some parents like Wendy Lucas, the two days a week her daughter Rhiannon spends at Newton House are the only times she gets a full night’s sleep. Without Newton House, she said their lives would not function.

But at the end of 2024, families were given two month’s notice that the service would be shut down. A letter from Bath and North East Somerset Council and care provider Dimensions said it had become “unaffordable.” The council later apologised for the letter, which it said had been an “error” as alternate provision had not been found for everyone using Newton House.

Derek Greenman said the news was a “bombshell.” His son Michael has quadriplegic cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and cannot speak, and uses the short break service at Newton House.

For parents used to fighting for their children, the letter was a call to action. Mr Franklin launched a petition and his local councillor Dave Biddleston (Keynsham South, Labour), who is a customer of his window cleaning business, helped him raise the issue with the council. The closure was quickly put on pause for several months— but parents pushed for Newton House’s future to be secured.

On January 13, 2025, Mr and Mrs Franklin, Ms Lucas, and Mr Greenman all came to a meeting of a council scrutiny committee discussing the closure to share their stories and urge councillors to save the home. Parents were invited to join a council working group looking at the issue, and have been a constant presence at the scrutiny committee every time the issue has been discussed.

Now, after a year long fight, parents were invited to a meeting on January 13 — a year to the day that they came to the council to share their stories — to be told that the Newton House short breaks service would be recommissioned for another five to seven years. Mr Franklin said: “When I got home with Julie the pair of us just cried together.”

Ms Lucas said she was “beyond overjoyed”, adding: “I can not emphasise what a huge relief this is and a complete vindication of everything we have been telling the council in meetings for the past 12 months. It’s also proof that parent power really does matter.”

Mr Greenman said: “This is a good result. At least we start the new year knowing that we can all plan our lives. I think that’s what people don’t understand [if they are] not involved in looking after someone with special needs.”

On January 19, the future of Newton House was raised at the scrutiny committee for what parents hope will be the last time, as the council’s cabinet member for adult social care Alison Born informed the committee that she was “delighted” that the council has been able to recommission the service. The council said it is able to issue a direct award to keep it open thanks to new powers introduced in the Procurement Act 2023 as there was no other service in the area.

Ms Born said: “I am confident there shouldn’t be further hurdles. As well as working with the families, we have also been working with the provider. They are on board with the process so I don’t think we are in a position where we are going to offer them a contract that they are not going to want to take.”

She said: “I think the relationships with the families are now well established and the families will continue to be kept well informed on any developments.”

Vice chair of the scrutiny panel Liz Hardman said: “I would like to point out that the issue was brought by the carers of the people that they care for to this scrutiny panel. And I do believe we had a very big part to play in getting the whole issue resolved.”

She said: “It was the publicity around the whole issue that actually brought about negotiations leading to the eventual change in outcomes for the carers.”

Mr Franklin and Mr Greenman both attended the meeting. Ms Born told them: “I would just like to thank you very much for the work that you did with our officers on helping us reach that conclusion. It was a really positive and constructive process and it was a good example of co-production, albeit from a rather shaky start.”

Asked what the council would do to make sure the situation did not happen again, Ms Born said: “The important thing is that we don’t make any important decisions — certainly not decisions of that magnitude, but any decisions — which are around changing the way that we provide services for people, without involving the people who use those services in them.

“That doesn’t mean we won’t ever have to make difficult decisions but we will be making those decisions in a fully informed way with the people who would be most affected by them.”

Mr Franklin said: “I think it could have been avoided if they had been more open. I think the council recognises that as well. But we are happy with the result and we are hopeful that we don’t have to be put in this position again going forward — and not just for myself and the people using it now but the future and people coming up through the system as well.”

The petition he started was signed by 2,956 people before signatures were closed as it was declared a victory.