Riven Vincent’s despair over social care cuts signals depth of misery ahead

David Cameron’s promise to Riven Vincent to look into case of her disabled daughter will not stop the pain to come for carers

Riven Vincent’s cry of frustration that she could no longer cope with the exhausting demands of caring for her severely disabled daughter Celyn echoed way beyond the internet talk board where she posted her heartbreaking confession, and planted the issue of social care spending cuts on the front pages of national newspapers.

Her revelation on the Mumsnet website that she had, in desperation, asked social services to take her daughter into care because she had been told by the authorities they could not extend the six hours of respite care she currently received would, ordinarily, have caused few ripples. But Vincent had, nine months previously, become a symbol of prime minister David Cameron’s commitment to protecting society’s most vulnerable citizens. Cameron, whose late son Ivan, like Celyn, had cerebral palsy and severe epilepsy, had visited Vincent and her daughter at home in Bristol during the general election campaign and assured her that if he became prime minister he would not do anything to harm disabled children.

That promise last week began to look a little threadbare. Vincent put out a statement that said: “I had hoped that after David Cameron came to visit me earlier this year following our exchange on Mumsnet he would have done more to protect families like ours.”

Cameron replied that he was going to look “closely” at her case. But the prospects for disabled children and their families and carers look increasingly bleak as local authorities struggle with government-imposed budget reductions of up to 30%, and disabled people prepare for cuts to welfare benefits such as the disability living allowance.

The government has allocated £800m to authorities over four years to enable carers like Vincent to access short breaks and respite care. Campaigners welcomed this, but have pointed out that the money is not ringfenced, meaning there is nothing to stop cash-strapped local authorities from spending the funds on other services. The coalition is ideologically opposed to ringfencing and says local authorities must decide how to spend the money. The Princess Royal Trust for Carers says that when Labour allocated a similarly un-ringfenced £400m for respite care to NHS primary care trusts in 2008, only 23% of the cash found its way into carers’ breaks.

The wider cuts to social care, which begin in earnest in April, are beginning to bite. Carers are being told that their care and support packages will be reduced, while charities are concerned that many carers’ centres, which provide respite care, will be forced to close. The Vincent case could be just the tip of an iceberg of misery.