Friday, 23 January 2015

Who really wants a named person for their child ?

School children
From a wordpress blogger:
"If there is one thing that needs to happen its that families who have a child with a disability or a life long condition receive the same service. Its not even a postcode lottery for us (I hate when people say that), it is merely down to who works for us. We as families receive a patchy service that is inconsistent and full of judgements. GIRFEC will really help with this and it is one change that as a parent, child or young person we need to know a bit (not everything but enough) about so that if professionals don’t mention it to us we can mention it to them and we can also have a bit of knowledge about what it involves and how our child can benefit from this. If you are up to it and you can be bothered then check out the GIRFEC National Practice Model ‘A Guide to Getting It Right For Every Child‘ has all the information you need."
This is a Blogger with a disabled child who is full of hope that GIRFEC is going to make a difference, and sad for all that.

Written in June 2013, she probably does not realise that despite the rhetoric, GIRFEC and the named person have not been set up to help children in need. There is no money for that. GIRFEC is about monitoring and databasing the private lives of all children from birth to 18. It has more to say about data sharing than it does about addressing needs.

When the Scottish Government informs us that Scottish parents asked for the named person as a single point of contact, they are being duplicitous. The only parents who would look for a single point of contact are parents exhausting themselves running around the various agencies trying to get a care package together for their needy children.

Most parents in Scotland do not have a child in need. No parent in their right mind would request a named person to monitor their parenting and oversee the wellbeing of their children.

Holyrood, a current affairs magazine, has reported on the legal challenge against the named person proposal and Jackie Brock`s comment.
"Children in Scotland chief executive Jackie Brock said concerns over the proposal was the result of a "misunderstanding" of what the proposal would involve in practice."
How belittling ! As if discerning parents cannot see that the proposed named person scheme involves gathering the personal data of all children so that it is there - all of it - at the click of a mouse, hence the build up of digital data storage systems.

Liz Smith is one MSP who got it right. "I firmly believe the named person policy remains a huge error of judgement on the part of the Scottish Government,."... "It is neither necessary nor wanted by the vast majority of parents across Scotland who see it as a completely unacceptable intrusion into family life. It is also a policy which will divert resources away from our most vulnerable children at a time when local authorities are already overstretched."


  1. I entirely agree. And how on earth will it work in practice? If I move my family from - for example - Ayrshire to Edinburgh and my 'named person' is in Ayrshire, what happens next? If I really dislike my child's named person and disagree with their entire stance on pretty much everything (and I can think of one teacher about whom I felt like this!) what can I do about it? Nothing? And how many kids to one named person? How will they cope? And what if my child's named person turns out to be a paedophile - like the late postmaster / retired police sergeant / kirk elder who was convicted of horrific abuse in this village. I was speaking about this to a friend from England over the weekend. She said 'I wouldn't put up with it if I had a child. I'd rather move.' I must say, I feel the same. If I had young children and this was foisted on me, I'd head over the border as soon as possible. But then 'they'll agree with it if we explain it better' is always the last resort of the undemocratic politician.

  2. Thanks for your comment. For me, this crazy proposal never loses its shock value.

    How will it work in practice? It`s going to mean more interference in family life. Piloted in Highland Council, 8,000 children were placed on a child plan, as opposed to what used to happen - ie an average of 65 or so placed on the child protection register. It`s going to mean more young children, including babies, being taken into care. This was admitted by Children`s Minister Aileen Campbell and she saw that as a good thing. That`s what happens when the state intervenes before there`s a crisis.

    Given that, it`s going to mean parents having to appease the demands of the named person, or else.