Sunday, 22 February 2015

The politics of early interventions

There is a good article in the Scotsman speaking out against the named person legislation:
The private sphere has since been targeted as the cause of social problems. It is an approach that suits politicians, for it is one that eschews social and political solutions to real problems. Forget improving education or growing the economy, ignore structural issues; if you haven’t hugged your son or daughter often enough before they turn three, you have caused untold damage.
Up until this legislation, professionals involved in children’s lives had to have a particular professional reason to be there – education or health or concerns about abuse. Now they are present full-time because they have been officially appointed by the state. Up until this law, state intervention required justification. That is no longer the case.  

Those who believe that voting against the SNP will get rid of the named person are mistaken. It is more insidious than that, as it mentions in the article:
The named person is supported by the main opposition and many children’s welfare organisations.
Those who believe they can escape the intrusions of the named person by moving to other parts of the UK need to know that all systems employed by the named person are already in place there. These shifts cut across all the main political parties. They include the shift towards lower thresholds of concern, early interventions, multi-agency working and data sharing. A lead agent is brought into play once a family is on the radar for low levels of concern. It is this cluster of ideas which threaten and undermine all families.

True, the named person takes this one step further and is a warning to everyone, but the political will is already there to interfere in family life.

People need to see the bigger picture.

No comments:

Post a Comment