Mel Kelly has put across her view strongly - some would say too strongly - but she does recognise that when the state displaces parents, children are more vulnerable to institutional abuse.
In the Scotsman article, on the other hand, Ruth Davidson worries that appointing a Named Person for every child will result in overstretched resources and the possibility of another Baby P tragedy.
She added: "I think it is wrong that the government of a country can impose a guardian to watch over your child without consent, and without reason to believe that child needs protection. It is a grave violation of the right to a family life, a provision which includes the right to the holding of private information."
Most commenters see Davidson`s criticism of the Named Person scheme as political posturing but are woefully misinformed about its implications. There is a balance needed between the public and private spheres in order to keep power in check. But this legislation, with its joined up working and integrated services, is building a super-state that will totally engulf the individual child.
For an informed breakdown of the article see the Home Education Forum at the link below: