Named Person / State Guardians

[cdtaylornats]

That started off well

A teacher appointed one of Scotland’s first “state guardians” faces a lifetime ban from working with children.

Dayna Dickson-Boath was yesterday struck off the teaching register for sharing fantasies about abusing youngsters.

www.scotsman.com/news/politics/teacher-appointed-first-named-person-state-guardian-struck-off-1-4014998#ixzz3yd6RqX21

But how is putting more responsibility on already overworked people going to stop children from slipping through the safety net?

It's slip-shod, poorly written, knee-jerk legislation of the same ilk as the deplorable anti-sectarianism legislation the SNP passed a few years ago that will do nothing to solve the problem.

Genuinely all that changes is that actually now cases of neglect or a lack of care can be caught early because the versions agencies must talk to each other.

my concern about the legislation is more from the other side - say I don't pick up on something? Am I to blame?

crisps it is touching that you have such faith in the legislation, but it really is very poorly drafted (as is much of the legislation that comes out of the Scottish govt). They really need to send to England for some parliamentary draftsmen.

And nothing personal crisps but hopefully the named person will be blamed as that is something which might put a stop to the ludicrous nonsense due to no one being willing to act as a named person.

I am not sure patronising me is fair. I am not saying I am without concern but I feel the accusations of professionals in a role of child protection suddenly becoming nazi type henchmen deeply distressing and completely unnecessary.

Seperate out a dislike of the snp (which I share) with what actually happens in practice.

I missed a post anthony. I do appreciate that most parents certainly do fulfil that role really well. But to presume that it should be as simple as that is incredibly short sighted. Many children go without adequate parenting and thus their life chances are affected.

My children are no longer pre school age but if they were I would be very concerned that a health visitor would be their named person. I refused all health visitor involvement for my second and third child but I doubt this will now be allowed. No doubt I would be reported for failing my children if I refused to see a health visitor.

I completely understand that many children are failed by their parents crisps and more needs to be done to help them. However I am very firmly of the view that the named person scheme is not the way to do that. And apologies if you felt patronised, it wasn't my intention.

Have to go and feed my children now - don't want to be accused of affecting their happiness by not dishing up dinner on time

Really, none needed. I am concerned for tbe reasons stated before and I agree re HV. So I need to remind myself about others in such a role who may not act as would be hoped.

I do feel a bit now as if I am in a position of never winning - do nothing and I risk legal action. Take action and I risk alienating parents and potential legal action. Everyone's scape goat for doing something I have done for many years already without the poisoned chalice of a title

And mine is chucking books around while I type. Don't ask don't tell!

www.nspcc.org.uk/services-and-resources/research-and-resources/statistics/

This is the reason for GIRFEC. An estimated 400,000 children in the UK needing protection from abuse (according to the NSPCC), with only 1 in 8 having been successfully identified.

Sorry, that should actually read 50,000 currently needing protection with a further 400,000 estimated to be suffering abuse. Only 1 in 9 abused children are currently picked up by the existing system.

Anthony, a couple of things.

I suspect your comment about sending Scots legislation to England for proper drafting was somewhat tongue in cheek?

And, head teachers will not be routinely demanding information from other agencies, there has always been and will continue to be resistance from the other agencies to do so, and head teachers don't have the time or resources to investigate family lives themselves. They will continue to escalate concerns to social services and other agencies, at which point the named person may change. But a school reporting a concern is not a guarantee that another agency will investigate either. Not by a long way.

And! There are clearly defined wellbeing indicators within GIRFEC, happiness isn't one of them.

Who is going to be the state guardian for a home educated child?

Would you be happy if the guardian was of a different religious bent?

It gets more sinister when you consider the plans for the id database www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/02/scottish-identity-database-plans-privacy-risk-ministers-warned

If you consider that the 120 agencies who can access this might well be able to see opinion recorded by the guardian about your child.

It wasn't entirely tongue in cheek jaggy. This www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_EducationandCultureCommittee/Children%20and%20Young%20People%20(Scotland)%20Bill/FacultyofAdvocates.pdf explains very well what is wrong both with the drafting and substance of the legislation.

Angels, there's a wee bit more detail within GIRFEC than just the indicator titles... And I'd suggest that teachers never report whims. Head teachers might pass on observations or the details of a disclosure from a child. And again, the service they pass this on to then decides what to do with the information. None of this is new.

"Would you be happy if the guardian was of a different religious bent?"

Unless it was the sort of religion that Katy Morgan-Davies was raised in, how would it be relevant? Interfering purely because of a religion would be a lawsuit waiting to happen, there does have to be actual justifiable concerns.

jaggy. Of course teachers should always have passed on their concerns so that is not new. What is new is the right of the state to interfere in a child's life even if there is no reason to do so. The legislation effectively puts the state in the position of ultimate parent for all children at all times. Scarey stuff!

Familiarise yourselves with the term "corporate parent".

Until now the fact that you are your child's parent gave you automatic rights to decide family life which could only be removed in extreme circumstances. That parental right has now been bestowed upon a total stranger who equals your role in law and as such is under no obligation to consult you on any matter regarding your child.

There is no increase in resource for child protection only a dilution of existing responsibilities and the total overall removal of obligation to work in conjunction with families. The Act as it has been passed is deeply sinister and sadly will take a long time to undo because so many people are buying this bullshit about child protection. My children have two parents, there is no need for a third appointment in that role against the wishes of my family but that is what the law has enacted for every family in Scotland.

That third parent is down to the luck of the draw and only when it all goes badly wrong over and over will that be changed. One abuser caught so far and the scheme hasn't really kicked in yet, what will it take to make you research this and protect your children from this madness?

I predict that at some point the Scottish Government is going to be dragged into court over this and will end up falling foul of the Human Rights Act - specifically the right to enjoy family life. If I was going to be a "named person" I would be making very sure I could in no way be held liable. It strikes me you could also run into problems with libel law.

I agree cd I don't think it will be long before parents bring a court case about the way the named person has interfered in their and their children's lives. The legislation and the guidance that has had to be issued alongside it (because it he legislation is so wooly and badly drafted) are so wide ranging that it seems inevitable that some interfering named person will overstep the mark.

NO2NP NEWS UPDATE
This is a wee bit from the latest newsletter, sorry it is so long, I can't get the links to copy but you get the jist...

The NO2NP campaign has had a busy start to the year with Roadshows and Action Days already taking place in Greenock and Falkirk, with further events planned for Dunfermline, Perth and Aberdeen this month.

The Named Person Judicial Review will be heard in the Supreme Court on the 8th and 9th March and the scheme itself is due to be rolled out across Scotland in August. Do keep taking action in your communities to say NO to Named Persons and encouraging people to sign the NO2NP petition, which is now at almost 17,500.

Named Persons continue to make headlines in the national newspapers as more people speak out about concerns and further information is uncovered revealing increasing problems with the scheme.

In the news...

JANUARY

NAMED PERSONS BASED ON ‘DUBIOUS PHILOSOPHY’, WARNS SCOTS EDITOR
Alex Massie, Scotland Editor of The Spectator and a regular columnist in The Times, raised concerns about the “dubious philosophy” influencing the Named Person scheme and said the plan sends a message from the Government that it “does not trust the people”.

NAMED PERSON CHILD SEX OFFENDER STRUCK OFF BY TEACHING COUNCIL
A teacher who served as a Named Person for 200 pupils has been struck off the teaching register after being found guilty of child sex offences. Dayna Dickson-Boath was appointed one of the first Named Persons in Scotland, but could now be banned from working with children for the rest of her life.

NHS LOTHIAN: ‘WE DON’T HAVE THE STAFF TO COPE WITH NAMED PERSON SCHEME’
One of Scotland’s biggest health boards, NHS Lothian, is facing serious staff shortages and admits it is unlikely to be able to meet the extra demands of the Named Person scheme when it is rolled out later this year.

DECEMBER

TAXI DRIVERS RECRUITED UNDER GIRFEC TO SPY ON CHILDREN
In a secret recording, a child protection training officer was caught disclosing that taxi drivers are now under a legal duty to spy on child passengers and report information to Named Persons if they are to keep their contract with the council.

NAMED PERSONS BEING ‘TRAINED TO SUSPECT PARENTS’, WARNS SOCIOLOGIST
Leading sociologist and supporter of the NO2NP campaign, Dr Stuart Waiton, cautioned that “every single professional who comes into contact with children is being trained to be suspicious of parents”.

THE CURIOUS INCIDENT OF THE DISAPPEARING EXPERT COMMITTEE
In November we asked the Scottish Government to explain the mystery behind the sudden disbandment of an expert steering group set up to oversee the introduction of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014.

NAMED PERSONS: STATE CONTROL WE SHOULD ALL BE QUESTIONING
A Courier newspaper columnist warned that the Named Person scheme “authorises the invasion of privacy”, “sanctions intrusion into every aspect of a child’s life” and raises data sharing concerns.

ROADSHOWS AND ACTION DAYS
We have been so encouraged by all of you who have joined with us at Roadshows and Action Days across Scotland to say NO to Named Persons. This month we will be in Dunfermline, Perth and Aberdeen. For more information and to look out for an event near you visit: no2np.org/roadshow

SHARE THE PETITION
Help us get to 20,000 by sharing the petition widely in your communities. If you have a smart phone perhaps you could add no2np.org to your favourites, so you are ready to help people sign the petition on the go as you share your concerns.