Guardians for all children

[HazyMazy]

I don't normally follow Scottish politics, just Westminster, however was watching the mid day prog, First Ministers questions, on tv lately.

I was wondering how the Guardian for every child in Scotland, legislation passed by the SnP in 2014, went down with Scottish mums.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11221902/Legal-fight-starts-over-SNP-state-guardian-for-every-child.html

It seems a crazy idea, though well meaning, and had I been a mum of young DCs at the time would have been incensed.
Was there an outcry at the time? I don't think the law has been removed.

The school might have a concern. Social work might have a suspicion. The GP might notice something. The three concerns might never be joined up

I have to say that the school are not doing their duty to the child if they do not pass concerns onto SServices. Likewise the GP, I should think.

My point was that having one person who gets all the information and is the one point of contact simplifies things and prevents important information slipping through the cracks.

I was just reading up on this the other day. The media have tried to blow it up but it makes a lot of sense. One person to link agencies and co-ordinate to help parents provide care and protect children if concerns are raised. Children do fall through the gap and when they do people complain that nothing was done - but when something is done its criticized. There is a big emphasis in what I read on supporting parents. Its not about taking kids away.

This falls down when you consider that one HT can be the Named Person for hundreds of children. It isn't 1-1, it's 1-400. When children at risk can often be clustered in more deprived areas, it gives HTs a huge extra burden

Good idea, poorly executed then? Have more teachers be the Named Persons so they don't have so many children per person? I like the system they have in my country where schools have social workers and psychologists assigned and they meet regularly with the head teacher and any teachers or outsiders involved with children (youth workers for example) and concerns about children can be raised and discussed there.

Do children fall through the gap?

Isn't usually that someone - police or teacher, for example, didn't do what they are already supposed to do.

And if they are adding a layer of authority are they adding the extra staff required to deal with this???

Well sorting out the almighty cock up that is Police Scotland would help more then the pointless red tape of this unimplementable legislation. A good teacher will report concerns but should not have to bear the accountability of being the 'named person' when there is inadequate police follow up.

Absolutely not; I trained to be a teacher, not a social worker Voluntarily of course, I would suggest teachers be forced into it but I expect they'd be more than just one teacher per school who would want to involve themselves more.

Well if teachers didn't have such big workloads to begin with. Hmm needs more thinking through.

I like the system they have in my country where schools have social workers and psychologists assigned and they meet regularly with the head teacher and any teachers or outsiders involved with children (youth workers for example) and concerns about children can be raised and discussed there.

So you don't live in Scotland then?

No I don't, saw this on active though and didn't even realise this was on the Scotsnet bit until now...sorry! I am half Scottish though.

Natsku - did you not read the OP though? It talks about Scottish legislation and the SNP... :o

I just assumed it was a chat or onthenews thread, oops! But I did read up a bit on it after seeing it mentioned before on some active thread and liked the sound of it but it does seem like its being poorly executed and not really thought out but is based on a good idea.

Some of the responses on this thread demonstrate that many people in Scotland have just sleepwalked into allowing this Orwellian legislation to be passed. Those of you who think it's a good thing, have you actually read the legislation? Despite what you may think this is no service to be used at parents request, every child will have a state guardian who has absolute power to decide what is in your child's best interests without consulting, or even telling, parents what's going on. If your child's state guardian decides that something is necessary for your child's wellbeing, then it will happen - even if you as parents are completely opposed. The previous thread linked to above has lots more detail.

And the cost to,date of this legislation to help the estimated 3000 children in danger of abuse?? £61 million and rising, and the legislation is not yet in force. just think what else could have been done with the money!

Hazy those of us in Scotland who are not in thrall to the odious Nicola Sturgeon are hoping that the Supreme Court will rule that the state guardian legislation is incompatible with the HRA. If they do, I hope this will be enough to have the whole thing scrapped.

Anthony I'm not quite sure how we have managed to avoid the brainwashing. If this is scrapped, I suggest that the SNP pay it out of their pocket - they could do that instead of spending the money on brainwashing- election packs which they are trying to get into every high school. This on top of 2 16 year old pupils from every High school being summoned for a personal brainwashing session by the lovely NS. Don't look in her eyes kids....

I read the other thread and there seems to be a lot of concern about things I don't understand. For instance why the concern about that questionnaire? And the person that had a concern about the nursery teacher asking questions about how their child gets on at home? What's the actual concern here?

I think it must be something in the water OneMagnum ! If any other party carried on the way the SNP do there would be howls of protest from all corners. They really are the pits. I'm still waiting for news about what is happening to my MP - you know the one whose solicitor carried out a whole lot of transactions for her and was struck off because in the words of the disciplinary tribunal, his actions were clearly designed to facilitate mortgage fraud! No sign of the odious Michelle being prosecuted so far. Surprisingly the SNP no longer want anything to do with her and as a result their numbers have been reduced at Westminster.

Natsku people are concerned becuase the state guardian legislation represents the state interfering in families lives where no such interference is warranted or necessary. Also, You might be happy that what you thought was confidential information about your child or family is shared between medical, education and social work for no good reason, but I am not.

I am sure there must be some dedicated, intelligent, honest and compassionate SNP MPs out there maybe. Unfortunately the rise to power was fast and they had to scrape the bottom of a particularly mingin barrel to fill all the seats. In the meantime some dedicated local representatives that were doing a lot for their communities (and some arseholes tbf) lost their seats.

I just wish the Scottish population would give their heads a wobble.

Where were the SNP on "Independence day" telling us what we would have won.....?

My FB stream is full of "we are the 45" and "don't come moaning to us yessers about the Tories" etc. I just want to reply - "well we are the 55 so fuck off" and "don't come moaning to me when big brother takes over your life" I instead choose to occupy the moral high ground (an drink bottled water just in case)

Maybe the problem is that not enough of the 55% tell the 45 to fuck off when they start their devisive whining. Or maybe we should just call them Losers (in a sing songy chanty voice) to see if they get the message.

Good tip re the bottled water. Do you think I should go with English or French just to be on the safe side?