http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Named Person - is it really such a good/bad idea en Sun, 31 May 2026 20:12:33 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661&page=2#post-225972 Mon, 01 Aug 2016 12:53:16 +0000 spytfyre 225972@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm not a fan of NP scheme. Way too jumpy way too much personal info freely made available and if something goes wrong you are not going to get your kids back. Not to mention the stress put on the head teacher who already has a busy enough day job and the fear of making a mistake either way more likely to lead to mistakes made on the over cautious side and again bye-bye children. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661&page=2#post-225923 Sun, 31 Jul 2016 23:30:30 +0000 ih 225923@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@SRD Rereading the Kevin McKenna article, it is pretty critical. He starts by saying it's "well-intentioned but inadvertently sinister" and it goes downhill from there.</p> <p>Having started this thread I would like to thank you all for your thoughtful and informative posts and for indulging me in a non-cycling thread; I am much more aware of the issues than I was three days ago.</p> <p>My view has shifted towards understanding that it is "well-intentioned" and I now know what good work is being done in Edinburgh, Fife and Highland, but I'm still not convinced that the NP idea is ultimately helpful.</p> <p>A related issue raised by this legislation, is the absence in Holyrood of a robust revising mechanism which I feel would have ironed out some of the wrinkles and actually made it easier for the SG to get its legislation through. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661&page=2#post-225922 Sun, 31 Jul 2016 21:28:30 +0000 SRD 225922@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Going back up thread a bit - I didn't remember Kebin McKenna's piece being all that negative. I thought he was actually rather sympathetic. Maybe I linked to the wrong piece. </p> <p>I do think Mornungsider's point is apposite though. think of any issue you know well, reflect in how media (even good media) have covered it, and then reflect on the inevitable distortions in things you read and don't question..... </p> <p>Scary eh? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661&page=2#post-225920 Sun, 31 Jul 2016 19:59:44 +0000 gembo 225920@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Nah, 2017 is when </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661&page=2#post-225917 Sun, 31 Jul 2016 19:30:18 +0000 chdot 225917@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"But that is another story for later on."</p> <p>I think now would be a good time... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225912 Sun, 31 Jul 2016 17:24:55 +0000 gembo 225912@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@deckard, what are your concerns? The legislation reflects current practice in Edinburgh and Fife. Largely as both have a service called Children and Families or Children's Services which are the result of merged education and social work services. Any child who needs a named person has one. Obviously, the legislation states every child shall have a named person. For most children that will be it. Same as saying they have a head teacher or had a health visitor.</p> <p>Despite how this has been reported the Scottish govt have 42 days to reword the legislation to ensure there is no sharing of info where this is not needed. I do not think there is over sharing but the Supreme Court has ruled there is no mechanism to prevent this.</p> <p>I am in favour of the legislation clearly but keen to hear what the concerns are. I have different concerns about why SNP are pushing the legislation beyond the desire to have local authorities who have not fully implemented GIRFEC doing so. But that is another story for later on. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225910 Sun, 31 Jul 2016 15:50:59 +0000 deckard112 225910@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@morningsider - I don't base my views on The Scotsman/EEN, I'm a little more enlightened than that thank you. The link I posted was an interview with someone directly affected by the scheme which was relevant in the vein of the discussion. Your assertion that anyone who opposes the scheme is a nutcase frankly fails to recognise people do have real and justified concerns regardless of their political views and instead is an example of 'name calling' simply because they oppose your view. </p> <p>I currently oppose the legislation but as I said in my previous post I am open to change when I am presented with solid fact that my concerns are unfounded. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225904 Sun, 31 Jul 2016 07:41:45 +0000 chdot 225904@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>There is, too, little to celebrate about the way the way the pro and anti-campaigns have been conducted. The SNP has been guilty of failing to communicate the advantages of the scheme and the NO2NP of exploiting that failure to create a climate of hysteria. Depending on your perspective, its overblown rhetoric of state snooperdom either drowned out more measured criticisms, or provided cover for the Scottish Government to ignore them. Either way, the depiction of Named Persons as state-sanctioned busybodies made life more difficult for those taking on the role.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/dani-garavelli-in-denial-over-named-person-court-ruling-1-4190354" rel="nofollow">http://www.scotsman.com/news/dani-garavelli-in-denial-over-named-person-court-ruling-1-4190354</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225836 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:46:02 +0000 gembo 225836@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Quite interesting to get the feedback here from an articulate group of thoughtful folk.</p> <p>Just to reiterate the Named Person, Lead Professional and all of GIRFEC / SHANARRI - child planning meetings, well being indicators etc have been in place in Edinburgh for at least five years. Education and social work merged in 2005. Earlier similar approaches going back to 2001 (working together).</p> <p>THe change here now is the creating of a legal entity of Named Person (largely to try to have other local authorities coming fully onboard).</p> <p>We are not perfect in Edinburgh and need to ensure everyone is well informed (we do not need the legal back up but if cuts hit then we might). We promote the inclusion of the child and the family and push for meetings to be strength based and solution focussed. This is good practice.</p> <p>I do not think there has been over sharing of information but the legislation will now state this and presumably allow parents redress if they feel too much info has been shared.</p> <p>The rest is hyperbole, setting up of false propositions etc </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225832 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:04:51 +0000 Morningsider 225832@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>deckard112 - Think about how the Scotsman/EEN reports on cycling and how likely it is that its reporting on Named Persons is any better.</p> <p>I stand by my use of the word nutcase to describe those who lodged the legal challenge to the named person scheme. Its backers include people who seem to see government conspiracies wherever they look, far right "libertarians" that would sell their granny if these was a few quid in it and "Christians" more concerned with their right to physically chastise their children and promote bigotry than love and understanding. As for the Tories - they just voluntarily plunged the UK into its biggest port-war peacetime crisis, and then all decided to leg it - opposition to Named Persons was pure political opportunism on their part. Yes, "nutcase" is robust language and I am sorry if I have caused offence to anyone - it wasn't aimed at anyone here.</p> <p>I shared some of the concerns people have raised here. I'm lucky enough to know people who understand the proposals inside out. They were able to reassure me that my concerns were unfounded. </p> <p>There's some useful information on how it is all planned to work here: <a href="http://www.gov.scot/Topics/People/Young-People/gettingitright/named-person" rel="nofollow">http://www.gov.scot/Topics/People/Young-People/gettingitright/named-person</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225821 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 14:17:14 +0000 deckard112 225821@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The way that this is being peddled is that there are no current mechanisms in place for child protection. Quite the opposite is true. Any professional where there is contact with a child is obligated to report concerns be it a Doctor, Teacher or even a registered childminder. Having read reports directly from parents who were part of the pilot scheme it gives me serious concern that my civil liberties are being infringed and my ability as a parent called into question. </p> <p>If that makes me a 'nutcase' then so be it.</p> <p><a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/revealed-what-can-happen-when-a-named-person-reports-on-your-children-1-4089077" rel="nofollow">http://www.scotsman.com/news/revealed-what-can-happen-when-a-named-person-reports-on-your-children-1-4089077</a></p> <p>Defenders of this scheme have continually failed to alleviate my concerns and those of others (including the Alistair Gaw piece). If they can then I'll happily change my view but simply saying "it won't infringe on your civil liberties" over and over again without explaining why then I'll remain against. </p> <p>Even the NSPCC who support the scheme have publicly said the way it is drafted is not clear. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225813 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 13:34:02 +0000 chdot 225813@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Then there's things like this </p> <p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36922820" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36922820</a></p> <p>So getting NP 'right' is either vital or not as important as some people would like to believe. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225811 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 13:26:33 +0000 Darkerside 225811@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm pretty firmly against it. Key concerns:<br /> - It's a big data project tracking subjective opinion about a highly emotive issue.<br /> - It brings legislation in to enforce something that is already happening.<br /> - The Named People are likely to be too distant from the children to be useful.<br /> - In making the Named Person resposible, will others (perhaps closer to the children) feel less responsible?<br /> - It's a broad-brush approach to child welfare, when I suspect that a more targeted approach would return better value-on-investment. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225799 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 11:56:19 +0000 chdot 225799@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Meanwhile at the sharp end -</p> <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/social-workers-feeding-lothian-children-over-summer-1-4189395" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/social-workers-feeding-lothian-children-over-summer-1-4189395</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225797 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 11:13:55 +0000 Roibeard 225797@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>when a school unilaterally rules that it is unsafe to cycle</em></p> <p><a href="http://bikewalktn.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/arrested-for-riding-bike-to-school.html">Tennessee 2011</a></p> <p>"Biking" and walking to school seem alien to the US traffic planners and school authorities - quite a bit of it around, but it's not just there...</p> <p><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1291970/Couple-threatened-social-services-children-ride-bikes-school.html">London 2010 (Daily Mail)</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10314904/Pupils-banned-from-cycling-to-school-over-health-and-safety.html">Newport 2013 (Telegraph)</a></p> <p>Robert </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225795 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 10:53:52 +0000 I were right about that saddle 225795@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>when a school unilaterally rules that it is unsafe to cycle</em></p> <p>Good lord. Did that really happen? When it is demonstrably the case that it is unsafe <em>not</em> to cycle. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225793 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 10:14:27 +0000 chdot 225793@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Pre-school it will be the health visitor. High school, the guidance teacher."</p> <p>Might be time to call the act Named PersonS. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225792 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 10:08:38 +0000 chdot 225792@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"While this is all very interesting," </p> <p><em>Almost</em> enough of a reason to be here.</p> <p>"I struggle to see the relevance to cycling (except in Roibeard's case)."</p> <p>Isn't any as such, but not against the rules - RULES No personal insults. No swearing.</p> <p> "Any chance it can be labelled OT on the thread header?"</p> <p>Yes, but no real need as title is self explanatory.</p> <p>CCEers are pretty restrained about launching 'nothing to do with cycling' threads. We have had several on elections/referendadums where there wasn't too much about ' if this happens the result for cycling would be...' (the result of CEC 2017 might be different), don't think any were labelled OT. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225789 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:54:21 +0000 crowriver 225789@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>While this is all very interesting, I struggle to see the relevance to cycling (except in Roibeard's case). Any chance it can be labelled OT on the thread header? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225788 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:52:08 +0000 mgj 225788@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Its a named person so the duty isn't just on 'the local authority', and more importantly so that everyone knows who to tell when they have an issue or a concern. Pre-school it will be the health visitor. High school, the guidance teacher.</p> <p>The idea that sharing of information doesn't already go on is laughable, but its informal, and mostly non-electronic. The guidance was set up to cover automatic data sharing, and that is a minefield. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225787 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:45:58 +0000 chdot 225787@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>What the court said yesterday means that the named person scheme can go ahead but the information sharing part has to be fixed. </p> <p>The court says it has to be a lot clearer and show how children, young people and families will be protected when private information is shared with and by the named person. </p> <p>After yesterday’s decision there are still difficult issues to tackle. The Law Society of Scotland will be watching closely as things develop.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/morag-driscoll-difficult-issues-to-tackle-after-named-person-ruling-1-4189085" rel="nofollow">http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/morag-driscoll-difficult-issues-to-tackle-after-named-person-ruling-1-4189085</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225786 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:40:21 +0000 chdot 225786@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Of course there's parenting and 'parenting' -</p> <p>"</p> <p>MORE than £1 million has been spent by police tracking down missing people this year – including one teenager on 77 separate occasions.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/teenager-reported-missing-77-times-in-one-year-1-4187322" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/teenager-reported-missing-77-times-in-one-year-1-4187322</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225785 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:39:10 +0000 chdot 225785@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/alistair-gaw-exploding-myths-over-named-person-law-1-3922768" rel="nofollow">http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/alistair-gaw-exploding-myths-over-named-person-law-1-3922768</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225783 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:29:30 +0000 steveo 225783@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I must admit I find the whole thing a little disconcerting for no reason that I can put my finger on. I think, like Roibeard, I'm concerned what will happen if the "named person" decides they don't agree with my parenting choices.</p> <p>I'm not convinced it will realise the intended benefits especially at the extreme end that the tabloids like to attack on and will end up being yet another expensive white elephant quietly smothered by the next government or worse become more intrusive after the first high profile "failure". </p> <p>As some one who is vanishingly unlikely to ever be a "named person" I wonder how a head teacher at a large school or the like feel about being personally responsible for the welfare of over a 1000 kids some of whom will be from more colourful backgrounds. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225782 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:23:58 +0000 chdot 225782@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I do not find it surprising that groups with views contrary to the general population are the ones concerned that this may be a mechanism to enforce those generally held views."</p> <p>No doubt that's 'not considering all the implications of legislation' - quite common!</p> <p>I presume the court case will lead SG to do some 'improvements' - which may or may not satisfy objectors.</p> <p>Degrees to which 'other views' should be resisted, ignored or accommodated is always a problem for Governments!</p> <p>'Pro cycling views' are (a bit) less ignored than they once were, though Govs still seem to care more about the rabid frothing minority demand <em>their</em> rights (to behave like <em>their</em> motor is the only thing that matters). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225781 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:05:24 +0000 Roibeard 225781@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>We've been passed school reports with the named person section blank, yet before the parental section and signature for return.</p> <p>It thus looks like that the named person intends to fill in the report after the parents, yet as if the parents know the content.</p> <p>Although perhaps this may be just an implementation issue?</p> <p>We've seen what happens when those in authority consider parental actions as child endangerment, and particularly when a school unilaterally rules that it is unsafe to cycle. What will happen when the named person considers there to be a protection issue here?</p> <p>I do not find it surprising that groups with views contrary to the general population are the ones concerned that this may be a mechanism to enforce those generally held views.</p> <p>Robert </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225780 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 08:55:46 +0000 chdot 225780@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm very much in two minds about this. </p> <p>I'm happy to be 'reassured' by the informed opinions of morningsider and gembo and I'm not swayed much by the bluster of Kevin McKenna - "Named person scheme is yet more SNP big brother".</p> <p>I presume he didn't write the headline, but it's more of the 'SNP bad' reaction to anything someone doesn't like. On that, 'we' know that the SNP works in ways we might disagree with over transport - and has certainly centralised control over LAs. </p> <p><em>But</em> this supposed to be about 'safeguarding' children. So if that is made better by a bit of legislation - plus some extra resources, training etc., then good. </p> <p>What I really don't understand is the <em>named</em> person - 'will often be a head teacher'. Well HTs move/retire and children change school (not just when they go to secondary). So, on the face of it, one of the reassuring <em>selling points</em> of the scheme is seriously flawed!</p> <p>In addition I would assume (no evidence of course) that a lot of potential issues are related to children before they go to school. </p> <p>Obviously murder is at the extreme end of the problem and it may well be that this legislation will make very little difference - in which case, sections of the press will rush to the view that the NP scheme has failed (gembo says that Edinburgh and Fife are already two of the better councils...)</p> <p>I'm extra-confused by gembo's example which concludes "Such over sharing of info very unlikely". I'm surprised that such a thing would be considered "over sharing". </p> <p>I'm sure there are 'real world' issues where (for instance) drug using/dealing <em>might</em> lead to children being in real danger but have no idea if such information is shared between (for instance) social services and schools/police - or whether this legislation will expect/require different actions or 'safeguard client confidentiality' - or even if the NP has anything to do with!</p> <p>So my simplistic conclusion is that the benefits of the plan have not been adequately explained. </p> <p>Better guidance and more money for LAs might have been a wiser approach. To bring it back to cycling - by contrast - legislation <em>requiring</em> LAs to do more for Active Travel might be worth considering!! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225776 Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:13:44 +0000 gembo 225776@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ad hominem arguments not always fallacious and I did not take that line. Though I have taken it with relatively reasonable people who have been part of this campaign. </p> <p>If examining tactics (here and indeed on the cycle route through roseburn) the campaign to prevent the initiative sets up false propositions. Thus Named Person is an intrusion into family life. The amended legislation will have a clause saying any info sharing needs to be commensurate with the level of need (this is the case just now in almost all cases). Thus if a child has a mild learning issue requiring some adjustment in class and / or at home this info is with school, there is no suggestion (apart from in the heads of the campaigners) that this info would be shared with say social work or health. It could be I suppose but it isn't. The legislation will now say it should not be. Such over sharing of info very unlikely and in 42 days will be stated that this should not happen. </p> <p>Legislating for Worst Case Scenarios is not hugely helpful but Edinburgh, Fife, highlands and south Ayrshire will be able to carry on their good work. Not sure how the 28 other local authorities will manage this as they will be arguing they need resources, they need training etc. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225770 Thu, 28 Jul 2016 21:58:17 +0000 stiltskin 225770@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Aren't we getting a bit <em>ad hominem</em>? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16661#post-225767 Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:51:35 +0000 mgj 225767@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <br />