• UK Supreme Court rules against Named Person scheme in Scotland.
    6 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Judges at the UK's highest court have ruled against the Scottish government's Named Person scheme. The system would appoint a named person - usually a teacher or health visitor - for every child in Scotland. Judges say some proposals breach rights to privacy and a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. The court said the aim of the Act is "unquestionably legitimate and benign", but said specific proposals about information-sharing "are not within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament". Source: [URL]http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36903513[/URL][/QUOTE] I can see how this could be beneficial in families suspected of having domestic violence occurring, but a blanket application seems rather invasive. A 'welfare check' system would be much more beneficial.
Just creepy to be honest. I understand why they're implementing it but it goes too far.
knowing people, this is an awful idea.
I understand the well-meaning behind it but the problem is that from the experiences of a few people that I know, social services can be really heavy handed sometimes and I don't doubt that some of these named persons may be just as blunt in their handling of things.
don't families that are suspect of domestic violence get the scottish equivalent of child protection services called anyways? why is this needed? [editline]28th July 2016[/editline] (I mean it obviously isnt needed now that it was voted against but yeah)
[QUOTE=Egevened;50788881]don't families that are suspect of domestic violence get the scottish equivalent of child protection services called anyways? why is this needed? [editline]28th July 2016[/editline] (I mean it obviously isnt needed now that it was voted against but yeah)[/QUOTE] Elections are coming up. Gotta look like you've done something if you want votes.
[QUOTE=GordonZombie;50788641]I understand the well-meaning behind it but the problem is that from the experiences of a few people that I know, social services can be really heavy handed sometimes and I don't doubt that some of these named persons may be just as blunt in their handling of things.[/QUOTE] One of the problems with social services is the number of both simply false but well meaning, and malicious reports. They are chronically underfunded, and because they can't properly investigate things, they often get stuck in limbo. No bureaucracy wants to be responsible for closing a case when there might be something going on, so they start demanding all sorts of ridiculous shit. It's guilty until proven innocent. Overzealous poorly trained idiots are a byproduct of really poor funding, and laws written to make you guilty until you can prove innocence.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.