Named persons a ‘completely unnecessary interference’

The Named Person scheme is a “completely unnecessary interference with parental rights”, according to the former head of an association of headteachers.

Carole Ford, former President of School Leaders Scotland, wrote to The Scotsman criticising the Scottish Government’s controversial plan to appoint a state guardian for every child.

The full statutory scheme is due to be rolled out in August next year, but pilot schemes are already operating in many parts of the country.


Ford wrote that whilst a single point of contact is welcome, appointing a named person for every child is a “completely unnecessary interference with parental rights” which actually “diminishes parental responsibility”.

She said that this is “a direction of travel no sensible society would follow”.

Delivering sound bite policies will do nothing for vulnerable children.

Carole Ford

Ford also stressed that implementing the scheme for all children, rather than those who are specifically identified as vulnerable, would make its impact “so thin as to be negligible”.

Vulnerable children

She concluded that: “The SNP government must think again on this issue and turn its attention to strategies which might actually have some effect.

“Delivering sound bite policies will do nothing for vulnerable children.”

The Christian Institute, alongside other charities and concerned parents, has lodged an appeal against the legislation in the UK Supreme Court.

Legal fight

This was after the Inner House of the Court of Session, Scotland’s highest court, rejected their concerns at the start of September.

If the Supreme Court appeal does not reach a favourable conclusion, the case could be taken to Europe.

Related Resources