Headteachers may face parents court action under Named Person scheme
Scots headteachers could find themselves facing court action under controversial new Named Person proposals, legal chiefs have warned MSPS.
The proposals place a “duty to consider” issues of child welfare on teachers and health visitors who will be appointed to the role of Named Person for all youngsters in Scotland. MSPS heard concerns from legal experts and NHS staff about the changes amid fears that frontline staff will have lawyers on “speed dial” because they are unsure of which information to pass on.
There are also fears that the new burden on staff to pass on information will affect their core jobs of teaching and providing health care.
The controversial legislation has been brought back to the Parliament after it was ruled illegal by the UK Court of Session last year.
Kenny Meechan of the Law Society of Scotland and QC Janys Scott from the Faculty of Advocates told Holyrood’s education committee yesterday that the changes would be a minefield for staff.
The dilemma facing teachers will see them forced to consider whether information they gather about each youngster, covering areas like their results in class, should be shared with social work staff. It also covers knock-on scenarios like whether sharing will “result in a problem which is more serious than not sharing”.
Ms Scott said: “The thought of a primary teacher sitting down at four o’clock in the middle of marking a load of books and thinking this one through without help and trying to make their way through a code of practice on things whic hi, as a lawyer, would find difficult in the knowledge that if they get it wrong, it’s going to be raised in a court of law, that strikes me as something which would be unattractive.”
Mr Meechan added: “I could imagine an awful lot of people who are given Named Person responsibilities having their legal departments on speed dial.”
Asked if individual teachers could find themselves facing litigation from parents over the way they share – or don’t share – information, Ms Scott replied: “Potentially.” But Mr Meechan said this was unlikely, adding; “Simply making the judgment call incorrectly comes back to the employer organisation rather then the individual.”
But Liberal Democrat MSP Tavish Scott pointed to new legislation being passed at Holyrood which would make headteachers “accountable in law” for their school and taking on “corporate responsibility” and suggested this could leave them open to litigation.
Ms Scott added; “That drives down responsibility from the local authority to the school itself, yes I can see that.”
Both legal chiefs accepted that “potential” for headteachers facing litigation could arise in this scenario.
Lorna Greene, of the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) Scotland, said there was “confusion and nervousness” among nurses about the changes after the Supreme Court decision.
“RCN thinks it could potentially have quite a significant impact in the form of leading to defensive practice,” she added.
“By introducing a duty to consider, we’re worried professionals might find themselves becoming nervous and wanting to evidence and sort of cover all their bases which would take time away from that meaningful face-to-face interaction.”