Misguided fears

Once again we hear the tired old cliche of the “nanny state” as Keith Howell (Letters, 3 January) complains that the Named Person Scheme and the smacking ban are examples of “over-intrusive state interference in family life”.

We should never forget that for the great majority of children the family is a place of warmth, security and love.

However, we also need to take into account that it is also the place where the majority of child abuse happens. It is also deeply concerning that Liz Smith, Conservative education spokesperson, to make political capital out of the issue, should be so misinformed as to say that “a complete ban would criminalise thousands of parents”.

Many countries have preceded Scotland in introducing complete bans, starting with Sweden in 1979, and it has not lead to the criminalisation of “good parents” in any of them. Why should Scotland be any different?

GILL TURNER Derby Street, Edinburgh