In this evaluative post I am hoping to reflect on Thursday’s class debate and come to my own conclusion on the issue.

GIRFEC (Getting it right for every child) is built on 3 main aspects. The wellbeing wheel, The Named Person and the Child Plan. While I could sit and talk about GIRFEC all day there is one key area I will be focussing on….Is the Named Person a positive or are there too many negatives???

If you would like to find out more information about GIRFEC follow this link – http://www.gov.scot/Topics/People/Young-People/gettingitright/what-is-girfec

Before evaluating the positives and negatives it is important to understand the Named Persons role. Every child in Scotland up to the age of 18 is to have a Named Person who they have regular contact with. From the age of 0-5 this is usually the child’s health visitor and once the child starts school it becomes a Guidance or Head Teacher. The Named Person is to be the first point of contact for anyone, including the child, who has any worries or concerns about the child. The Named Person is also there to provide advice to parents or children and help them get into contact with other services if needed. Finally they have the important role of getting into contact with the Lead Professional to put into place the ‘Child Plan’ if there are serious concerns about the child’s wellbeing.  Many welcome this introduction and have no problem with it but on the other hand a large amount of people have found various negatives and fail to support it.

So, here we go… I’ll begin by summarising some of the negative aspects I found.

• The child may not like or want to speak to their Named Person therefore problems still could go unnoticed. There is no element of choice for the child, the Named Person should be someone the child chooses and that they are comfortable with. If this were the case it could be argued some problems could be identified and acted on quicker as the child would be more likely to report them.
• In a primary school of 300+ children It will be very difficult for the Named Person (usually Head Teacher) to know every child well enough to be able to identify problems especially with quiet children. It is also a lot of work for the Head Teacher who already has various tasks and some argue they cannot do the job properly when they are so busy.
• The are many gaps in the scheme. For example children who move around a lot can be without a Named Person for sometime until they are settled and even then they may find it hard to build a relationship with them. Also when a young person leaves school – which they can at 16- they are left with no Named Person and this can be very vulnerable time for them.

However there are positives…

• The named person is someone the child is able to speak to about problems at home if they are unable to speak to family. This reduces the chances of problems at home going unnoticed.
• Some also argue the child and the Named Person do not always need to be friends it is simply an extra person watching over them.

Overall it is obvious the negatives out weigh the positive but this does not mean the Named Person scheme is not a good idea, it simply means it needs improving. Having an extra person aside from parents to look after every child is never going to be a bad thing. In practice it should mean problems are identified quicker and solved sooner. However it cannot be fully effective until the negatives listed above are addressed.