Response 1047968180

Back to Response listing

Consultation questions

1. Do you think that the offence in section 12 of The Children and Young Persons (Scotland) Act 1937 would benefit from reform and modernisation?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer
Many categories need to be clarified

2. Do you think that existing concepts of “neglect”, “ill-treatment”, “abandonment” and “exposure” should be defined in the legislation?

Please select one item
Yes, the terms should be defined in legislation
No, the terms should be defined in guidance
No, the terms should not be defined
If so, do you think they should have a meaning which is different from current interpretations?
Clarity is essential, so as to help with interpretation
Further, do you think it is necessary to keep the terms “abandonment” and “exposure to risk” in a modernised offence?
Yes.

5. Do you think that children in Scotland should have clear legislative protection from emotional abuse?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer.
It is key to get the right definition of ‘emotional abuse’ or ‘psychological harm’. It must be clear and precise.
Perhaps it would be better to use “psychological” in the offence rather than “emotional”

There must be safeguards to stop families being targeted just because children are being raised in a way that does not conform with today’s culture.

Too broad a law could lead to a climate of fear among ordinary loving parents and deter them from contacting public agencies when their child needs help.

6. Do you have examples of the sorts of behaviours and their effect on children that should or should not be captured by any revised offence?

The offence must not include what many people would consider normal parenting decisions, which children often disagree with. This might include denying a child’s request to watch a particular film or TV programme, or preventing a young teenager from socialising with certain friends.

As the Supreme Court has declared: “Different upbringings produce different people” and that: “Within limits, families must be left to bring up their children in their own way.”
The definition of the offence must ensure that it does not interfere with the variety of
approaches to parenting that exist in Scotland.
For example: parental approaches differ as a result of religious beliefs. Parents are primarily responsible for raising their children and should not be subject to the
criminal law just because they make decisions that others, even a majority, disagree with.

The consultation document refers to ‘rewarding a child for bigotry’ as being emotional abuse.
Parents must be free to encourage their child to have strong religious beliefs, including claims to absolute truth that necessarily view other beliefs as false. They must also be free to teach their child that some lifestyles are morally wrong.

7. Do you think the provision in section 12(2)(a) concerning failure to provide adequate food, clothing, medication, or lodging should be changed?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer.
neglect is 'neglect' wherther deliberate or incidental to a chosen lifestyle

8. Do you think the provision in section 12(2)(b) concerning the suffocation of a child while in bed should be changed?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer.
This could be the result of a chosen lifestyle, e.g. abuse of alcohol and/or drugs.

9. Do you think that the test for establishing whether harm or risk of harm occurred should include a requirement that a ‘reasonable person’ must consider the behaviour likely to cause harm?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer
'Reasonable person' is the best term I can think of.

10. Do you think a provision equivalent to section 12(3) should be included in any revised offence, either in its current form or amended?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer.
Prent law appears adequate.

11. Do you think that the offence should apply wherever a person wilfully and deliberately acted or neglected to act in a way which caused harm or risk of harm, regardless of whether they intended the resulting harm/risk?

Please select one item
Yes
No
Please explain your answer.
Cuuent law appears adequate, but needs to be kept under review.

11b). If not, do you think the offence should only apply to those who:

Please select one item
intend to cause harm to a child by their action or inaction?
intend or is reckless as to whether harm is caused?
Comments:
Intention to cause harm infers a reasonable esponsible attitude.

12. Who should be capable of committing the offence?

Comments:
Anyone and everyone coming under existing legislation.

13. Do you think the legislation should set out the age of a perpetrator?

Please select one item
Yes
No

14. Do you think that a child should be defined as 18 in relation to the offence?

Please select one item
Yes
No

15. Do you think the current penalties for a section 12 offence should be amended?

Please select one item
Yes
No

19. Do you have any comments on whether the definition of a ‘position of trust’ should be extended to cover other positions in which a person is in a position of power, responsibility or influence over a child?

Anyone in a position of power, responsibility or influence over a child should be covered by the abuse of trust offence.

In particular, in view of recent scandals, the abuse of trust offence should be extended to cover sports coaches, youth workers, and religious leaders.

About you

Are you responding as an individual or an organisation?

Please select one item
(Required)
Individual
Organisation