Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 27 February 2013
27 Feb 2013 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Families Need Fathers
I congratulate John Mason and declare an interest as a former court lawyer specialising in family law. Although I am wary of drawing from that experience, which was 12 years ago, I shall do so in part, with the caveat that there has been some progress in balancing and protecting the rights of fathers with regard to their children when relationships end—particularly when they end acrimoniously.
I acted for women and men and found faults on both sides, although sometimes they were just on one side. A good family lawyer does not indulge in inflaming dispute, nor does he or she allow clients to use their children as ammunition or bribes. I never did.
However, at that time, there were some presumptions that sometimes still prevail, although that might be patchy. There is a presumption that women should have residency rights, and the father should have contact. There is also a presumption that in what I would call—in inverted commas—a “domestic”, the man is at fault and has to be decanted out of the home, leaving the woman with the children. I understand that there is still a protocol between the Crown Office and the police on that. I do not know the details, but I will follow it up.
There is no doubt that some men made it hard for themselves. Refusing to pay maintenance for their children unless contact orders were obtempered was always a bad move. The two do not go together. Some women made things hard for their ex-partners because they had the child’s ear and could and did bend it. Neither of those actions are supportable and they are certainly not in the interests of the children.
I will focus on education, to which John Mason referred, and access to information, particularly under the Scottish Schools (Parental Involvement) Act 2006.
Guidance that was published along with the 2006 act says specifically that both parents have equal status in their relationships with the school unless there is
“a court order limiting an individual’s exercise of parental rights and responsibilities.”
The guidance also urges schools to engage actively with non-resident parents and requires schools to produce a parental involvement strategy and report annually on its progress. I bet that not many schools do either of those things. I do not want to malign headteachers—I was a teacher, too—but I think that many might well be unaware of that duty on them, given that so few have complied with it.
Fathers are further impeded by the Pupils’ Educational Records (Scotland) Regulations 2003—members can tell that I was a lawyer. Paragraph (d) of regulation 6, “Circumstances where information should not be disclosed”, provides that information should not be disclosed
“to the extent that its disclosure would in the opinion of the responsible body, be likely to cause significant distress or harm to the pupil or any other person”.
I stress that the regulation refers to “significant distress or harm”, not “serious” harm. What could that be? It certainly should not be annoyance, displeasure or inconvenience. Who might “any other person” be? We should bear it in mind that if someone wants to prevent information from being disclosed to the father there must be a court order against the father.
There are huge difficulties. Fathers are not even entitled to see school photographs. They get access to information about what is happening to their children only if they have access to the school bag. That is not the way to impart information.
I very much object to the term “absent parent”, which I understand that my council, Scottish Borders Council, uses in its forms. The people whom we are talking about are not absent parents. The term is cruel, hurtful and incorrect and should not be used.
17:36
I acted for women and men and found faults on both sides, although sometimes they were just on one side. A good family lawyer does not indulge in inflaming dispute, nor does he or she allow clients to use their children as ammunition or bribes. I never did.
However, at that time, there were some presumptions that sometimes still prevail, although that might be patchy. There is a presumption that women should have residency rights, and the father should have contact. There is also a presumption that in what I would call—in inverted commas—a “domestic”, the man is at fault and has to be decanted out of the home, leaving the woman with the children. I understand that there is still a protocol between the Crown Office and the police on that. I do not know the details, but I will follow it up.
There is no doubt that some men made it hard for themselves. Refusing to pay maintenance for their children unless contact orders were obtempered was always a bad move. The two do not go together. Some women made things hard for their ex-partners because they had the child’s ear and could and did bend it. Neither of those actions are supportable and they are certainly not in the interests of the children.
I will focus on education, to which John Mason referred, and access to information, particularly under the Scottish Schools (Parental Involvement) Act 2006.
Guidance that was published along with the 2006 act says specifically that both parents have equal status in their relationships with the school unless there is
“a court order limiting an individual’s exercise of parental rights and responsibilities.”
The guidance also urges schools to engage actively with non-resident parents and requires schools to produce a parental involvement strategy and report annually on its progress. I bet that not many schools do either of those things. I do not want to malign headteachers—I was a teacher, too—but I think that many might well be unaware of that duty on them, given that so few have complied with it.
Fathers are further impeded by the Pupils’ Educational Records (Scotland) Regulations 2003—members can tell that I was a lawyer. Paragraph (d) of regulation 6, “Circumstances where information should not be disclosed”, provides that information should not be disclosed
“to the extent that its disclosure would in the opinion of the responsible body, be likely to cause significant distress or harm to the pupil or any other person”.
I stress that the regulation refers to “significant distress or harm”, not “serious” harm. What could that be? It certainly should not be annoyance, displeasure or inconvenience. Who might “any other person” be? We should bear it in mind that if someone wants to prevent information from being disclosed to the father there must be a court order against the father.
There are huge difficulties. Fathers are not even entitled to see school photographs. They get access to information about what is happening to their children only if they have access to the school bag. That is not the way to impart information.
I very much object to the term “absent parent”, which I understand that my council, Scottish Borders Council, uses in its forms. The people whom we are talking about are not absent parents. The term is cruel, hurtful and incorrect and should not be used.
17:36
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith)
Lab
The final item of business today is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-04456, in the name of John Mason, on Families Need Fathers. The debate will be c...
John Mason (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
SNP
I thank members who signed the motion, which has allowed the debate to happen.Perhaps I should start off by declaring a non-interest in the subject, in that ...
Anne McTaggart (Glasgow) (Lab)
Lab
As a parent of three lovely young children and a former chair of the Blairdardie primary school parent board in Glasgow, I am delighted to take part in the d...
Sandra White (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
SNP
I thank John Mason for securing the debate, which is very timely, given the publication of the Scottish Government’s national parenting strategy, in which—as...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Lab
I should have reminded members at the beginning of the debate to speak through the chair and to refer to each other by their full names, not as “you”.17:20
Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con)
Con
I very much welcome the debate and am grateful to John Mason for bringing it to the chamber this evening.Mr Mason’s motion rightly refers to the “important” ...
Mark McDonald (North East Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I congratulate my colleague John Mason on securing this debate.In its national parenting strategy, the Scottish Government has set out its ambition to make S...
Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Lab
I congratulate John Mason on bringing forward this important but complex debate. It is complex in practice, but not in respect of the principles that should ...
Christine Grahame (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
SNP
I congratulate John Mason and declare an interest as a former court lawyer specialising in family law. Although I am wary of drawing from that experience, wh...
Bob Doris (Glasgow) (SNP)
SNP
I thank John Mason for bringing to the Parliament what has been so far an excellent debate. I signed his motion, and I had been thinking of putting my name d...
The Minister for Children and Young People (Aileen Campbell)
SNP
I thank John Mason for bringing this important debate to the chamber and for raising a number of important issues. I also thank other members for their thoug...
Christine Grahame
SNP
I suppose that this question is for onward transmission to Dr Alasdair Allan. Regarding the number of schools that seem absolutely unaware of their duties un...
Aileen Campbell
SNP
I will consider that point, and Christine Grahame and I can continue a dialogue on it.John Mason mentioned the parenting agreement for Scotland. The national...