THANK you for your front-page article and related leader comment regarding the Named Person scheme ("Ministers under pressure to rethink state guardian plan" and "Caveats to consider on Named Persons", The Herald, July 1).

Some might be tempted to consider adjustment and clarification of the terms of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act to correct its manifest shortcomings. Others however, will take the many disturbing facts in your article and comment piece, as confirming their original worst fears.

This legislation was always clearly a case of common sense being overridden by the (no doubt well-meaning) attitudes of officialdom and experts who believe they know best and in this case have allowed their inner zealots full rein in designing this ill-conceived imposition on families across Scotland.

It is of course disturbing how often cases of child abuse arise, but they are still thankfully applicable to only a small minority of children and families. The answer is more specialist resources focused on the cases where concerns are raised. The blanket coverage sought under this new legislation and potential inappropriate interference in all families, often using hard-pressed resources poorly qualified for the task in hand, promises a widespread waste of public resources, with potential for great inconsistency of application.

The analysis of responses to the consultation reflects another common trait of this SNP Government. Too often consultation exercises are simply used to confirm the Government's position in whatever it is they plan to do, and even significant or as here overwhelming views in opposition from some - in this case parents - are simply ignored by those drafting the legislation.

The SNP's tendency to silence or ignore critical voices within or outside its supporters, combined with a clear attachment to controlling and imposing as much power as possible from the centre, does not bode well for any of us.

Keith Howell,

White Moss, West Linton, Peeblesshire.

AS the parent of two children with disability/additional support for learning needs I identified strongly with your rticle about Named Persons.

In dealings with our local authority the confusion over the role and who has responsibility for taking a lead role in our children's welfare has been far from clear. At times I get the distinct impression that the fog of confusion between agencies (principally education and social work) allows the authority to avoid taking clear and decisive decisions about services - nd perhaps allows budgets to be kept in check?

As a parent I will always strive to be in control of what is correct for my children, as frankly I have never developed any level of trust in the input we have had from "professionals".

The introduction of many subjective and spurious concepts within GIRFEC ( Getting It Right For Every Child - the framework for a multiagency approach to meeting the needs of our children) struggles to produce clarity in assessing the needs of our children, although the principles of the framework are laudable.

Duncan F MacGillivray,

Oakcrest, 60 Victoria Road, Dunoon.