|
(Continued from previous page) How many young people can understand the implications of data-sharing? It is not something that is likely to have entered into their lives before, unlike medical treatment. How informed is a young person likely to be about the legal, human rights, data protection and privacy debates currently raging over the sharing of adults' information? Will PAs know? If not, will they be capable of giving the young person a balanced view? Can they even list the people and organisations with whom the data will be shared? It is recommended that PAs broach the issue of consent at the initial meeting; however, a trainee Personal Adviser has told ARCH that PAs are advised verbally not to tell young people immediately that they will be using the APIR - described in more detail in these pages. How can a young person's consent be 'informed' if s/he is unaware of the nature of the information likely to be sought? A young person visits the doctor voluntarily, but can be referred to the Connexions Service without his/her knowledge or consent. There is already a substantial imbalance of power in the relationship, and if the young person has been 'in trouble', s/he may be worried about the implications of appearing uncooperative. If you look at the questions set out in the APIR and intended to be asked of the young person who has given this 'informed consent', you will see that many have implications both for that young person, and for his/her family. Is the young person advised of the consequences of supplying this, often sensitive, information? Is s/he advised as to who may make use of it and with whom it will be shared? What implications will there be when the young person seeks future employment? Some of the 'suggested issues to explore' contained in the APIR involve the supply of information about others, and in particular the young person's parents and family. Should children be encouraged to supply information about their family? Could this not in itself result in the undermining of family relationships? This information should only be sought with the consent of the people concerned. To do otherwise is likely to lead to a breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights: the right to respect for private and family life. Education is the legal responsibility of parents, and the Connexions Service is all about education: any problems that a young person might have are approached on the basis that they are 'barriers to learning'. How can a parent be held responsible for their son or daughter's education if they are excluded from the Connexions process? Can it be right that a parent is sufficiently responsible to face parenting orders or prosecution for truancy, and yet may not be included in discussion or decisions about their child's life and future? In ARCH's view, until there is clarification of all of the above issues, the use of the notion of informed consent should be discontinued and any issues of consent should be addressed to parents. |