Dutch to Open Electronic Files on Children

Del writes "The Dutch government plans to open an electronic file on every child at birth as a tool to spot and protect the troubled kids of the future. All citizens will be tracked from cradle to grave in a single database - including health, education, family and police records."

Comments

I wish this was a joke

[Bananatree3]

As a privacy safeguard, no single person or agency will be able to access all contents of a file. But organizations can raise "red flags" in the dossier to caution other agencies about problems

And so what if one malicious worker has exclusive rights to view several hundred children? It doesn't matter if they have access to the whole database or not, even a "small pecentage" could be several hundred or thousand children. This is a pedaphile's ultimate dream.

The intention is to protect troubled children, Brouwer said. Until now, schools and police have been unable to communicate with each other about truancy records and criminality, which are often linked. "Child protection services will say, 'Hey, there's a warning flag from the police. There's another one from school. There's another one from the doctor," Brouwer said. "Something must be going on and it's time to call the parents in for a meeting."

And how long exactly will these records be kept? Also, this would be a good way to usher in a country-wide database of this sortfor every citizen. Start with the children, saying its "for the good of the kids", and then slowly introduce a more inclusive database, which would go under some other guise. It would seem that a database of children "for their safety" might be easier to pull of then a citizenry-wide database at first.

Every child will get a Citizens Service Number, making it easier to keep track of children with problems even when their families move.

This could have good uses, and assuming it was used exactly for the intent stated, this would be an excellent service. BUT, more often then not, these kinds of things get abused in some form or another. In every government there is some malicious back-room government worker who goes below the radar. These kinds of things get abused, and when it is a child at stake, the risks are even higher.

Re:I wish this was a joke

[wllf]

The Dutch government has come under attack from the public because of some very nasty incidents during the last couple of years.

There were cases, highly profiled in the media, where children were abused and even murdered. In hindsite there were clues, but because the parents had moved a couple of times no-one had the whole picture. Child protection did not have information from there sister organizations from other cities, reports from police about the parents which would have provided vital clues about the home situation, were not available.

In general everytime something was going on with the children the people who had to judge the situation had to start from scratch.

What the government now proposes is under pressure from the public to do something and I think it is a good thing.

As much as slashdot loves the odd conspiracy theory left and right and as much as I distrust the Dutch government, I believe this is well intended. But it needs to be well thought out because the possibility of abuse is certainly there.

Re:I wish this was a joke

[AftanGustur]

As a privacy safeguard, no single person or agency will be able to access all contents of a file. But organizations can raise "red flags" in the dossier to caution other agencies about problems Even if that may solve some problems, it creates others realy serious. What this means is both that some grumpy social worker, on bad day, can flag a kid for life, and there is no way for anyone to put a judgement on the social workers decision. Also, gifted children often have behavioral problerms which can not be easily diagnosed for what they are.

Re:I wish this was a joke

[jcr]

While I suspect that this has good intentions

I think you can put that suspicion to rest.

-jcr

Re:I wish this was a joke

[E8086]

that could lead to profiling and profiling is wrong

So they can arrest the parents or take the kids away because in a semi-similar situation the kids were much abused or killed.

So when one abused kid who was charged with something at some time grows up and has kids and severly injurs or kills their kid, then some overzealious young gov't worker brown nosing for a promotion or raise or corner office uses that limited data to create a profile everyone who had jeuvinile charges thrown at them when they were a kid is now a suspect for possible child abuse.
I only said charge, not conviction and didn't say what it was for. It could be that some kid broke a neighbor's window while playing baseball when he was 9 and instead of accepting compensation from the kids parents, the kid-hating neighbor gets their DA friend to bring the kid up on charges to teach him a lesson and/or make an example for the rest of the neighborhood kids. Since that system is probably going to record everything, even something pointless like that during childhood can make them a future suspect. In the US you don't have to report legal charges, only convictions and most jeuvinile records are sealed when the person turns 18 and can be petitioned to be destroyed/removed from the permanant record. Yes, that's an extreme example, but possible that something that happened to you many years ago can put you at risk because someone 100yrs before did something similar and then did something worse. And no one caught it because not all law enforcement depts have access to all of it.

Re:I wish this was a joke

[Master of Transhuman]

"Well intentions" do not excuse either incompetence or malice.

If the Dutch are doing this for the reasons you stated - i.e., preventing the abuse of childen because of incompetence in their bureacracy - there are obviously many other ways to eliminate that incompetence rather than doing a cradle-to-grave surveillance of people.

The parents moved, so they can't find out they had trouble with kids before? Gimme a fucking break. If you can find out about it afterwards, you can find out about it beforehand. This is just the usual CYA bullshit the authorities always trot out to explain incompetence and justify more repression.

Then malice comes in. This is merely an excuse for the law enforcement establishment and the politicians - which is the SAME group of scumbags in EVERY country, regardless of political setup - to build up their surveillance of people, so they can clamp down on "undesireables" - i.e., anybody they don't like or who doesn't like them.

Period. That simple. Anybody who supports this sort of thing is a moron or a malicious asshole - probably both.

Re:I wish this was a joke

[Ihlosi]

Who cares if they are gifted or not?

People who aren't morons.

G&T kids are likely to become "troublemakers" because the normal education system does not offer enough challenges.

Teachers usually do not like these kids and start harassing them as soon as it starts to show that the kid is actually smarter than the teacher. (Teachers cannot stand anyone appearing smarter than they are in class, even if the appearance is true).
Their classmates do not like these kids because they usually get better grade with much, much less effort. And the classmates are even better at harassing than the teacher.
All the harassment does lead to trouble eventually (unless the G&T kid is especially good at hiding his abilites or has an ungodly tolerance to harassment). And guess which side the teacher will side with if there's trouble between a normal kid and the smartass G&T "troublemaker" ? Bingo.

Re:I wish this was a joke

[molotov02]

Although I quite agree that this might have some huge possibilities for abuse, it helps save children.
Here in the Netherlands, every year there are a few high profile cases where children are extremely abused and/or killed. Usually, afterwards it became know that quite a lot of social services were involved into the family, but didn't communicate with each other or that records simply 'vanished' because the family moved. in result; children die because social services are hugely incompetent.
This system now automates the 'speaking to each other' part of the whole equation.
FYI; in the province of Utrecht, this system has already been tested for a few months, with excellent results.
I do completely agree this could be seen as a dangerous law, so far it actually does what it's meant to do; protect abused children.
(To tell the truth; we're surprised the government actually does something like this right)

Re:I wish this was a joke

[josh_miller]

So you potentially save "a few" kids while exposing the info on countless others to Jeebus knows who.

If Social Services are indeed "hugely incompetent", will the availability of this database really help to the extent intended?

ugh

[neurokaotix]

It's dangerous storing all information about people in one, most likely easilly hackable location.

Re:ugh

[ciroknight]

Personally I'd be more worried about what the Government would be doing with that wealth of information verses what the balls-to-the-wall, caffeine-hyped, advertising firm-paid cracker would do.

There are some crazy things a government could do with that kind of information; track genetic traits, mental defects, medical procedures, medicines taken.. This information is a combination of things that us Americans see as private and need things such as subpenas to see.. Now the police department can be granted access to rummage and look for "possible offenders" before they do anything wrong.

It has strong uses, but its misuses seem to out number them (IMO) in a society that still has troubles seeing everyone as an equal. This "development" is very far ahead of its time.

Re:ugh

[orthogonal]

Now I wonder what's so dangerous about keeping a central database of persons. It somehow alert a bunch of people what the word "children" involved. But what is the real danger of this?

Here's an answer I gave over a year ago on Slashdot. Coincidentally, it used as an example Dutch history, and a particular Dutch girl who was anything but protected by the authorities.

I was writing in reply to a commenter like you who saw nothing to worry about. That commenter wrote:

Think of this utopia: The government is honest, never abuses info collected about the people,... Now would you really mind having a lot of data about yourself collected,... Collecting personal data by itself is harmless.

Anyway, here's how I replied last May, on what happened to be the 44th anniversary of the Dutch surrender to Nazi Germany:

Ok, I'm thinking of your utopia. I'll even make it a better utopia: I'll posit that no business try to hack into the government databases for personal gain. And I'll go so far as to pretend that no government employee with access ever abuses that access for personal reasons.

Now, imagine that your utopia is The Netherlands. And imagine it's not May 15, 2004, but May 15, 1940 -- one day after The Netherlands surrendered to Nazi Germany. Note that in surrendering, The Netherlands legally turned over government control to the Nazis. Presumably that would included your database -- if the Nazis hadn't simply seized it outright.

Your utopian database contains the details of all residents, anyone who might join the Resistance, and all the Jews -- including Otto and Edith Frank and their daughters Margot and Anne.
The Frank family managed to hide from the Nazis for two years; how long do you think they'd manage in your "utopia".

Now some will say that there's little chance of Nazi invasions these day, so we should feel safe with "utopian" databases. But it doesn't take a foreign invasion to radically change a government: sometimes it just takes an election, of an Anzar or a Berlusconi or a Blair & Blunkett team or a Bush or a Howard -- or a former war criminal like Waldheim.

Remember COINTELPRO?

Here's the original comment.

Maybe the Dutch aren't reading their history any more, or maybe they just think history is over. It surely is over for Anne Frank and most of the others who got tattooed with generated id numbers and entered into the Nazi's great big people-exterminating database.

But, as always, there's a new generation ready to trust that the government and their oh-so-well-intentioned Leaders will never do wrong. I mean, it's not like FEMA was ever misused for political reasons, right? Right?,

Questions about this

[SB5]

Is this meant for control as in "Brave New World". Or is this meant for research? Knowing the Dutch, and the way this is worded, it seems to goal of this is noble. Whether it will stay noble is the question.

Re:Questions about this

[ciroknight]

The problem is that this system, good intention or not, has such a large net of effectiveness that it is overwhelmingly a positive, and overwhelmingly a negative situation, all rolled into one convenient digital package.

This has honestly hit me like a load of bricks tonight. The societial rammifications this kind of system could have are absolutely mindboggling. I honestly didn't believe I would live to see the day that this kind of system made it to the real world, but here we are, and the floodgates are open and wrought with a flood of questions.

While one would hope the government will approach this system with a level of benevolence that the all-mighty Google would bow to, I have the overwhelming pit forming in my stomach that it might not be the case. The peacetime and wartime uses of this system for any political power are so far and beyond that of anything that exists today; one could argue that this is a more dangerous weapon than a nuclear arsenal.

The one pit in this program that really burns me is that these human beings are being borne into it. They have no choice to the matter of how this information is collected and generated about them. The system has no opt-in or opt-out features to allow anyone who doesn't agree with the government on how their information is collected to stand out. The system has very few failsafes mentioned on how it would deal with a breech in security, a data-retention policy wasn't discussed.. there are so many questions that a single post could not possibly deal with them all. I hope the government is ready to open up their phone lines and listen, and that the people won't smile and nod their way through what is easily the most important and scary decision of their child's future.

Good luck Dutchmen.

At Least We're Informed

[RAMMS EIN]

One good thing about the media in the Netherlands is that this new system has been visibly covered in the media. I can well imagine that it would have been swept under the rug in other places; after all, it's just various organizations dealing with children and their problems cooperating.

What's going on

[jeroenb]

What is really going on is that the already existing files of different agencies are being coupled in an attempt to keep children in difficult situations from falling off the radar when for instance they move to a different city. Child protection services often didn't know about children moving into the city with problems in their past - in the old database the record would be closed and they wouldn't turn up in the new one until something actually happened (which is usually too late).

So I hope this is not interpreted as a terrible invasion of privacy - all the information is already collected by local governments. The only change is that moving from one local government's area to another doesn't mean those services lose all information.

Can someone enlighten me...

[jkrise]

why no country has attempted to do this sort of thing? For the entire world, there could be only 6 billion records - a single nation would need to have less than a billion - maybe a few million for most countries.

What can be the security implications for storing things like name, date of birth, sex, present address, etc. for all citizens? It's amazing that in these days of hi-tech gadgets and advances in storage, such elementary data is not available OR not reliably accurate.

Even population estimates have a more than 10% error rate for most nations. How can we plan for social welfare and emergency relief when we don't have accurate data? Amazing, really...

Curse or Blessing?

[RAMMS EIN]

The blurb (and TFA) are a bit misleading. They suggest that Dutch citizens will now be tracked ``from cradle to grave'', whereas they hadn't been before.

In reality, what's happening is that schools, police, and various organizations for the protection of children, psychiatric institutions, etc. are already doing this tracking.

What's changing is that they will now exchange information about which kids have caused or otherwise been in trouble.

The rationale is that by improving communication between these institutions, kids can be more adequately helped. For example, a school can receive information from a child protection institution that says the child is having trouble at home, and link that to the fact that the child is often missing from school.

Principle is *backwards*--WE should own OUR info

[shanen]

This is just the natural extension of what's been going on over the last few decades, and the movement to the governmental level is just the natural limit. The potential for abuse is enormous--and you can basically rest assured such power over individuals will be abused. Perhaps not so much by the Dutch, who are basically reasonable people (IMO), but there are lots of much less reasonable governments out there.

The operative legal principle should be that our personal information belongs to the individual, and if someone (even someone who works for the government and who "wants to help you") wants to store data about you, they should be required to store that information on YOUR PODS (personally owned data storage). Easy enough to use a checksum to prevent you from modifying the information, but if they want to see it again, they should be required to say why, and you should have the right to agree or disagree to their proposed use of your personal information.

Trivial example, if you want to borrow money from a bank, then the bank would have good reason to query your PODS for information about your financial history. If you don't agree to provide enough information, then the bank is not going to agree to the loan. However, once they've made the decision to loan you the money, they should store the records on your own PODS, and erase most of the personal information at their end. Once you've finished paying off the loan, they'd have no reason to keep any of your personal information (though the records would still be stored on your computer if you want them again, as for another loan).

Remove your tin foil hat

[sangdrax]

Schools are pedaphile's dream, and far easier to access too. The Internet also offers possibilities. Yet we didn't ban them. Geez. Ofcourse the system won't be 100% hack proof. No system can be. It's about the advantages (keeping troubled kids from going unnoticed by the right people) weighing against the disadvantages (chance of system abuse).

Creating this system country-wide for all citizens is probably the future. It's not creating a totally new system: we already have nation-wide systems for national ID, criminal records, taxes etc anyway. They're just not linked, causing everyone headaches and people can abuse *that* as well. And far easier, too.

Also keep in mind that we don't carry this US trauma of the government being evil.

What They Don't Tell You Is...

[JohnPerkins]

...that each child will have to carry their own information in a frisbee glued to their backs.

Lessons of History

[Budenny]

You would have thought the Dutch of all people would understand the dangers. In Holland before WWII the local authorities had records of the religion of their people. The reason was simple, so that contributions could be made to the churches on their behalf. All very reasonable and in keeping with tolerance and religious diversity. But come the invasion, it was very very simple to find everyone of a given religion.... It is not what these guys will use this stuff for, its what their successors may use it for.

Re:those dutch

[msh104]

as a dutch person, I have to agree
it seems that many of the new directions we are heading in are in the wrong direction.

and guess what... most of this new thinking direction is about fucking terrorism. to "protect" us.

laws are already being passed to arrest people who haven't yet commited a crime but "might" do so in the near future. (because it is not much use to arrest someone who is going to blow himself up after he commited the crime.

according to our government they would even like to expanding this by making adoration for terrorists a crime. thinks like "I think bin laden is a cool guy" or "man, really darn nice explosion a few weeks ago" could very well cause you big trouble.

the problem is this kind of thinking is that it could very well cause people who are actually joking or haven't done anything to go to jail, it is also a very usable power source if they would decide to use it for bad things. and it is also a first direction into the breaking down of our freedom of speech.

our government is heading in the wrong direction. and in general, there is no such thing as turning back...

just hoping this isn't a general scenario.

Additional background information

[Frans Faase]

In the past year, several times children have died because of molest, when several authorities where aware of things going wrong. In some cases ten or more different organisations where involved with a family but not knowing about each other. After the child died, it was realized that the life of the child could have been saved, if the organisations had been aware of eachother.

Wow

[DaveV1.0]

One stop Identity-theft shopping!

Weee!

Re:gestapo wtf

[WindBourne]

First off, the gestapo did a LOT more than just murdering jews. They spent a lot of time monitoring as many of their citizens as possible. Basically, you did not dare speak out, as the person next to you may very well be SS.

Next, we ARE a lot closer than what we were even a decade ago. Now, that gov. are tracking citizens and listening in their voice and internet coversations, how is that different than what gestapo did to the average german citizen? Likewise, the reason why so many fought against FDR's Social Security was that they were afraid that the SSN could be used in part of a national ID (interestingly, the republican party fought it hard based on that). The more that a gov. tracks and listens, the easier it is for the next one, to extend that further. They all say that is for the "good of the nation" or for "homeland defense".

A good example is China now has forced abortion on women and forced sterilization on both sexes. We are not talking a 1-2 months abortions, but 9 month (ready to deliver). Now, with this kind of tech., how easy will it be for a gov. to say, oh, we know that you are pregnant by listening in on coversations. And yes, if China is doing this now, how soon will other govs. decide to do the same? Perhaps, they have decided that junior there does not have the genetic make-up that is desirable. But of course, we both know that a gov. would NEVER take that step. Right?

And no western gov. would ever spend their effort listening in on all their citizens.

And no western gov. would ever control the press by locking up foreign journalist (say known musleum reporters in a war zone) or allowing their own press to be owned by just a few friendly companies in which the CEO and "moderators" decide what is ok to print/tell/view.

And no western gov. would try to control those who do have intimate knowledge of deals

10 years ago, I would have though ppl crazy for thinking that a DB is bad. Now, In light of what has happened over the last 5 years, I have changed my mind.

Re:gestapo wtf

[sangdrax]

I would rather be concerned for countries which do execute people and do drag people to camps without judge or trail "for national security" and do invade foreign nations to expand their sphere of influence, all covered with a thick layer of propaganda and national pride. *That* is I call tending towards Fascistic nature.

But linking information that's already being gathered for decades without problems? That is, except the problems of unlinked databases, which stopped us from preventing several children from being murdered by their own parents recently.. How does wanting to prevent that even come remotely close to creating WW2 like scenarios?

It's the public consensus that creates WW2 like scenarios, not governments creating systems which could theoretically be abused if they really wanted to. They don't need new systems to be able to abuse them. You have to make sure they don't want to, thats the key.

Privacy issues vs. solving realworld problems

[gek]

For the first time in a long while I actually believe the end justify the means used. In an ever growing world we are seeing more and more systems pop-up that are able to classify and trace citizen in any country. Most countries that do this immediately label the system as an anti-terrorism system and basically make your life a living hell when you want to fly. Holland (where I life) is actually going to use this system to do good. Track citizens to make sure that nothing bad happens to them.

In the town where I live, we had a small child die when here parents severely abused her. This was such a shock to the nation that an investigation was started. All the instances that are normally involved in child protection had one complaint. There was no central system in place to track problem children in the country. Basically you could abuse your child in one town, get caught, move to the next town with a clean slate. This has happened several times and the government decided to solve this problem. I believe this will do good and I also believe that the Dutch government are not going to abuse the system.

The great thing of living in Holland is that we have privacy issues up the kazoeks. For example, in the rest of the world when someone gets arrested the media can actually use his full name in press reports, no go in Holland. The guy that killed van Gogh is called Mohammed B. and is last name is never used! But they (the gov.) do keep pushing the limits. A while ago they sent out a massive SMS round asking for witnesses to some football violence. They basically asked the telcos to provide the Cell numbers of everyone that was in the stadium or near it when the incident happened. Results: some people were pissed off (logically) but they managed to catch around 30 people with this action.

I am happy to live in Holland and to be honest when I compare it to the US I feel safer and have more trust in my government.

In Norway we have this database

[Harald Paulsen]

Norway has this database actually. Everyone born or moving into Norway is registered and they keep track of your parents and grandparents, where you are born, the places you have lived, when you died and if you're married / living together with someone. Every appartment even has a unique number (Mine is H0101, which is the first appartment on the first floor) so in case of emergency they can pinpoint you fairly easily.

Same scheme in the UK

[cardpuncher]

A similar scheme (http://www.politics.co.uk/public-services/hodge-c hildrens-database-will-not-be-it-disaster-$7765060 .htm) is being planned for the UK. It follows the high-profile death of an abused child who was "known" to a variety of agencies who failed to communicate with each other. Whilst the motives appear to be virtuous, the possible implications of the scheme are serious and the benefits extremely dubious.

Re:gestapo wtf

[igb]

You would expect the Dutch to be slightly more attuned to this. The roundups in 1942 were massively aided by the Dutch census of 1937, which included religious affiliation. And massive collaboration by the police and civil service, of course, but few European countries reacted to roundups of Jews with anything other than enthusiasm. It's instructive to note how few Dutch Jews survived the war with how many Danish Jews did. In Denmark, there wasn't a population register with religion on it, and the civil service behaved impeccably.

ian

Re:You think this is scary? Read on...

[pe1chl]

This particular database has no relation with tracking terrorists.

The proposal you refer to, does. You are right, we have a problem with politicians like Balkenende and Donner, who believe that they can control everything when they can monitor everyone.

But even more of a problem is that they believe that there is a war on terror to be fought against a hostile community. This belief came upon them when they had too close contact to the current president of the US. Said person indoctrinated them that troups should be sent to countries like Afghanistan and Iraq, to support a war against a phenomenon that they do not understand (and do not bother to understand).
As they really like to please people that appear to be powerful, the troups were sent. And now, they are faced with a "terror threat to the country". Instead of admitting that this is their own stupid fault, they try to cover their asses by inventing all kinds of stupid laws and regulations like the one you are referring to.

In fact:
- they are the real cause of the terror threat. when we had remained neutral there would have been no threat.
- they are exaggerating the threat, scaring people more than necessary
- the are introducing extra measures to constantly monitor people just in case

All in all they are just giving the terrorists what they want. First, give them a reason to attack. Then, scare their own people and take freedom-limiting measures.
Terrorists must be delighted by such a (mis)government! Everyone scared without having to throw a single bomb.

A bit misleading

[Anspen]

The tone of the article suggest something that not really the case.

First of all they won't suddenly start keeping a single, giant 1984 record. What they are proposing is to link the existing records of different agencies.

Second, while the road the hell is paved with good intentions they do have a good reason for this step: in many cases tragedy could have been avoided if agencies had known important information that others had. An example is the rise of loverboys in the Netherlands: young men who use the emotional fragility of teenage girls to get them in to prostitution. Often the police knows about the men, but doesn't know what or who are the likely targets, while child protection services knows the girls but has no clue about the men.

Thirdly: the right to privacy is protected much stronger in the Netherlands that in the US. As a result identity theft is almost never a problem and there are very few cases known of clear abuse of government databases.

It's certainly something to be watchfull about but the step in itself isn't too worrying.

Re:That's complete nonsense

[Pieroxy]

What does the fact that the system work with flags have to do with how these flags are placed?

The social worker will have access to all the red flags of the file, beforehand. And don't tell me a social worker will not be influenced when he opens the file and already sees 7 flags raised.

Re:gestapo wtf

[bustersnyvel]

Now, that gov. are tracking citizens and listening in their voice and internet coversations, how is that different than what gestapo did to the average german citizen?

The difference is the action that is being taken. With the Gestapo, you could get killed for venting your thoughts. No way that this is going to happen by action of the Dutch government.

I think the protection of children is a good thing. Personally, I'm against the right to have children as defined now. I think everybody should have the right to have children, but only after having done a course in raising a kid.

Personally, if I would have to give up a little privacy in order to give one kid a better life, I think it's worth it. If you look at the raising criminality and drug use among kids in The Netherlands, I think paying more attention to them wouldn't hurt anyone. Many parents don't do that nowadays - pay proper attention to their kids I mean.

Then again, given the current situation of The Netherlands, I think our government has much better ways of spending their money.

Re:gestapo wtf

[iawia]

It's not the unlinked databases that 'stopped us from preventing several children being murdered'. It's simply incompetence of the organisations that are supposed to protect those children.

The cases that have been in the media in the last year (which are just a few examples, as 1 to 2 children *a week* are killed by abuse in the Netherlands!) are cases where the family was already under control of a child protection agency. The situation was known to the 'gezinsvoogd' (custodian? it's the person assigned responsibility over a child by the judge when there are serious problems) but they didn't react, or at least not very effectively.

The reasons this system doesn't work are simple:

1) The safety of the child is not a priority. In most of the agencies there is a huge pressure to make sure the child stays with the parents. Even if the parents have repeatedly physically abused the child! The reason given for this is that it is better for the psycologicaldevelopment of the child to stay with its parents. True, but first things first, please...

2) History is disregarded. Parents from who children have been taken because of abuse are allowed to keep their other children. Apparently this is a 'different relationship'. Go figure.

3) The organisations charged with protection of the children are both inadequately funded, and inadequately run. There is usually no clear structure or guidelines on how to deal with different cases, no place to get expert help (ie. no child psycologists available, and no budget to go to an external expert), no rules on how to keep records, even!

Fixing these problems is not done by linking databases. It's done by reorganisation of the system, and proper regard for children's safety as *the* primary requirement.

Re:gestapo wtf

[DataCannibal]

If the cases in the Netherlands are anything like the cases that have been cited here in the UK as the reasons for us having a National Childrens Database, then it was not the "linking of information that's already been gathered" that would have prevented the deaths but people doing their jobs properly.

I'd be very surprised if it was any different in NL.

Re:Yeh but

[Scarblac]

That's not true. We spend less money fighting drugs and have a smaller drugs problem than the rest of Europe. There are some cities that have put limits on the number of 'coffee shops' they wanted in town center, and perhaps a few had to close, but then normal bars and all other businesses are regulated too.

What's popularly regarded as failed is integration of minorites (i.e., muslim immigrants) into our society. There's a big divide there, mutual fear and anger, and the feeling that the values of Dutch society aren't shared by traditional Islam. That's what the big mess in our society right now is. Not a few harmless coffee shops.

Re:gestapo wtf

[Shaper_pmp]

You're right in what you say - the US is (for all their talk of "t3h fr33d0mZ!!!!!1111!") far closer to becoming a fascist state than the Netherlands currently is.

Read The 14 Characteristics of Fascism by Dr. Lawrence Britt - the USA hits every single point square-on, with the possible exception of point 5 (rampant sexism), although the paper goes on to clarify "opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy", so maybe half a point then.

However, by instituting a system such as the Netherlands', they make it much easier to start monitoring their citizens and restricting civil liberties in the future - all you need is to not stop updating the database after the child passes 18, and you've got some of the scariest bits of 1984 right there.

Short version: The US is far further down the track, but the Netherlands just massively upgraded how fast they can catch up.

Re:gestapo wtf

[Shaper_pmp]

"The difference is the action that is being taken. With the Gestapo, you could get killed for venting your thoughts. No way that this is going to happen by action of the Dutch government."

Currently.

Ten years ago in USA you couldn't be arrested, detained without trial, denied even minimal Geneva Convention protections and tortured and abused without restitution merely for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

And the USA was widely regarded as the shining example of representative democracy and civil liberties to the entire world.

Your point?

Re:gestapo wtf

[scaryjohn]

I'm a bit of a paranoid libertarian myself, but that link is horseshit. Fascism is a philosophy, not a mystery syndrome. And maybe some people in the Administration do have authoritarian leanings but... even under Dr. Britt's criteria we still fall short, if only by degrees

To say that the U.S. has military supremacy is the most far-fetched of them all. I could only find two cabinet secretaries who had military service listed in their Wikipedia biography: Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, and Veterans Affairs Secretary Jim Nicholson. That's troublesome in its own right, but might explain why there are so many hawks in the Administration. Regardless, when you start getting into fascist military cults... you don't see Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld running around in military uniforms making up medals to give each other like Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, or dare I say it: Hussein's government in Iraq all did.

Again, it's not that I'm not scared: it could happen; we're inching towards it. But what's his face's attempt to force fit fascism into modern American society is a joke.

Re:gestapo wtf

[Shaper_pmp]

Yay! My first Freak!

But seriously, I wasn't trolling, I was attempting to make a serious point:

Merely because the current government in the Netherlands apparently isn't predisposed towards fascist/totalitarian behaviour, that's no reason to hand them the capability without thought.

Allowing the government additional powers isn't merely a question of "will they use it responsibly?".

It's actually a case of "will they, and every single government who comes after them, for the entire conceivable future of the country use these powers responsibly".

I'd submit that no "government" can be trusted for all time, since the people who make up each "government" change every few years, and while it's easy to restrict civil liberties and pass restrctive laws, these measures don't tend to be repealed by anything short of a revolution.

The (admittedly slightly emotive) example of the US was intended to illustrate this point - in the mid-90s you'd have been laughed at to suggest that the current situation would occur within 5-10 years, and yet the US has gone from shining beacon of liberty to the world to an unprecedented crackdown on civil liberties and an unprecedented drop in international esteem.

Apologies if you think I'm trolling, but that wasn't the intention at all. And when your Freaks list is at least as long as your Friends list, maybe you want to re-evaluate that hair-trigger on your killfile ;-)

Correction

[ifwm]

"children die because social services are hugely incompetent."

This should read "because PARENTS are hugely incompetent"

You're welcome.

No: point by point

[cappadocius]

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism

Flags have been steadily vanishing in the public square compared to their post-9/11 prominence. They are also largely without power.

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights

The US Constitution provides expressly for many human rights. Our legal positivism is not dismissal of the value of human rights, only the acknowledgment that in the real world rights exist because governments grant them, not because of their value.

Identification of Enemies

Name me one world power in history that had no enemies. We don't scapegoat everything on terrorists, only what they do. And we make a distinction between Muslims and Islamists.

Supremacy of the Military

Ours is a civilian government. Military service does not grant significant advantage in elections. Many people do not like the military. Military recruitment has fallen. A large budget means that we are in an intractable war, not that we are a military state.

Rampant Sexism

First, opposition to abortion is not sexism. It really isn't. You can be pro-Life and a feminists. Secondly, opposition to abortion isn't that high. A majority think it should be legal, they just don't think it should be legal at all points and in all circumstances. As for homophobia, it goes both ways. Some states have civil unions, others have marriage bans. Many have some special protections in the form of hate crime laws.

Controlled Mass Media

The closest thing we have to state-run media is PBS and NPR. Tell me with a straight face that those are fascist propaganda machines. And before someone shouts Fox News, having one news source tailored to viewers of a particular political persuasion sympathetic to the current administration does not fascism make.

Religion and Government are Intertwined

American secularism, enshrined in the Constitution, specifically disentangles government and religion. Yes, members of the governing party use religious rhetoric, but they are not the majority of the government, and they represent people who genuinely care about it, not people who have been manipulated.

Labor Power is Suppressed

Unions are perfectly legal, and even given some protections. That unions are in trouble in America is due to the decisions made by the particular Unions (AFL-CIO, several of whose member unions left recently) and the pressures of globalization.

Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

Last I checked Ward Churchill could say any crazy thing that he thought up and nothing happened to University funding. He certainly wasn't hauled away. The US continues to be one of the top nations for scholarly institutions. As for art, refusing to give away money to artists isn't fascism, it is just a lack of socialism.

Obsession with Crime and Punishment

The police don't have limitless power, most people care about civil liberties, and the courts have repeatedly checked the power of law enforcement. I would certainly like for their to be greater checks on law enforcement, but it is not as if we have a secret police or suspension of habeas corpus.

Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

Federal corruption charges are not overly numerous, and the effects of cronyism are limited and temporary. It is not as if we have no problem with this, but again, not to the level of fascism.

Fraudulent Elections

Our elections are real. Sure they are flawed in ways that only rarely make a difference, such as in Bush v Gore, but those flaws are not systematically designed to benefit the ruling party, they are often due to human laziness and incompetence.