Talk:Family voting

Dire need for improvement

This article provides a definition of the phenomenon and cites two sources about times when it has been encountered. However, there would be much more to say about this. What is the different countries' policy about this? In which situations does it happen? (the sources state that it is often vulnerable people that are helped in this way); Is there any debate about the practice? Come on, we can improve this! (even if I know you love stubs Bensin)Kapiski (talk) 09:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

The article needs to be viewed with some circumspection. Wikipedia is being used as a platform to promote a concept which has been used by the Right to cast aspersions on election results not favourable to them. The article, like the realtime proponents of the concept, lacks clear agreed citations of relevant historical occurrences. Much as one might abhor the idea of interference in electoral processes, the article (like the phenomenon itself) requires a sounder basis to be anything but an explanation of language sometimes used to cast aspersions on electoral processes and results, arguably pseudo-academic, defamatory, racist, demeaning and Italophobic language at that. ~2026-12949-59 (talk) 17:19, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

"racist" ~2026-12935-20 (talk) 05:37, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

? ~2026-13062-98 (talk) 12:32, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Irrelevant

It's not even a generally used term. Other than "Democracy Volunteers" who are the organisation who created this stub, nobody else uses it. All the citations are from articles about "Democracy Volunteers". Adamcreen (talk) 12:53, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Well it's more relevant today than ever before as the recent by-election scandal shows ~2026-12935-20 (talk) 13:00, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

"Scandal"  — Hex • talk 14:15, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Scandal - an action or event regarded as morally or legally wrong and causing general public outrage. ~2026-12935-20 (talk) 15:32, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Not 'general.' Confined to a particular section of the Right not endowed with the decency to respect democratic processes and election results when they are not in their favour. ~2026-12949-59 (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

There are sources out there that don't mention "Democracy Volunteers" and pre-date the 2026 Gorton and Denton by-election. What makes you believe they created this article/stub? I'll be keeping a eye on this subject and hoping more information about DV and their agenda comes out in due course. Orange sticker (talk) 13:38, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

The Act doesn't define "family voting" and it specifically says that it is legal to enter a booth with somebody to help people to vote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-13020-98 (talk) 16:37, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Well thanks for that little contribution, without which the cognoscenti's suspicion that the whole theme is bogus might have gone unserviced online, or at least in all the obvious places. Such an important contribution, indeed, that I'd really like to know your identity, when you feel ready for that. ~2026-13062-98 (talk) 20:24, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

On a little further reflection, the anonymous contributor above actually exposes the fact that there's something wrong not only with the article, but it also raises suspicions about the organisation Democracy Volunteers. The article appears to conflate 'discussion' (legal, according to our learned, anonymous friend) and 'direction' (illegal). And there's no evidence in the article that 'direction' has ever actually occurred in the countries mentioned. You'd think that if Democracy Volunteers were genuine, and worth their salt, they'd have troubled to educate us on any such occurrence years ago, on the main article page? ~2026-13062-98 (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

The Lords Library overview of the 2023 Bill at https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/lln-2022-0028/ says that The aim of the bill is to address the issue of ‘family voting’, and the text of Bill itself says that it would make it an offence to: accompany an elector into a polling [booth]; or position near an elector inside a polling station with the intention of influencing how they cast their vote. Belbury (talk) 15:48, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

The bill in question did not become law. As it says in the link, the government pointed out that 'family voting' is already illegal, altho there are specific circumstances in which voters may be accompanied into polling booths. This is also another clear instance of the political Right casting aspersions on election results and voting cultures not favourable to themselves, but failing to provide clear, relevant evidence. ~2026-12949-59 (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Gorton and Denton by- election

Including "Gorton and Denton by- election" as it's own subsection on an otherwise very short article seems like undue attention to a recent, contested "example". Particularly when it's the only such substantial "example" given. Surely worth revisiting later, but there's nothing really to write about right now beyond conflicting assertions. Boredintheevening (talk) 19:24, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

The Gorton and Denton by-election was the first known instance of the Right publicly and fraudulently casting aspersions on a British election result they didn't like, Trump-style, with the assistance of the so-called 'election monitoring service' of a former Liberal Democrat parish councillor. ~2026-12949-59 (talk) 15:59, 28 February 2026 (UTC)