Subscribe to End Hereditary ReligionNews FeedSubscribe to End Hereditary ReligionComments

Home > Blog > 2010

The USA Should Move to Institute International Standards on Child Rights
February 16th, 2010 by Richard Collins

Book Review

James G. Dwyer, The Relationship Rights of Children. Cambridge University Press, 2006, $ 55.00 hardcover.

The United States and Somalia stand as the only two nations in the world that refuse to sign the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a document that lays down the basic rights and moral standing of children. Nor has the U.S. attempted to adopt the comprehensive legislation passed in many countries, such as England’s The Children Act, which focuses on all matters pertaining to children, with the child’s welfare squarely defining all legal actions.

James Dwyer, in his complexly argued book, The Relationship Rights of Children, believes that, while the United States goes far in protecting parents” rights, it is often at the expense of the welfare of children. He does not offer why the United States leans so far in favor of parents (there are complicated historical and cultural reasons for our “difference”), but instead makes a strong case, based on two centuries of philosophical reasoning, for why children deserve the same moral and legal consideration as adults, even when this consideration steps on the rights of adults.

The debate about children’s rights, when it takes place at all in this country, is usually carried on by legal scholars, with the occasional contribution of social scientists who either study child development or who offer measures of children’s economic and psychological well-being. With Dwyer, we are offered extensive arguments from the philosopher giants, John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant, John Rawls and others on the value of the moral autonomy of the individual. These philosophers, he admits, focus their arguments on adults, not children. In fact, he notes, John Stuart Mill, in his theory of liberty, specifically states: “[this] is meant to apply only to human beings in the maturity of their faculties.” Not so for Dwyer. He makes a compelling case that the same moral rights apply to children.

“Critically then, each of us competent adults has rights of self-determination because it is generally assumed as a moral matter that our interests matter, and matter equally regardless of our status in society. This empirical assumption certainly applies to children as well, and if we are to respect children as equals, we must extend the moral assumption to them also–that is, that their interests matter as much as do adults’ interests in state decision making.”

But how do children know what their interests are, and if they did, how can they assert them? Children are, of course, dependent upon adults to do so for them. But which adults? Here Dwyer argues forcefully that although the law professes to promote “the best interests of children,” in fact it is far more protective of parental rights, and that these rights are often based on a purely biological claim, not any test of parental ability. Dwyer promotes a view of parents as caretakers, not automatic owners of children. He focuses his criticism on laws creating parental rights at birth, and protecting them in events of abuse and neglect after birth. His solution is to drastically re-formulate the law so that, among other requirements, a birth mother must sign a “Parental Vow” promising love and support within two days after birth in order to become a legal parent, but the state may file a petition within seven days to determine in a court proceeding whether the mother is, in fact, unsuitable for one of many reasons, including age, mental incapacity, past conduct of violence against family members, etc. Fathers achieve legal parenthood only if the birth mother consents and they are married. Fathers not married to the mother can only be deemed legal parents if the mother consents and the father petitions the court, passing all the tests of adequate parenting. Non-biological adults may also petition the court within 30 days and their claim will be determined by the court. Following birth, similar strict tests are applied in cases of abuse or neglect of children, allowing the court to more easily terminate parental rights than is now the case.

His view of children’s rights privileges birth mothers but gives little other advantage to biological ties. Unwed fathers still have an obligation to support but not to access unless they have passed all the above tests. Adults who have acted like parents, or have firm attached relationships to children, like stepfathers, have rights over non-involved biological fathers, and a child may have more than two significant adults in his life. From this perspective, attachment trumps biology and a parent must earn the right to become and to continue as a parent.

This concept of parents as caretakers or trustees rather than the owners of children who have independent rights is much more in keeping with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and with most European efforts at establishing a code of children’s rights. Some of its obvious consequences would be a move toward no corporal punishment and ultimately the right of children themselves, as they grow older, to petition to “divorce” their parents–the course taken in Europe.

Grounded in a strong tradition of moral philosophy, this child-centered approach adds valuable support to some American legal scholars and others who have been moving more timidly in this direction, most notably with a new revision of the influential American Law Institutes” treatise on Parent and Child where “de facto” parents (such as stepparents) without biological ties would be given greater access rights.

A limitation of this book is that Dwyer limits himself to the “protective” rights of young children and does not wander into the thornier “choice rights” of maturing adolescents. For instance: does the protective state have the right to insist on drug testing for children before they may join any after-school activity, as the Supreme Court recently ruled? or, are the rights of children served when in one courtroom a 13-year-old who steals a candy bar may be given a lawyer and nearly all the due process rights of a criminal defendant while down the hall a 13-year-old whose physical custody is being determined following divorce may have no voice or representation at all? Perhaps this philosopher will tackle maturing children’s rights in his next book.

Mary Ann Mason

University of California, Berkeley

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Encouraging news on child abuse front
February 16th, 2010 by Richard Collins

I posted this in the Amazon, Spanking your children should be illegal forum
+++++++++++

We interrupt this forum for some breaking news!

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=9730224

A massive new federal study documents an unprecedented and dramatic decrease in incidents of serious child abuse, especially sexual abuse. Experts hailed the findings as proof that crackdowns and public awareness campaigns had made headway.

An estimated 553,000 children suffered physical, sexual or emotional abuse in 2005-06, down 26 percent from the estimated 743,200 abuse victims in 1993, the study found.

“It’s the first time since we started collecting data about these things that we’ve seen substantial declines over a long period, and that’s tremendously encouraging,” said professor David Finkelhor of the University of New Hampshire, a leading researcher in the field of child abuse.

“It does suggest that the mobilization around this issue is helping and it’s a problem that is amenable to solutions,” he said.

But the study points out that 500,000 children were still abused. That is not acceptable, especially in view of the fact that the abused often turn around and abuse others. We must get ahead of the problem and stop sweeping up after the harm has already occurred. Nonetheless, we see that preventive measures do help and that should give us hope we are moving in the right direction.

What would really help is to develop a national policy that set forth requirements for competent parenting and widespread parental training classes. As a final measure licensing of prospective parents could be the next step. Abolishing all forms of physical punishment and verbal abuse must be instituted. There is never any reason to hit a child or threaten them with violence.

The libertarian and conservative religious ideology that family privacy trumps any efforts by the state to intervene in family matters until damage has occured has to go. Parents are not free to do as they please to their children.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


The best interests of the child — UNCRC
January 23rd, 2010 by Richard Collins

http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/IHRIP/circle/modules/module5.htm
[quote]

Best interests of the child

A major aspect of the philosophy behind the UNCRC is that children are equals; as human beings they have the same inherent value as grown-ups. The affirmation of the right to play underlines the fact that childhood is valuable in itself and these years are not merely a training period for the adult life. The idea that children have equal value may sound like a truism, but it is, in fact, a radical thought—one not at all respected today.

Children—especially when very young—are vulnerable and need special support to be able to enjoy their rights in full. How can children be granted equal value and at the same time the necessary protection? Part of the answer lies in the principle of “the best interests of the child,” formulated in article 3(1):

In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.

Whenever official decisions are taken which affect children, their interests should be seen as important. The interests of the parents or the state should not be the all-important consideration. This is indeed one of the major messages of the CRC.

Views of the child

This first principle, by its very nature, gives importance to another principle, one about respecting the views of the child. In order to know what actually is in the interests of the child, it is only logical to listen to him or her. The principle is formulated in article 12(1):

States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child be given due weight, in accordance with the age and maturity of the child.

This has been termed by some commentators the “participation” element in the CRC. The idea is that the child has the right to be heard and have his/her ideas taken seriously. The reports by states parties so far have been vague on this article; some have stated that children of, for instance, twelve years of age have the right to reject an adoption or a change of name or nationality. Few have displayed a comprehensive approach to this principle which affects life in schools and families—and in politics.
[/quote]

It is easy to see why despotic parents hate the foundational premises of the UN CRC. They wish to treat their children as property, as clay they can mold to suit their whims and prejudices. You do not treat an equal in this manner. You certainly have no inherent right to punish an equal physically because they do not bow down to you.

Framing the rights of children as elaborated in the UN CRC has profound implications for how parents role in the development of their children is envisioned. Tyrannical patriarchs are out. Thoughtful respectful guardians are in.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


Online resources compiled by James C. Talbot
January 19th, 2010 by Richard Collins

Legality of corporal punishment in the United ...
Image via Wikipedia

For any parent’s who would wish to explore what has become a world wide consensus against spanking, you will find below a number of online resources from my book.

The Road To Positive Discipline: A Parent’s Guide

Slapping and Spanking in Childhood and Its Association with Lifetime Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders

http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/gca?sendit=Get+All+Checked+Abstract%28s29&SEARCHID=1041949468944_779&TITLEABSTRACT=Slapping+and+spanking+in+Childhood&JOURNALCODE=&FIRSTINDEX=0&hits=1&RESULTFORMAT=&gca=161%2F7%2F805

Research on Corporal Punishment – Available Online

http://stoptherod.net/research.htm

Corporal Punishment – Empirical Studies

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/CP-Empirical.htm

The Research and Informed Expert Opinion

http://nospank.net./resrch.htm

Slapping and Spanking in Childhood and Its Association With Lifetime Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders in a General Population

http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/161/7/805

States Should Ban Violence Against Children – United Nations Study

http://nospank.net/n-q33r.htm

Correlation Between High Rates of Corporal Punishment in Public Schools andSocial Pathologies

http://nospank.net./correlationstudy.htm

Experts – Spanking Harms Children, Especially Girls

http://nospank.net./women.htm

Spanking and Mental Illness

http://nospank.net./falk2.htm

The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children

http://parentinginjesusfootsteps.org/sxdangers.html

Spanking Can Be Sexual Abuse

http://www.nospank.net/101.htm

panking, Pain and Pleasure

http://www.nospank.net/r-ali.htm

American Academy of Pediatrics’ Position on Physical Punishment

http://nospank.net./aap4-c.htm

ChildAdvocate.org – Corporal Punishment Society’s Acceptable Violence Towards Children

http://www.childadvocate.org/1a_research.htm

What Does Research Say About the Effects of Physical Punishment on Children?

http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/familydevelopment/components/7266a.html

The Neurobiology of Child Abuse

http://www.nospank.net/teicher2.htm

It’s Time to Change `The American Way of Discipline’ – Arthur Cherry, M.D.,FAAP,

http://nospank.net./aap5-a.htm

Why Do We Need Full Legal Reform to End All Corporal Punishment?

http://nospank.net./endallcp.htm

Physical Punishment of Children

http://nospank.net./shrc.htm

Corporal Punishment in Schools

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3b106/2/343

Lowest Achieving Ohio Schools Quickest With The Paddle-Rights

http://nospank.net./ohio3.htm

Dr. Spock on Parenting (1989)–Excerpts

http://nospank.net./spock2.htm

The Center for Effective Discipline, Columbus, Ohio

http://www.stophitting.com/

End All Corporal Punishment of Children

http://www.neverhitachild.org/

Corporal Punishment and Trauma – Building Better Health

http://healthresources.caremark.com/topic/corporal

Corporal Punishment of Children (Spanking)

http://www.religioustolerance.org/spanking.htm

Giving Guidance on Child Discipline

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/320/7230/261

The Belt, Adrenalin, and Delinquency

http://www.nospank.net/welsh5.htm

Abused Tots Take On Abusive Parents Ways

http://www.nospank.net/tots.htm

Impact of Parenting Styles – Alfred Adler Institute of San Francisco

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hstein/parentin.htm

Adult Consequences of Childhood Parenting Styles – Alfred Adler Institute

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/hstein/adult.htm

Ten Reasons Not to Hit Your Kids – The Natural Child Project

http://www.naturalchild.com/jan_hunt/tenreasons.html

Guidance for Effective Discipline

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3b101/4/723

Spanking Strikes Out

http://life.familyeducation.com/spanking/discipline/36133.html

Corporal Punishment

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/corporal_punishment.html

Force and Fear Have No Place in Education

http://nospank.net/einstein.htm

Physical Punishment and The Development of Aggressive and Violent Behavior – A Review, by Elizabeth Kandel

http://www.neverhitachild.org/areview.html

Let’s Outlaw Any Hitting of Children

http://www.nospank.net/lndsbrg3.htm

Hitting People Is Wrong – and Children Are People Too

http://www.neverhitachild.org/hitting1.html

The Institute for the Study of Anti-Social Behaviour in Youth – Highlights from the Latest Youth Update

http://www.iay.org/youth_update/abstracts_latest_issue.html#Maltreatment%20and%20its%20Impact%20on%20C

Why Do We Hurt Our Children – The Natural Child Project

http://www.naturalchild.com/james_kimmel/punishment.html

Alternatives to Spanking

http://life.familyeducation.com/spanking/discipline/36135.html

Some Thoughts On Spanking – The Natural Child Project

http://www.naturalchild.com/guest/don_fisher.html

Raising Kind Children

http://extension.missouri.edu/xplor/hesguide/humanrel/gh6126.htm

Why You Should Say `No’ to Corporal Punishment – It Doesn’t Work

http://archive.southcoasttoday.com/daily/05-96/05-2796/c02li081.htm

Spanking – An Idea Whose Time Has Gone

http://nospank.net/gurza.htm

Faut-il interdire la fessée? / Should Spanking Be Prohibited?

http://www.nospank.net/n-j48.htm

The Swedish Example

http://parentinginjesusfootsteps.org/crowell-article.html

German Parliament Bans Use Of Corporal Punishment In
Child Rearing

http://nospank.net/deut.htm

Denmark Bans Spanking

http://www.neverhitachild.org/denmark1.html

Israeli High Court on Spanking

http://nospank.net/n-g02.htm

Jerusalem Supreme Court: Corporal Punishment of Children
Is Indefensible

http://nospank.net/israel.htm

Greece Outlaws Corporal Punishment in the Home

http://nospank.net/greece.htm

South Africa’s Constitutional Court Says `NO’ to Spankers in
Christian Schools

http://nospank.net/sacourt2.htm

Spanking of Toddlers to Be a Crime in Scotland

http://www.nospank.net/n-i48.htm

Bangladesh Observes Child Rights Week

http://www.nospank.net/n-f33.htm

BBC News – UK – Smacking Children `Does Not Work’

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/252607.stm

Delhi School Kids To Be Spared The Rod

http://nospank.net/delhi.htm

Punjab Bans Corporal Punishment

http://nospank.net/pkstn.htm

No Smacking Rule For Children Under Three

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2001/09/161

Greece outlaws corporal punishment in the home

http://nospank.net/greece.htm

End All Corporal Punishment of Children

http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/

Correlation Between Corporal Punishment and Social Pathologies

http://nospank.net/guthrow.htm

Paddling States v. Non-Paddling States: A National Academic Comparison

http://nospank.net/charles5.htm

National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Call For Government Rethink On Hitting Children Following United Nations Report

http://nospank.net/n-j58.htm

Corporal Punishment of Children (Spanking): Introduction and Legality

http://www.religioustolerance.org/spankin2.htm

Kenyan Children Suffer Frequent Beatings by Teachers

http://hrw.org/english/docs/1999/09/09/kenya1654.htm

Dept of Health Issues Guidelines to British Parents on How to Smack TheirChildren

http://wsws.org/articles/2000/feb2000/smck-f02.shtml

Project NoSpank

http://nospank.net./main.htm

Spanking Articles at findarticles.com

http://findarticles.com/

End All Corporal Punishment of Children – States With Full Abolition

http://endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/frame.html

The Center for Effective Discipline

http://www.stophitting.com/

Parenting Tips

http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/children/parents/behavior/368.html

Spanking – Ages 6 to 12 | ahealthyme.com

http://www.ahealthyme.com/topic/spanking6to12

Family Resource Library Resources

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/

A Good Whuppin’? Many Who Survived Childhood Spankings Now Endorse Them, Renewing Debate Over a Peculiar Institution.

http://www.childprotectionreform.org/policy/spanking/washpoststory.htm

Our Children Don’t Deserve to Be Beaten

http://nospank.net/lombardo.htm

Monadnock Area Psychotherapy and Spirituality Services

http://www.mapsnh.org/spanking.html

Family Issue Facts, Spanking, Bulletin 4357

http://www.umext.maine.edu/onlinepubs/htmpubs/4357.htm

United Nations Committee on Rights of Child

http://www.nospank.net/uncrc.htm

Corporal Punishment Society’s Acceptable Violence Towards Children

http://www.childadvocate.org/1a_research.htm

How Children Really React to Control

http://nospank.net/gordon.htm

Force and Fear Have No Place in Education

http://nospank.net/einstein.htm

Selected Print Medial Coverage

http://www.nospank.net/clips.htm

Let’s Outlaw Any Hitting of Children

http://www.nospank.net/lndsbrg3.htm

Domestic Abuse Organizational and Employee Impact

http://www.newfoundations.com/OrgTheory/Mickles721.html

Plain Talk About Spanking

http://nospank.net/pt2007.htm

This valuable list for advocates who are working to ban violence against children was compiled by James Talbot author of The Road To Positive Discipline: A Parent’s Guide .

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


« Newer Posts