Do Rights Still Flow Downhill?

in The International Journal of Children's Rights
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

In the United States, the debate about whether children have rights continues to rage, in no small measure due to the absence of any framing document that recognises children as rights holders. Within Anglo-American traditions, competence is a prerequisite to having and exercising rights, largely because of notions surrounding social compact theory. Thus children are excluded from the class of rights holders because they lack competency. The tension between a conception of the rights holder as an autonomous and capable individual free from governmental regulation and a strong notion of the welfare state suggests that a system of rights which acknowledges remediation of insecurity and inequality as a vital governmental obligation is essential to the well-being of all vulnerable populations, including children. That system of rights, grounded in notions of empowerment, continues to offer a way forward for children.

References

Brown W. and Halley J. , “Introduction” in Brown W. and Halley J. (eds.), Left Legalism/Left Critique (Durham: Duke University Press, 2002).

Butler J. , Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York: Routledge, 1990).

Butler J. , Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence (New York: Verso, 2004).

Butler J. , Frames of War: When is Life Grievable? (New York: Verso, 2009a).

Butler J. , “Performativity, Precarity, and Sexual Politics”, Revista de Antropologia Iberoamerica 2009b (4(3)), 309 ixii.

Butler J. , “Precarious Life, Vulnerability, and the Ethics of Cohabitation”, Journal of Speculative Philosophy 2012 (26(2)), 134151.

Federle K. , “On the Road to Reconceiving Rights for Children: A Postfeminist Analysis of the Capacity Principle”, DePaul Law Review 1993 (42(3)), 9831028.

Federle K. , “Looking for Rights in All the Wrong Places: Resolving Custody Disputes in Divorce Proceedings”, Cardozo Law Review 1994 (15(5)), 15231566.

Federle K. , “Looking Ahead: An Empowerment Perspective on the Rights of Children”, Temple Law Review 1995 (68(4)), 15851604.

Federle K. , “Rights flow downhill” in Freeman M. (ed.), Children’s Rights: Progress and Perspectives (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2011).

Federle K. and Skendelas P. , “Thinking Like A Child: Legal Implications of Recent Developments in Brain Research for Juvenile Offenders”, Freeman M. and Goodenough O.R. (eds.), Law, Mind, and Brain (Burlington: Ashgate 2009).

Ferguson L. , “Not Merely Rights for Children But Children’s Rights: The Theory Gap and the Assumption of the Importance of Children’s Rights”, International Journal of Children’s Rights 2013 (21(2)), 177208.

Guggenheim M. , What’s Wrong with Children’s Rights? (Boston: Harvard University Press 2005).

Gunn T.J. , “The Religious Right and the Opposition to us Ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child”, Emory International Law Review 2006 (20(1)), 111128.

Hobbes T. , Leviathan (ed., Richard Tuck, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991).

Locke J. , Second Treatise of Civil Government (1689) (repr., New York: Henry Regnery Co., 1955).

Rousseau J.J. , The Social Contract and Discources (trans. Cole G.D.H. , New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1950).

White L.E. , “Seeking ‘… The Faces of Otherness …’: A Response to Professors Sarat, Felstiner, and Cahn”, Cornell Law Review 1992 (77(6)), 14991511.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 15 15 3
Full Text Views 7 7 7
PDF Downloads 4 4 4
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0