Children’s rights only serve their purpose in as far as they are recognised as rights by those who can exercise them. This study examined a sample of Irish adults’ (predominantly students; n=83) perceptions of children’s participation and protection rights across two age groups of children (seven- and 14-year-olds). Participants completed the Perceptions of Children’s Rights Questionnaires and likelihood of reporting child abuse online. A within-groups four-factor anova examined differences between the perceptions participation and protection rights across the two age categories. Participants endorsed protection rights more than participation rights for both age groups and reported a higher endorsement of protection rights and a lower endorsement of participation rights for seven-year-olds compared with 14-year-olds. Participants were more likely to report the abuse of a seven-year-old compared with a 14-year-old, and participants’ endorsement of protection rights significantly predicted likelihood of reporting abuse. These findings have implications for how children’s rights are viewed in Irish society and how these rights may be enacted.
In many countries, a birth certificate is necessary to attend school, receive health care, inherit property, open a bank account, gain access to credit, obtain other forms of identification, vote, and receive a death certificate (). A birth certificate is proof of identity, citizenship and serves as a gateway to the realisation of other rights for children. It also serves as evidence that a child has been registered. Using evidence from the Tanzania National Panel Data 2010/11, I show that birth registration predicts lower odds for possessing a birth certificate for children in Tanzania. Instead, the education of the mother and the ability of households to pay for their own malaria bed nets, serve as the strongest predictors for possessing birth certificates in Tanzania. The article concludes with recommendations for improving birth registration and certification in Tanzania.
This paper examines how Norway turned to a more active policy on adoption in the child welfare system. It examines the full public records from all four times that the government and Storting debated adoption from care, over the period 2002–2013. I analyse the empirical and normative arguments that shaped policy, through a discourse theoretical framework () to distinguish different types of arguments. The Article contributes an empirical case for analysing the normative aspects of social and welfare policy. The findings show that an active adoption policy is justified by strengthening of child-centred perspectives. First, research and expert discourse gained influence in the framing of adoption policy over time. Second, the ethical response to this knowledge base has been to shift attention from shared family needs to the child’s individual and developmental needs. There are signs that legislators view adoption in relation to children as independent legal subjects with rights.
The overarching ambition of this paper is to explore how teachers’ actions shape children’s growth as rights-subjects. This is done by addressing the question: which rights-subjects are privileged for children by teachers’ different rights-teaching mentalities? The paper draws on observation and interview data from fieldwork in three Year 1 classes in Swedish primary schools. Theoretically framed by a Foucauldian governmentality perspective, rights-learning situations were analysed through the lens of teachers’ rights-teaching mentalities and governing techniques. The findings show how teachers’ different actions privilege different rights-subjects for the children, and demonstrate how the teachers’ actions in everyday interaction in the classroom play a significant role in this process. It is argued that rights-learning, and growing as a rights-subject, does not primarily happen in designated children’s human rights events at school, but rather occurs continuously, day after day, in ordinary school practice.
Murri Courts are a specialist criminal law practice that includes Elders and respected persons of the local Community Justice Group in the sentencing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander defendants. Drawing on an ethnographic study of two southeast Queensland Murri Courts, this article explores the impact of State ordered out-of-home care on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander defendants and their children. We show how Community Justice Groups and specialist courts help to address the intergenerational impacts of child protection interventions. The rights of Australian Indigenous peoples to enjoy, maintain, control, protect and develop their kinship ties is recognised under the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) and international human rights treaties. We suggest that policymakers and legislators should better recognise and support Community Justice Groups and specialist courts as they provide an important avenue for implementing the rights of Australian Indigenous peoples to recover and maintain their kinship ties.
Refugee children often find themselves in a vulnerable position; they have experienced trauma and mental health problems and in the host country they are involved in a complex and adult-oriented asylum application procedure. International and European legal standards urge states to adapt migration procedures to the age and maturity of children and to make these more child-friendly. In this article, the core concept of analysis is the child’s right to information. It will be shown that this right is closely connected to other children’s rights and concepts, such as access to justice, child-friendly justice and the right to participation. The implementation in practice of the right to information in the asylum procedure in the Netherlands will serve as a case study, to show the precarious information position of both unaccompanied as well as accompanied refugee children. The results of this study show that the information position of these children can be improved, which will benefit their legal position, emotional well-being and possibilities to exercise their rights.