Do Children Have Rights or Do Their Rights Have to be Realised? The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child as a Frame of Reference for Pedagogical Action

Abstract

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) is presented and understood as the primary reference point regarding questions of children's rights. However, the UNCRC is not a neutral instrument deployed to meet the rights of children: it embodies a specific perception of the child, childhood and citizenship. The interpretation of the UNCRC from the point of view of children's legal status emphasises the autonomy of children; the focus is on the rights that children possess. Conversely, the social-political interpretation of the UNCRC addresses the question of how the rights of children can be realised. It is suggested that distinguishing between these interpretations is essential with regard to questions of pedagogy and education.

Action Research and Democracy

“…Our research also devoted much attention to the historical and social analysis of these human rights frameworks, as well as to the examination of the meaning attributed to the UDHR and the CRC in everyday practices. The distinction made by Biesta (2011a) between a socialisation and a subjectification approach can be identified in our research, particularly in the conclusion of the second action research project in which we reveal that both the UDHR and the CRC are interpreted in very different ways, with a legal interpretation at one end of the spectrum and a socio-political interpretation at the other end (Roose & De Bie, 2007). In a legal interpretation, rights are used as an end of dialogue: the solution to concrete problems is embodied in the implementation of the law.…”

Children’s rights in pediatrics

“…It is rather a request that concerns healthcare professionals and parents who have to support and assist the child's competence to develop opinions depending on the particular situation and developmental stage. In practice, the UNCRC leaves room for individual and situational differences [32]. In the case of the 13-year-old girl, the violation of the child's right to be heard is obvious.…”

For Adults Only? Young People and (Non)Participation in Sexual Decision Making

“…The UNCRC contains inalienable and indivisible rights for all children and young people under the age of 18, that are commonly referred to as the '3Ps': protection rights, provision rights and participation rights. Despite concerted efforts at both national and international levels to extend children's protection from harm, exploitation and discrimination, and to further the provision of basic goods and services, including the right to food, shelter, healthcare and education, the realisation of children's participation rights remains elusive (Roose & Bouverne-De Bie, 2007). In part, this is due to the fact that the articles contained within the UNCRC are subject to interpretation and dependent on the local context within which they are being implemented, so certain categories of rights may be prioritised over others (Roose & Bouverne-De Bie, 2007).…”

“…This article should not be read as a call for a libertarian approach to children's rights, nor should it be interpreted as a rehearsal of libertarian versus paternalism dichotomy. Instead, it should be seen in the context of what Roose and Bouverne-De Bie (2007) call the 'pragmatic trend', premised on the argument that, just as it can be harmful to children to bestow on them the same rights as adults, so too can over-protection with regards to sexuality be harmful, as it denies children and young people access to knowledge and information, and 'creates unnecessary dependencies and prevents the child from developing competencies' (p. 433).…”