Research Ethics and the Concept of Children's Rights

Abstract

This paper examines the arguments that have been put forward about the implications of children's rights for the ethics of research involving children. It begins by exploring the concept of rights, and the different kinds of right that have been identified in the philosophical literature. From this, the discussion moves to the nature and legitimacy of children's rights. Finally, the implications of the debates about children's rights are examined for research ethics. It is argued that these implications are more limited and problematic than is generally recognised.

Seen and heard: towards child participation in dental research

“…The UNCRC has also brought children and their rights to the forefront of the research agenda. Academics in childhood studies recognise children as active participants rather than objects in research, viewing children as experts on their own lives who can contribute valuable knowledge and unique insights; however, a previous systematic review found that dental research is mostly conducted on children rather than with children. This comprehensive review of the child dental literature published from 2000 to 2005 considered papers in four main categories: children as the objects of research; proxies used on behalf of children; children as the subjects of research with some involvement; and children as active participants with their perspectives explored.…”

Hvordan forstår vi barn og barndom?

“…Mener vi det samme når vi snakker om barns perspektiver? Siden argumentene om å inkludere barn som informanter ble lansert, er det blitt påpekt at disse argumentene var helt nødvendige, men at de også var problematiske og tvetydige Hammersley, 2015;Kjørholt, 2004;Komulainen, 2007), noe jeg skal komme tilbake til. Men ved inngangen til 1990-tallet var det å argumentere for barneperspektiv i forskningen ingen selvfølge.…”

“…Dette åpner opp for muligheter for personlig og sosial endring mot blant annet større rettferdighet, frihet og likhet. Alanen er likevel, på linje med Hammersley (2015Hammersley ( , 2017, kritisk til hvordan dette begrepet ofte blir forstått og brukt innenfor Childhood Studies. Et hovedelement i argumentasjonen om at barndom er sosialt konstruert, ser ut til å vaere at det å vaere barn varierer i forskjellige samfunn, og at heller enn å se barn som biologisk forskjellig fra voksne, bør forskning om barn og barndom foregå i de kontekster barn lever sine liv.…”

“…Et hovedelement i argumentasjonen om at barndom er sosialt konstruert, ser ut til å vaere at det å vaere barn varierer i forskjellige samfunn, og at heller enn å se barn som biologisk forskjellig fra voksne, bør forskning om barn og barndom foregå i de kontekster barn lever sine liv. Konstruksjonisme blir, hevder Hammersley (2015), ofte brukt selektivt og ikke om alle fenomen. Det er derfor ulogisk at ikke alle sosiale fenomen, for eksempel også barns stemmer og Childhood Studies, burde ses på som sosiale konstruksjoner.…”

Building a System of Indicators to Evaluate the Right of a Child to Play

“…The existence of a new paradigm that declares that the best way to invest in the future of our society is to invest in childhood and adolescence has contributed to significant progress in the recognition of the inalienable rights of all boys and girls (Hammersley, ). However, although States, public authorities, families and society as a whole have a combined obligation to ensuring the recognition of these rights, much remains to be done.…”