The UNCRC: The Voice of Global Consensus on Children’s Rights?

Abstract

That the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) encompasses contradictions is known. Despite this knowledge, attention to conflicting aspects within the convention is limited, and instead, the assumption that the convention represents an international consensus on the meaning of children's human rights seems to be widespread in policy and academic work. Furthermore, the available literature within the field of children's rights is largely silent regarding precise and elaborated knowledge about the inherent contradictions within the UNCRC. This paper expands upon and specifies the knowledge about consensus and inconsistencies within the convention. Through an in-depth study of the drafting process of the UNCRC, the paper identifies and displays both contradictions within the convention, and ways in which the text of the convention can be seen to express consensus. The analysis shows how a certain consensus was produced for respectively civil and political rights, and socio-economic rights, but that different and inconsistent children's rights logics underlay the formation of these respective consensus-formations.

The What, Why and How of Child Participation—A Review of the Conceptualization of “Child Participation” in Child Welfare

“…Children's participation is a universal right, embodied in various practices, dependent and relationally linked to their cultural environment. Critical voices claim that children's rights are presented in practice and policy as the new "norm" that children need to adapt to (Reynaert et al 2009;Mason and Bolzan 2010;Quennerstedt 2010;Quennerstedt et al 2018). The question is whether a universal norm of participation is relevant for all children, and in all cultural and social contexts in which children operate.…”

“…When participation is communicated and forms the basis for participation practices without further questioning and redefinition, we can get different results than intended. The "norm" (Reynaert et al 2009;Quennerstedt et al 2018) to always involve children, which Arbeiter and Toros (2017) refers to as the "current child protection philosophy" might end up in what Aamodt (2015, s.80) warns against: "The child's right thus becomes the child's duty where one can think that the duty is to ensure the child's right. It thus emerges a right the child has a duty to follow".…”

“…Van Bijleveld et al (2015) claim that lack of clarity in what the concept entails among scholars might be a key barrier to child participation. Reynaert et al (2009) and Quennerstedt et al (2018) highlight the importance of a transparent and exploratory debate to counter the distortion and simplification of a complicated field.…”

Introducing Childhood Cultures in Transformation

“…The history of the UNCRC's adoption and the continuous debate over children's rights and the best interests of a child must never be regarded as set in stone. Researchers suggest that children live in diverse conditions and that present concerns may move beyond the context of the UNCRC and pave the way for rethinking the entirety project of children's rights (Quennerstedt, Robinson, & I' Anson, 2018). This book intends to contribute towards such a dialogue.…”

An Analysis of Child and Youth Advocacy in 21st Century Contemporary Contexts

“…Some of the main critiques of the CRC that have been identified by scholars are its abstract and ambiguous focus which makes application to local situations difficult (Alderson, 2017). In addition, issues surrounding implementation and enforcement are also complex (Quennerstedt, Robinson & L'Anson, 2018). As a result, if advocates simply aim to implement different articles of the CRC in their work by tracking rights implementation, there is no guarantee that the cultural contexts in which children live will be considered and these interpretations will be based on the staff's own interpretations of the CRC articles.…”