Doing Children's Rights PDF

17 Doing Children’s Rights: Moving beyond Entitlements...

17 Doing Children’s Rights: Moving beyond Entitlements and into Relationships in Canadian Contexts Noah Kenneally LEARNING OBJECTIVES To describe the development and history of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Canada’s relationship to children’s rights, and identify the core principles of children’s rights To contrast the dominant legal approach to children’s rights with a relational approach To discuss and analyze how the perspective of the sociology of childhood supports a relational approach to children’s rights To make connections between concepts of children/childhood and underly- ing philosophical assumptions To effectively critique children’s rights from a variety of perspectives INTRODUCTION In this chapter, I join an ongoing conversation about children’s rights that challenges Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. dominant legal discussions. The most common approaches to children’s rights conceive of them as being in the realm of law and international relations. As mentioned in chapter 1, this legal approach has taken important steps to ameliorating the circum- stances of children worldwide. However, it is also removed from children’s actual lived experiences. In this chapter, I investigate how seeing children as agentive social actors can make children’s rights more concrete, especially for children themselves. I pro- pose that we reconceptualize children’s rights as doing—actions and interactions that directly involve children—rather than things that are done to or for children. In the spirit of this collection, I explore how the sociology of childhood can help relocate The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 337 children’s rights to a more concrete, observable, and enactable space—by reframing children’s rights as relational practices, as elements of children’s everyday relation- ships and interactions, and as tools children can use to participate in the shaping of culture and the production of our social worlds. First, I will outline the history of children’s rights, how they are understood and implemented, and Canada’s relationship to them. I will then discuss some of the con- ceptual tools of the sociology of childhood, and discuss how they can help to reorganize our perceptions of children’s rights. Finally, I will use those tools to describe some of the ways that children’s rights can be understood as aspects of relationships, and provide ex- amples that demonstrate ways of doing children’s rights, both from an adult’s perspective and from a child’s perspective. WHAT ARE CHILDREN’S RIGHTS? Chapter 1 of this volume briefly outlined the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC); described provision, protection, and participation rights; and pointed to some of the impacts that the CRC and children’s rights thinking has had on issues such as citizenship and social engagement. In the three and a half decades since it was created, the CRC as a framework for thinking about children’s rights has been central to many positive changes addressing children’s experiences around the world. The CRC exists to guide governments in forming laws that would universally ensure the neces- sary conditions for all children, in all cultures and parts of the world, to have the “best possible childhood.” However, it has also become an object of criticism. The CRC came into existence at a particular time in history, and was drafted within a particular philo- sophical framework. It has become increasingly clear that what the CRC means by “best possible childhood” is profoundly informed by history and the philosophical framework that it was developed in. Some of the common sense assumptions embedded in the CRC about what it means to be a child or what the “best possible childhood” is reveal norma- tive standards that do not match the majority of children’s lived experiences, either in the Western or minority world,1 such as here in Canada, or around the world. We will discuss these later in the chapter. Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. A SHORT HISTORY OF CHILDREN’S RIGHTS AND THE CRC—GLOBALLY AND IN CANADA Decades of social change around the world—anti-colonial movements against Euro- American domination in the majority world; the civil rights movements of margin- alized groups in the Western or minority world; and the growing presence of media and communication technologies linking all parts of the world—made it increasingly The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  338 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT apparent that although existing human rights texts proposed general principles that acknowledged children’s rights, a specific document that could be converted into en- forceable laws would make children’s rights more achievable. Therefore, an international convention—a document that could be adopted by member states of the United Nations and translated into legislation by their governments—was seen as a necessary next step. This international convention was the Convention on the Rights of the Child. UNICEF declared 1979 as the International Year of the Child, kicking off a decade of effort developing the CRC. Delegations from many UN member nations, intergov- ernmental organizations (IGOs), and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) formed an international Committee on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) that undertook drafting the Convention (Johnson, 1992). Marshall (2013) gives a detailed account of Canada’s participation. She notes that Canadian delegates were members of committees that developed the League of Nations’ Declaration of the Rights of the Child in 1924, and the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child in 1959. Canadians of that era were supportive of these treaties, as the political climate was focused on building a more socially responsible society. This provided a foundation for Canadian participa- tion in the development of the CRC. The United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted the CRC in 1989, and it became the most ratified, and most quickly ratified, international human rights treaty (Alderson, 2008; Human Rights Watch, 2014; Freeman, 2010). Countries that ratify the CRC commit to integrating its principles into their policies and laws. They also commit to submitting periodic reports to the UNCRC describing their progress in implementing children’s rights. The Committee responds to these reports with recommendations to assist with further implementation (OHCHR, 2016b). The UN and the OHCHR do not have the capacity to enforce the CRC—there are no children’s rights police. Instead, it is hoped that public opinion, international relations, and international standing are enough impetus for nations to implement the CRC and actualize children’s rights. Both the pace by which nations ratified the CRC and the high number that did so are “further testimony to the importance now attached internationally to promot- ing children’s rights” (Lansdown, 1996, p. 57). As of this writing, the United States of America is the only UN member state, out of 197, that has yet to ratify the CRC (OHCHR, 2016c). Since the CRC was drafted, three optional protocols have been add- Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. ed to address domains of particular concern (OHCHR, 2016a). Optional protocols are additional agreements that address a portion of that treaty in greater depth. They are optional because they are even more demanding in their obligations than the original treaty, and nations decide independently whether it is possible to adhere to them or not. The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography (OPSC) addresses child exploita- tion, slavery, and trafficking. The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (OPAC) addresses children involved in armed conflict. Both were adopted by the General Assembly in The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 339 2000 and entered into force in 2002. A third optional protocol, the Optional Protocol on a Communications Procedure (OP3 CRC), allows individual children to challenge rights violations committed by states. OP3 CRC was approved in 2011 and went into force in 2014. Together, the CRC and the three optional protocols are the primary texts of international children’s rights (OHCHR, 2016a). The Canadian government signed the CRC in 1990 and ratified it in 1991; it then ratified the first two optional protocols in 2002 but has yet to adopt the third. By ratifying the CRC, the Canadian government indicated that it was committed to the “fundamental obligations with respect to protecting and promoting the rights of children throughout the country” (Pearson & Collins, 2009, p. 57). Ratification, however, is merely the first step. Implementation—the translation of the CRC into laws and policies, to make them happen—is a complex process that demands ongoing effort from all levels of government, civil society organizations, and the Canadian populace. The Canadian Human Rights Commission is responsible for submitting the required reports to the UNCRC for Canada and for assessing its progress. According to an analysis by the Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children (CCRC), the Canadian governments’ implementation of the CRC over the past two and half decades has been sporadic at best (Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children, 2011). Canada could substantially improve the circumstances of all Canadian children by implementing the general measures of the CRC (Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children, 2011). General measures are considered the basic tools of implementation and consist of the following elements: Law reform is necessary to incorporate the principles of best interest and child participation into all levels of government and domains of the law. Monitoring mechanisms—including data collection on children in Canada, impact assess- ments of policy and practices, and reporting procedures to the UNCRC—need to be put in place so a clearer understanding of children’s circumstances across the country can be determined. Children’s rights programs need to be evaluated, to ensure that they are meet- ing their goals. Clear children’s budgets from all levels of government need to be devel- oped, so that expenditures can be committed to, accurately tracked, and assessed. Finally, mechanisms and governmental offices that specifically champion children’s rights need to be put in place to make them a priority in Canadian politics. The Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children (2011) notes that if the Canadian government takes action on these Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. general measures, children’s rights in Canada will be substantially improved. Even though Canada is a Western or minority world nation, and the population in general has substantial access to economic, social, and cultural resources when compared to other nations around the world, children continue to experience circumstances that have negative effects on their well-being, both on a personal and structural level (Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children, 2011; Pearson & Collins, 2009). Canada ranks 72nd on the 2016 KidsRights Index, a worldwide ranking of how well countries care for children and promote children’s rights in proportion to their wealth (KidsRights Index, 2016). Canada falls behind other industrialized countries in similar social and economic The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  340 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT circumstances, especially in the areas of children’s health, well-being, and development. The following outlines some of the situations faced by children in Canada: Canada ranks 26th out of the 35 wealthiest countries in the world when con- trasting rates of child poverty (UNICEF Canada, 2016). Fourteen percent of Canada’s children live in circumstances of poverty. There is a strong connection between access to resources and access to rights, and poverty is a clear violation of the human rights of children (Vandenhole, 2014). (See Albanese, chapter 11 in this collection, for more detail regarding child poverty in Canada.) Although the CRC addresses the rights of children with disabilities, and Canada ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2010, Canadian children with disabilities and their fami- lies still face significant barriers in accessing services, assistance, and support (Canadian Human Rights Commission, 2015; Statistics Canada, 2013). It is particularly difficult for school-aged children with disabilities to find a school with the adequate resources, equipment, and training to meet their needs, and this affects their future achievement. (See chapter 6 by Abbas and chapter 18 by Schneider for more information regarding children with disabilities in Canada.) Inuit and First Nations children are the fastest-growing young population in the country—46 percent of the Canadian Indigenous population is under 25 years. Indigenous children are subject to multiple forms of injustice at the same time, often referred to as intersectionality. They experience race-based discrim- ination; have higher rates of living in poverty; face barriers to accessing resourc- es; are overrepresented in the child-welfare system; and live with the legacy of Indian Residential Schools, displacement, and cultural genocide, which can affect their well-being and development (Aboriginal Children in Care Working Group, 2015). Canadian Indigenous children would particularly benefit if chil- dren’s rights were addressed more concretely. (See the introductory chapter of this text as well as chapter 12, by Spencer and Sinclair, for a more detailed dis- cussion of the issues faced by Indigenous children in Canada.) Almost 20 percent of new permanent residents to Canada are children when Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. they arrive. Newcomer children to Canada face challenges while integrating into a new context, and refugee children and children with precarious citi- zenship status (undocumented children, unaccompanied child migrants, etc.) experience even more marginalization (Bernhard, 2012). Children’s rights in particular have taken a central role in the response to the ongoing conflict in Syria. The world was galvanized into action by media images of the drowning of Alan (Aylan) and Ghalib Kurdi, two Syrian Kurdish refugee boys who, along with their mother, died attempting to reach Greece from Turkey in an effort to join family and resettle in Canada (Smith, 2015). Significantly, 34 percent of The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 341 refugees who arrived in Canada from Syria in 2014 alone were under the age of 15, and an additional 15 percent were 15 to 24 years of age (Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 2015). A more concerted effort to realize children’s rights in Canada would benefit these different groups, and all children in the country, in significant ways. Children’s circum- stances in Canada are changing all the time, and some important changes occurred at the time of this writing. In 2016, a landmark case was brought before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal by the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society and the Assembly of First Nations regarding the overrepresentation of Indigenous children in the child welfare system. It cited systemic discrimination on the basis of First Nations ancestry. The Tribunal found that the formula used by the federal government to allocate funds to child and family services for First Nations children on reserves was inadequate and discriminatory. The Tribunal referred to the CRC in its decision-making process, and ordered the federal government to cease these discriminatory practices and take measures to redress and prevent them (First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada, 2016). However, the federal government has yet to comply and commit to providing funds to address the disparity in health services for children living on reserve. In another promising turn of events, the newly elected Liberal government com- mitted to welcoming 25,000 Syrian refugees shortly after it came into power in 2015. Children, women, and families were prioritized, By February 2016, this goal was achieved, and Canada continues to assist and resettle Syrian refugees across the country (Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 2016). Finally, a restructuring of federal support for families with children was introduced in 2016 with the new Canada Child Benefit. This benefit provides funding to families based on how many children they have and is geared to the family’s net income—families with less income will receive more sup- port—as one way of addressing child poverty (Canadian Coalition for the Rights of Children, 2016; Canada Revenue Agency, 2016). All of these shifts in Canada’s ap- proach to children’s rights signal an increased sensitivity and political awareness of their importance. In the next section, we’ll take a closer look at how children’s rights are understood and put into practice. Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. UNDERSTANDING AND IMPLEMENTING CHILDREN’S RIGHTS Children’s Rights under the CRC Children’s rights can be understood in many ways. Two primary understandings of children’s rights are commonly referred to as the Three Ps and the Four Guiding Principles. In the Three Ps framework, provision, protection, and participation rights are The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  342 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT intertwined. The ideal proposed by the CRC is that one type of right cannot supersede another type of right—they are of equal value and all three should be worked towards simultaneously in every aspect of children’s lives. However, in practice it is difficult to balance them evenly, and the different types of rights can often seem at odds with each other. Common ways of understanding children frame them primarily as vulnerable, needing the protection of adults, and incapable of understanding the world around them or of forming an opinion. This is one of the reasons that a sociological approach to chil- dren and childhood can support children’s rights, as the sociology of childhood recog- nizes children’s capacities and sees them as social actors. For children’s rights to flourish, children must have what they need to survive and thrive, be protected from harm, and be considered legitimate and active parts of society. The Four Guiding Principles run like connecting threads throughout the entire CRC, and provide a solid base on which children’s rights can be developed and assessed. Each is considered a core concept of the CRC itself, and while all 54 articles fall under one or more guiding principle, each principle is primarily represented by an article in particular: Article 2: Nondiscrimination Article 3: Best interests of the child Article 6: Life, survival, and development Article 12: Respect for the views of the child When taken together, the Three Ps and the Four Guiding Principles provide a powerful conceptual framework that can be used to describe and evaluate the status of children’s rights and the implementation of the CRC. In human rights treaties, nations are referred to as state parties, and much of the language of the CRC is geared towards the governments of state parties. The CRC invests governments with the responsibilities to ensure children’s rights are respected and upheld. Therefore, legal systems and structures are considered the primary mech- anisms for making children’s rights happen, and laws and legislation are understood as the arenas where children’s rights are enacted (and enactable). Children’s rights are seen as things that children are entitled to, just by being alive, and the primary approach to implementing them is a legal approach (Alderson, 2008; Freeman, 1983, 2007, 2011; Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. Jones, 2011; Jones & Welch, 2010). For children’s entitlements to be recognized by legal systems, national governments are expected to translate them into laws—the rules that control the behaviours and de- cisions of a nation’s population. Entitlements are also closely linked to obligations—you are owed something, and I am obliged, either by law or by social convention, to provide you with it. Given that children are rarely considered power-holders in society, their rights are most often framed as obligations expected to be actualized by those who have authority over them, such as their parents, their families, other adults acting on their behalf, and the institutions of governments (Alderson, 2008; Freeman, 1983, 2000, The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 343 2007; Jones & Welch, 2010). Since children are dependent on adults in many ways, this perspective of obligation and entitlement is seen as particularly meaningful. You are a child, and we have to take care of our children, so we will give you these rights. From this perspective, rights can be seen as a type of exchange that is almost economic: adults and governments are obliged to take care of children and ensure their well-being, and so pay them in a currency of things they are entitled to—children’s rights. CRITICISMS OF THE CRC Although the CRC was signed and ratified almost unanimously, it has been met with reservations from the international community and with critique from children’s rights scholars and activists. According to O’Neill and Zinga (2008), “the number of declara- tions, reservations and objections to the Convention show that the world does not accept it as a monolithic code” (p. 5). Some governments are concerned that they lack the re- sources to actualize children’s rights in their countries. Others have reservations about the underlying ideologies that underpin the Convention, feeling as though the universal- izing claims made in the CRC about the “best possible childhood” go against traditional or cultural values (Cowan, Dembour, & Wilson, 2001; Johnson, 1992; Stephens, 1995). Canada itself has declared reservations to the CRC, including a reservation regarding Article 21 on adoption being in the child’s best interest, as a way to acknowledge that among Indigenous peoples in Canada there are other customs of care for children, and a reservation regarding Article 37 on the detention of children separate from adults in situations where this is not feasible (Canadian Children’s Rights Council, 2015). Other critics of the CRC contend that the high levels of its ratification are primarily symbolic—that countries signed on to the treaty to appear to be doing something to address children’s rights without having to do very much in practice—and that without a system of enforcement the Convention does little to improve the lives of children (Brown, 2004; MacIntyre; 2007; Mutua, 2002). Similarly, others feel that the rights accorded to children in the CRC, particularly participation rights, exist only on paper, or that states treat them in tokenistic ways, honouring the word of the CRC but not the spirit. Although there were reports of a collegial climate during the drafting of the CRC, Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. many developing or majority nations did not feel included in the process at the time, and feel underrepresented by the document itself (Johnson, 1992; Van Bueren, 2011; Viljoen, 1998). Some regions have responded by developing their own children’s rights documents for particular contexts—for example, the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (Adu-Gyamfi & Keating, 2013; Chirwa, 2002; Njungwe, 2009). The open-endedness of the CRC, which according to Johnson (1992) and Van Bueren (1995, 2011) was included in order to provide flexibility so that children’s rights could be enacted differently in different countries and contexts, also causes problems. Critics feel that by making the CRC so open to interpretation, its impact is diluted. In The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  344 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT many countries that have signed and ratified the CRC, children are still unable to access the basic necessities of life, let alone the varied elements they might need to achieve their full potential or enjoy that elusive “best possible childhood.” Finally, and particularly central to this discussion, the CRC is biased towards Western or minority world concep- tualizations of childhood, which make the Convention’s claims to universality troubling (Reynaert, Bouverne-de-Bie, & Vandevelde, 2012; Wells, 2015). The Normative Ideas in the CRC As mentioned above, the time at which the CRC was developed and the philosophical framework upon which it is based profoundly shaped taken-for-granted ideas in the CRC: what it means to be a child, what the ideal child is, and what sort of childhood is considered the “best possible childhood.” These normative ideas set a standard for how children and childhood should be. The philosophical framework at the core of the CRC and the dominant approaches to children’s rights are shaped by the ethics of liberal theory. Liberal theory has been one of the dominant theories underpinning contempo- rary politics and philosophy in the Western or minority world since the Enlightenment (Skott-Myhre & Tarulli, 2008; Tisdall & Punch, 2012; Wall, 2008; Wells, 2015). Liberal ethics conceptualize humans as independent, rational subjects who are free to make autonomous choices. This way of imagining human beings infuses almost every element of Western or minority world political life, which dominates global politics in the twenty-first century. It follows that it has tremendous influence on how we under- stand children’s rights and what we think it means to be a child. To quote Wells (2015), “International children’s rights law, news reporting on children and how NGOs frame their work with children are each inscribed with these same ethical premises that the child is a universal subject who should everywhere be enabled to be a free, autonomous, choosing and rational individual” (p. 203). Liberal ethics are at the foundation of children’s rights, and as Wells outlines above, they portray children as free, autonomous, choosing, and rational individuals, all as- sumptions which can be deconstructed. Free—means being independent, being a distinct and unconstrained person. Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. Few children would be considered free, as most are held accountable to the adults in their lives, and to social structures over which they have little control. However, similarly few adults have access to enough resources—social, mate- rial, or economic—to be considered unconstrained. From a sociological point of view, everyone is constrained by rules, conventions, and values that organize our social worlds. Autonomous—means being self-sufficient and capable of taking care of yourself. Again, given contemporary ideas about children, and the reality that the majority of children are dependent on adults for their basic needs, few children around The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 345 the world are autonomous. In fact, few adults could be considered autonomous. Generally, everyone today is dependent on social institutions like the family, economy, government, and so on to secure the necessities of life. At another lev- el, we also all share the same water sources, breathe the same air from the same atmosphere, and depend on healthy ecosystems to provide our food. We are far more interdependent than liberal ethics would lead us to believe. Choosing—means making decisions about how you spend your time, where you put your efforts, and how you spend your resources. For the most part, decisions are made for children, and young people are rarely invited to give input regarding their day-to-day activities. Again, this applies to all people, re- gardless of age, as everyone is constrained by the social and economic factors at a personal and societal level. Many adults’ choices are controlled by what they can afford to do, where they are positioned in society, their family and cultural background, what they look like, and other aspects of our social worlds. Rational—means using logic to think your way through decisions and situa- tions. Children are rarely considered to be capable of rational thought, and are more often thought of as being in the process of developing the capacities to do so. The same could be said for many adults—few grown-ups operate logically in the world at all times, and it seems as though human nature includes irrational, emotional aspects that also define who we are. Following this argument, from a sociological perspective it becomes increasingly difficult to find the type of subject idealized by the CRC. All children do not enjoy the same privileges and resources—some have more, many have a lot less. In addition to economic access, gender, race, and cultural factors also influence how much choice, free- dom, and autonomy a young person has. The term individuals may even be misleading. The idea of an independent and self-sufficient individual is also part of liberal theory, and demonstrates a bias towards the Western or minority world’s systems of social or- ganization (Wells, 2015). In other societies, for example Indigenous communities, the emphasis may be more on the collective and community than on the individual. In addi- tion, given the intense physical and social interdependence of humanity, and the fact that we rely on many other organisms and species for our survival, health, and well-being, Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. it might be more useful to understand our social worlds by focusing on relationships, and what happens when subjects and structures interact. After taking this closer look, we begin to see the divergence at the heart of liber- al thinking about children’s rights. On the one hand, it understands children as free, autonomous, choosing, and rational individuals—investing them with a lot of power, independence, and capabilities. On the other hand, the majority of articles of the CRC are preoccupied with children’s protection and their development, highlighting chil- dren’s vulnerabilities. Understanding and working towards achieving children’s rights, as well as translating the guidelines of the CRC into law and policy, becomes a very The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  346 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT complicated process. What happens, then, if we shift the arena of children’s rights away from the dominant legal approach and into the realm of relationships, and how might the sociology of childhood help to do this? THE SOCIOLOGY OF CHILDHOOD AND A RELATIONAL PERSPECTIVE OF CHILDREN’S RIGHTS According to Donati and Archer (2015), relational sociology examines the social world by paying attention to human relationships. It frames relationships not as transactions between fluid forces, but as interactions between beings that are imbued with care, emotions, and meaning. My exploration of a relational approach to children’s rights is inspired in part by former Canadian Senator Landon Pearson, who has been a child advocate for decades. In a lecture in 2012, Pearson stated the following: First of all I have learned that while there are a number of ways that we can frame issues that are related to children and youth, the human rights perspective is a particularly constructive one. Using it pushes you to engage directly with young people and of course with the voices of women, and to let them help you find solu- tions to their problems that are likely to work. Secondly, human rights properly understood, are about relationships, rather than about entitlements. They are about the relationships between individuals in society and between individuals—either alone or in groups—and the state. (Pearson, 2012) Scholars committed to exploring a relational approach to children’s rights push be- yond the legal framework. For instance, Priscilla Alderson emphasizes the personhood of children and sees children’s rights as a viable frame to acknowledge their agency and in- volve them in social life. She calls on adult power-holders to reconsider their assumptions about children and to investigate how those preconceptions may interfere with or impede children’s rights. She also recommends that adults use children’s rights frameworks to restructure the interactions they have with children in ways that value children’s views and experiences (Alderson, 1999, 2008). Similarly, Phil Jones and Sue Welch call on adult Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. service providers to investigate how rights-informed approaches to relating to children can transform the ways that they and their child clients interact. They contend that doing so can shift service provision for children to more collaborative approaches that respect chil- dren in ways that reinforce their rights within their relationships (Jones & Welch, 2010). To further support our point, many philosophers argue that rights must be seen with- in their cultural, economic, and social contexts and are subjective rather than universal (MacIntyre, 2007). The sociology of childhood can really help us see rights in this light. The sociology of childhood emerged as an interdisciplinary approach to studying children and childhood at roughly the same time as the children’s rights framework. It The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 347 offers several conceptual tools that support rethinking children’s rights as being about, or even located in, children’s relationships. First, the sociology of childhood investigates children’s social lives (Corsaro, 2011; James, 2010; James & James, 2004; Mayall, 2002, 2013). Sociology looks both at large- scale populations, trends, and themes—or childhood as a social category—as well as childhood as children’s specific lived experiences (James, 2010; Qvortrup, 1994, 2008, 2009). Children’s lives and experiences are perceived as worthy of study and as import- ant sources of information that are unavailable through any other means. If children’s lived experiences are the best terrain to explore childhood, looking at children’s relation- ships as potential sites for doing children’s rights makes sense. Second, the sociology of childhood perceives children as social actors (James & James, 2004; Mayall, 2002). That children have an influence on their social worlds is well doc- umented by sociology of childhood research. Understanding children as actors whose choices and actions have concrete effects in their social worlds supports our exploration of children’s practices within their relationships as a way for children’s rights to take place. Third, the sociology of childhood pays attention to the context of childhoods (Corsaro, 2011; James, 2010; James, Jenks, & Prout, 1998; Mayall, 2002, 2013). The idea that child- hood manifests differently according to historical and cultural context has spurred a wealth of research into the childhoods of different contexts (see e.g. Liebel, 2012; Punch, 2003; Twum-Danso, 2009). This approach situates particular beliefs about what it means to be a child, and what a “good” or “bad” childhood might be within a particular nexus of time, place, and culture. Context is seen as a major influence regarding the possible types of rela- tionships and forms of interaction. Paying attention to the context of these social processes can shed light on the ways that children’s rights can be aspects of different relationships. Finally, the sociology of childhood pushes against the ideas of universal norms and standards for children and childhood (Gabriel, 2014; James & James, 2004; Prout, 2011; Ruffolo, 2009; Smith, 2010). If we understand childhood as contextual then the idea of childhood being the same everywhere for all children does not make sense. Even general patterns of development are influenced by context and do not manifest in the same ways for all children in all places (Burman, 2008). There can be no “normal” childhood, as the standards by which we might measure are themselves based in time, place, and culture. The sociology of childhood helps us by relocating the patterns of Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. childhood within specific social worlds. RELATIONSHIPS OF RECIPROCITY I have found the work of the following scholars helpful in thinking about children’s rights as relational actions instead of entitlements. Wall (2006, 2008) reframes children’s rights as tools to be used in interpersonal relationships for the respectful response to oth- ers’ differences. He proposes that children’s rights be seen as a framework used to build The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  348 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT respectful and responsive interactions. These interactions involve intentionally opening to children’s “otherness” by careful listening, and weaving our own perspectives into our understanding of theirs. Similarly, Skott-Myhre and Tarulli (2008) locate children’s rights in the living bodies and experiences of children themselves. They see rights as be- ing produced by the actions of people, and so children’s rights happen in children’s lives rather than the realm of law. Building on their work, we can conceptualize the relation- ships of children as their realms of action—spaces where dialogues that value difference can flourish, and children’s rights can be re-imagined as creative processes of interaction. However, Tisdall and Punch (2012) call our attention to some potential dangers of focusing on a relational approach to children’s rights. First, they state that if we see rights as a part of a relational ethics of care, we acknowledge that children are import- ant elements of social networks. Yet in doing so we run the risk of obscuring the fact that children are not simply members of family units, but are also their own distinctive selves. Similarly, a relational approach also runs the risk of shifting the focus off the social category of children as a separate group with particular needs. Finally, they draw our attention to seeing children’s rights as responsibilities, a perspective that recognizes that children make real contributions to their worlds (although others note that in rec- ognizing responsibility, we may be producing the expectation of a “responsible” child wherein any child who doesn’t act “responsibly” becomes deviant). Tisdall and Punch (2012) suggest an alternative—a narrative of reciprocity. Re- ciprocity can be understood from a neoliberal or capitalist perspective as payback, or an exchange of equal value. Inspired by Tisdall and Punch, I prefer a definition that “can respect the dignity of all contributors” (2012, p. 258) and acknowledges our interdepen- dence as social creatures embedded in social worlds. From this perspective, reciprocity is a collaborative interaction that mutually benefits those involved. The following two examples illustrate possibilities for children’s rights at work in a relational context of rec- iprocity. The first is from recent news and the second is from my own work and research with children. Kipling Acres is a long-term care facility for seniors that also houses an early child- hood centre, Kipling Early Learning and Child Care Centre. Elderly residents and children interact regularly and have developed reciprocal relationships (Monsebraaten, 2016). Both groups experience segregation in Canadian society—young children are Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. often secluded in the family home or in daycare, and our aging population is increasingly sidelined by our youth-fixated society. Health benefits and social effects for both groups have been documented in a growing body of research (Gigliotti, Morris, Smock, Jarrott, & Graham, 2005; Holmes, 2009; Isaki & Towle Harmon, 2015; Kaplan & Larkin, 2004; Lee, Camp, & Malone, 2007). Looking through a lens of the sociology of childhood, the relationships between the children and seniors can be seen as reciprocal and rights-based. The way Kipling Acres is organized emphasizes that both children and seniors are actively involved in social life. Working against prevalent segregation by integrating children and seniors in everyday The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 349 interactions, such as meeting in the hall and having regular visits, allows for the pos- sibility of enacting a fundamental principle of rights: Article 2—non-discrimination. Monsebraaten (2016) reports that families describe positive effects for their children’s social understanding and interactions emerging from their daily encounters with the elderly. Similarly, the seniors report feeling enlivened by their interactions with the chil- dren. The integrated social engagement crosses normalized boundaries in contemporary Canadian society, where young and old people are siloed from the rest of the world. From a relational rights perspective, the interactions between the seniors and young children become immediate, intimate sites where children can practise respecting others and being respected by doing both in the context of concrete, lived relationships. My second example emerged during my own work as a student teacher/researcher at an alternative elementary school in Toronto. I conducted a project with a grade 2 class, visualizing the articles of the CRC after exploring children’s rights through a variety of activities, picture books, and reflective discussions. Figure 17.1 is a photograph of one of the students’ drawings—Article 12: Respect for the views of the child. When I asked Isa to explain what it meant, she described Article 12 as a demonstration of children’s rights as a creative, relational, interactive process. She explained that the drawing depicted a family, two adults and three chil- dren, and that the parents listened to their children. Doing this created a lot of love in Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. Figure 17.1: “Article 12” Source: Isa Blackstock-Berinstein, participant in research project Grade 2 Exploration of Children’s Rights, 2012. The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  350 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT the family, represented by the many hearts. One of the parents is drawn with a speech bubble that reads “I respect my children.” The student had written on her drawing “You have the right to give your opinion and for adults to listen to it seriously.” While this is a visual representation of Article 12 of the CRC, it also depicts a rela- tionship that does other components of children’s rights as well—for example, Article 5, parental guidance, by affirming the relationship between parents and children; Article 13, children’s freedom of expression, in the way that it recognizes children’s rights to share in- formation and express their opinions; and Article 14, freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, by acknowledging that children have the right to believe and think what they want as long as they are not stopping others from enjoying their own rights. From the perspective of the sociology of childhood, this example values children’s social lives and perspectives as important sources of information that are unobtainable any other way. Isa makes con- nections between listening, respect, and family that shed invaluable light on where she sees children’s rights as being possible—in her explanation of her drawing it becomes clear that she could see children’s rights happening, with adults listening and respecting children in living and dynamic interactions as an everyday part of their social lives. CONCLUSION It is possible to interpret children’s rights as relational processes instead of as dynamics of law, in the two examples I discuss above. By grounding our perspective in the sociology of childhood, and looking at children’s social lives as the spaces where children’s rights can take place, it is also possible to make children’s rights more tangible and concrete. This has far-reaching implications for professionals working with children, in helping children themselves learn and make sense of children’s rights, and regarding attitudes towards children’s rights in general. First, relational approaches to children’s rights can be useful to professionals in creating relationships of respect, where power imbalances between adults and children can be grappled with. Educators and school officials are presented with an opportuni- ty to rethink classroom and school dynamics to include children more in design and decision-making processes, and in that way making education more relevant to young Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. people and grounded in their lived experiences. Alternatively, health care professionals in Canada already have a foundation for forging rights-based relationships with the chil- dren in their care, foremost by framing children as deserving of dignity and the best pos- sible care available. The Canadian Paediatric Society encourages medical practitioners to take the position that “decision-making for children and adolescents should be inter- disciplinary and collaborative, and should actively involve the family and, when appro- priate, the child or adolescent” (Harrison & Canadian Paediatric Society, 2004, p. 99). These are the types of collaborative relationships in which children’s rights become an The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  Chapter 17 Doing Children’s Rights 351 active, engaged doing by all parties involved. Professionals in social work or providing other forms of direct care can benefit from relational approaches to children’s rights as well. Similar to medical relationships, involving children in ways that respect their views and productively include their input can lead to designing programs of care that take children’s preferences into consideration. This may even make young peoples’ participa- tion more likely. Second, a relational approach to children’s rights could make it easier for chil- dren to learn about and understand their rights. The dominant legal framework uses technical jargon and abstract concepts that makes learning about rights opaque for many adults, let alone children developing their language and conceptual capacities. Grounding children’s rights in aspects of their social lives has the potential to make them easier to understand. Examples of the principles at the core of children’s rights— respect, listening to and taking others’ views seriously, protection from harm, nondis- crimination, and so on—presented in an experiential way through interactions with other children and adults can make those principles more visible and meaningful. Additionally, sociology and social psychology research has shown that collaborative prosocial behaviours are learned through practice (Alderson, 2008; Callero, 1986; Brownell, Svetlova, Anderson, Nichols, & Drummond, 2013). Practising children’s rights by doing them in relationships could be an excellent approach to take in chil- dren’s rights education (Howe & Covell, 2007b). Finally, a relational approach to children’s rights may have a positive impact on at- titudes towards children’s rights in general. As mentioned in chapter 1, children’s rights and the CRC are not a part of the common discourse of everyday life for the populace of many nations, Canada included (Howe & Covell, 2007a). In fact, some groups are ac- tively opposed to them. Most notable of these are parental rights groups, whose primary concern is that children’s rights might undermine the role of parents in decision-making processes by involving state sanction or control. However, reframing children’s rights as mutually beneficial aspects of relationships in which power is shared in collaborative interactions rather than undermining one individual’s or party’s power in favour of an- other’s may shift resistant or ambivalent attitudes towards children’s rights in general. In closing, the sociology of childhood offers conceptual tools that make it possible to see children’s rights as aspects of children’s social lives. This relational approach has Copyright © 2018. Canadian Scholars. All rights reserved. the potential to reframe children’s rights as social actions that take place in the relation- ships children have with other children or adults. Given Canada’s diverse cultural and geographical contexts, with so many different perspectives regarding children and child- hood, and so many different experiences of being children and having a childhood, seeing children’s rights as being situated in lived social worlds presents a sensitive approach that can account for those differences. Doing children’s rights has the potential to make them more concrete—we can see and feel our interactions with others—and make children’s rights something that everyone can be involved in and relate to. The Sociology of Childhood and Youth in Canada, edited by Xiaobei Chen, et al., Canadian Scholars, 2018. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/concordiaab-ebooks/detail.action?docID=6282142. Created from concordiaab-ebooks on 2024-09-03 15:54:41.  352 SECTION IV CITIZENSHIP, RIGHTS, AND SOCIAL ENGAGEMENT CHAPTER SUMMARY Together, in this chapter, we Described the development of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the central document of children’s rights in the world. Canada signed the CRC i