Ratification by the United States of the Convention on the Rights of the Child: Pros and Cons from a Child's Rights Perspective
Bartholet_2011_Convention on the Rights of the Child (357.9Kb)
Access StatusFull text of the requested work is not available in DASH at this time ("dark deposit"). For more information on dark deposits, see our FAQ.
MetadataShow full item record
CitationElizabeth Bartholet, Ratification by the United States of the Convention on the Rights of the Child: Pros and Cons from a Child's Rights Perspective, 633 Annals Am. Acad. Pol. & Soc. Sci. 80, Special Issue, The Child as Citizen (2011).
AbstractThis article discusses the significance of the United States ratification of the CRC, concluding that even if the treaty is not self-executing, ratification would make a major difference. It would enable the United States to better promote children’s rights abroad, and it would push the United States to develop its domestic law in dramatically new directions that empower children. The CRC provides children with powerful affirmative rights and imposes reciprocal duties on nation-states. It provides rights to participate, including rights to be heard and to make decisions on personal and political matters; rights to receive important benefits, including health, support, and education; rights to protection against maltreatment; and rights to nurturing parental care. All this contrasts with U.S. law’s negative rights tradition, its emphasis on parental rights, limited recognition of children’s rights, and related restriction of state power to protect children. U.S. ratification could have a positive impact, particularly in connection with parental relationship rights and related maltreatment issues. However, there is also a risk of negative impact, given the problematic CRC provisions on international and transracial adoption. The solution is ratification with a reservation regarding Articles 20 and 21.
Citable link to this pagehttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:10579716
- HLS Scholarly Articles