Sparing the rod: Schools, discipline and children's rights in multicultural Britain

How should we treat unruly children in our schools? Which punishments are appropriate? successful?; and will they instill order and discipline in the next generation? These are the perennial questions asked by adults, answered by adults, and rarely posed to children themselves! Instead, educationalists and parents have sought to control minors by resorting to a variety of disciplinary sanctions. Today, however, the questions have to be set within a developing philosophy of `children's rights' whereby young people are seen as having entitlements which challenge existing notions of adult authority. This paper explores these issues within an overarching theme of human rights. It does not seek to promote the case for children's rights in isolation, but rather locates the question within the context of rights and responsibilities of pupils, teachers, and parents. Discussion provides an historical perspective on physical chastisement in the home and at school; analysis of the impact of the European Court of Human Rights on abolition in Britain; and a review of alternative sanctions being explored. Further, attempts to re-introduce the cane are considered notwithstanding clear indication from Strasbourg that violence can no longer be condoned. Finally, the dignity and integrity of the person will continue to be at the forefront of the debate on children's rights as there is clearly discernible an international dissemination of legal norms which can serve as a mechanism of social control, responsive to changing popular ideologies and effecting influence on social policy and practice.     

CHILDREN,THE UNCRC,AND FAMILY LAW IN ENGLAND AND WALES

There is no doubt that, overall, there has been a great deal of activity in relation to children's rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) since it was ratified by the UK government in 1991. Of particular significance in the context of family law, however, are the provisions of Article 12, which have in many ways proved to be more problematic than other provisions, not least because, in the context of family law, children's participation rights are necessarily juxtaposed with the long‐standing and hitherto unchallenged rights of parents to make important decisions about family life. The reorganisation in 2001 of the family court welfare services in England and Wales with the creation of the Children and Family Courts Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS), generated a new impetus for the consideration of children's participation rights and, at an organizational level, considerable progress has been made in embracing the provisions of the UNCRC. More problematic, however, is the acceptance of children's participation in making decisions about their futures by adults using and working in the family justice system. At the level of the courts, judicial attitudes are slow to change and in England, as court judgments often demonstrate, these are firmly rooted in a view of children as being incompetent in such issues; at the level of parents using the system, it is arguable that new discourses about the best interests of the child serve as a proxy for continuing discourses about parents’ rights that have become evident, most recently, in the context of an increasingly influential fathers’ rights lobby; and at the level of welfare practitioners, recent research also demonstrates that, although the rhetoric of children's rights is widely accepted, the willingness and ability to make these real in the context of family proceedings is, for a variety of reasons, less in evidence.     

Children's Rights and the Politics of Food: Big Food Versus Little People

This article traces the battle in the United States during the Obama administration, continuing into the Trump administration, to protect children's rights to food. It explores barriers to development of sound, science‐based food policies, including the refusal to recognize food as a human right, anti‐science denialism, hostility toward government regulation, and relative powerlessness of children. It points to the role of a “Big Food Pyramid” composed of powerful food industry and large scale distribution and marketing interests in blocking sound policies in prenatal and infant nutrition, school lunches, SNAP and WIC, the marketing to children of high fat and fructose‐laden products, and campaigns to increase youth fitness. While predicting a continuing assault at the federal level on children's rights to safe and healthy foods, the article highlights the positive role of consumer demand in shaping marketing, labeling and production of food and opportunities for leaders in the food industry and in government at local, municipal and state levels to continue the battle for sound food policies.     

Listening to children: Participation rights of minors in Italy and the United States

This article compares laws and policies in Italy and the US regarding children's right to be heard and to engage in the life of the community. Italy has adopted a strong children's rights perspective, informed by the principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The US, with its pre-modern constitution and resistance to international law, has been slow to recognise children's rights to voice and agency. The US Supreme Court has extended some due process rights to children in criminal court proceedings, but the US lags far behind Italy in recognition of children's rights to participate in civic life and collective decision-making. Child well-being rankings may reflect these differences in attitudes towards children's rights. Italy ranks significantly higher than the US on objective measures of child well-being and Italian children report superior peer and family relationships.     

论刑事司法中的人权保障

刑事司法中的人权保障是当前人权保障的首要内容。人权的基本含义是保护个体不受任何外来势力的命令和剥夺,自由体现自己的意愿。但具有抽象人权和具体人权的双重属性。个体人权到集合体人权的发展体现了人权内容的可变性。刑事司法中的人权侵犯现象不仅普遍存在,而且具有多样性。加强刑事司法中的人权保障,要全面树立人权保障观念,正确处理实体正义和程序正义的关系,完善和正确适用刑事程序制度和刑事实体制度。     

Assumptions about children's best interests

The family justice system operates with a set of presumptions and assumptions about the welfare of the child which are assumed to be based on 'scientific' knowledge and which, therefore, are further assumed to carry the authority of both science and law. In practice, the result is that those working within the family justice system use powerful 'legal'notions whose provenance is often taken for granted and whose authority is unchallenged. Drawing on the different sets of assumptions operating in the family justice system and the youth justice system, this article explains, however, that law responds to messages originating in external discourses, notably science and politics, only in so far as its functions require and only in ways which 'fit'into legal communications. Viewed in this light, the presumptions are seen as working guidelines which should only be used with great care when dealing with the lives of children and young people. Whilst acknowledging that a full investigation of all children's cases would not be feasible, this article therefore argues for greater attention to the applicability and validity of prevailing presumptions.     

PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF YOUTH THEFT,MARIJUANA USE,DEPRESSION, AND POOR ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE*

Explanations for the fact that crime tends to run in families have focused on the deprived social backgrounds of criminal parents, methods of child‐rearing, modeling processes, and genetic mechanisms. However, parental involvement in the criminal justice system itself also might contribute to the intergenerational transmission of crime and have other adverse effects on children's well‐being. We investigated the development of youth problem behavior in relation to parental arrest, conviction, and incarceration in the youngest and oldest samples of the Pittsburgh Youth Study, a longitudinal survey of 1,009 inner‐city boys. Parental arrest and conviction without incarceration did not predict the development of youth problem behavior. Parental incarceration was not associated with increases in marijuana use, depression, or poor academic performance. However, boys experiencing parental incarceration showed greater increases in theft compared with a control group matched on propensity scores. The association between parental incarceration and youth theft was stronger for White youth than for Black youth. Parenting and peer relations after parental incarceration explained about half of its effects on youth theft. Because the effects of parental incarceration were specific to youth theft, labeling and stigma processes might be particularly important for understanding the consequences of parental incarceration for children.     

A Cross-Cultural View of Adults’ Perceptions of Children’s Rights

This study examined how the need for autonomy may be coexisting with current cultural norms. A total of 264 U.S., 76 Swiss, and 51 British adults completed two perceptions of children’s rights surveys. The results showed that Swiss and British participants were significantly more likely to advocate for autonomy or self-determination rights than same-aged U.S. adults. British participants were also more likely to advocate for children’s self-determination rights than U.S. and Swiss participants, whereas Swiss adults were more likely to grant children nurturance rights than British and US adults. Generally, parents were less likely to advocate for autonomy than non-parents. The results are discussed in terms of individualism—collectivism, self-determination theories, and parentalism.     

Justice or Welfare? Nordic Women's Shelters and Children's Rights Organizations on Children Exposed to Violence

Efforts to promote the protection of, and support to, abused women have opened up new understandings concerning children who see, hear, or in other ways are exposed to men's violence against women and its consequences. On the basis of a redefinition of children exposed to violence into children subjected to violence, some important policy changes have recently been made in the Nordic countries as regards children's status as crime victims. To enable a better understanding of the context of such changes in policy, this article explores the extent to which Nordic women's shelter/crisis centre organizations and children's rights organizations draw upon a justice discourse in relation to the issue of children exposed to violence. The analysis is based upon a study of 10 organizations working at a national level in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden.     

DISRUPTING THE PATHWAY FROM FOSTER CARE TO THE JUSTICE SYSTEM—A FORMER PROSECUTOR'S PERSPECTIVES ON REFORM

Nearly half a million children are victims of abuse and neglect and part of our foster care system. Over time, many of these youth cross into our juvenile and then adult justice systems; some will end up as federal offenders, immersed in a process where mandated penalties provide little room for flexibility or consideration of the characteristics and needs of the individual. This article will offer the perspectives of a former prosecutor and child welfare advocate on: (i) the current conditions and challenges within our foster care system—the feeder for many youth into gangs and criminal activity; (ii) the misaligned priorities and disheartening patterns we currently see in our justice system; and (iii) the ill‐advised practices, that set our nation apart from the rest of the world, allowing juvenile offenders to receive life without parole sentences. The article will then discuss a series of recommendations in all of these areas that would enable us to turn the corner and chart an improved and more hopeful path for our nation's vulnerable and at‐risk children and youth.     

Kids are Different: The United States Supreme Court Reforms Youth Sentencing Practices for Youth Prosecuted in the Criminal Justice System

In a series of decisions issued between 2005‐2016, the United States Supreme Court relied on emerging scientific research detailing the developmental differences between children and adults to revamp its juvenile sentencing jurisprudence under the Eighth Amendment. The research established that youth’s developmental immaturity reduces their culpability for their criminal conduct, while also demonstrating their heightened capacity for change and rehabilitation. The Court focused on the most extreme sentences for youth, banning the imposition of the death penalty on youth under the age of eighteen in Roper v. Simmons (2005), and severely limiting the availability of life without parole sentences even for youth convicted of murder, in Graham v Florida (2010) and Miller v Alabama (2012). This article traces the Court’s evolution in reviewing sentences for youth in our justice system, and considers how the Court’s reasoning in these cases may influence further reforms in the justice system’s treatment of youth looking ahead.     

Victims' Rights in Criminal Trials: Prospects for Participation

Victims in common law jurisdictions have traditionally been unable to participate in criminal trials for a number of structural and normative reasons. They are widely perceived as 'private parties' whose role should be confined to that of witnesses, and participatory rights for such third parties are rejected as a threat to the objective and public nature of the criminal justice system. However, recent years have witnessed both a major shift in attitude in relation to the role of victims within the criminal justice system and a breakdown in the public/ private divide in criminal justice discourse. This article considers the standing of the victim within the criminal trial against the backdrop of such changes, and examines the arguments for a more radical course of reform that would allow victims to participate actively in criminal hearings as they are able to do in many European jurisdictions.     

Reforming Relocation Law: A Reply to Prof. Thompson

This article provides a response to Prof. Thomson's critique, noting many points of agreement and also the broader consensus that is emerging among experts in the field. The research evidence, and the wider body of knowledge on children's well‐being generally, supports the proposition that relocation is a risk factor for children after parental separation but provides no support for a general presumption either in favor of, nor against, relocation. Nor should it be assumed that the interests of children are the same as those of their primary caregiver. We defend our three questions arguing the need in an adult‐centric debate to focus resolutely on children's interests rather than on adult rights. Both Prof. Thompson's approach and our own involve guided decision making with the child's best interests as the paramount consideration—his through weak presumptions based upon research about how judges respond to relocation issues and ours through focused questions based on research on how parents and children respond to relocations issues. We do not consider that codifying the existing practices of the courts represents real reform. We identify various risks involved in using presumptions, but note that, in jurisdictions with limited publicly funded resources for individual case assessment, presumptions, burdens or guidelines may be needed to offer rough justice to impecunious parents.

Key Points for the Family Court Community
• Notes points of emerging agreement on relocation within the research community
• Explores the differences between the use of presumptions and focused questions and highlights the role of empirical research of the lived experience of children and families postrelocation disputes
• Identifies how the level of public resourcing for the family law system may impact upon decisions about the substance of the law concerning relocation

     

试论土著民的环境权

土著民的环境权的提出与论证,对现代社会的权利网络形成具有重要意义。土著民在近代民族国家分析框架中处于“少数人”与“受歧视”的位置。环境正义论与生态智慧论的提出,使我们超越民族国家框架,对土著民环境权的正当性进行评论,然后超越“现代性”重构土著民环境权;对土著民之权利,实施国际法的救济模式;在国内法的制度安排中,以“本土参与”为社会参与机制的核心,确保土著民之环境的“自治权”。     

Surrogacy,Identity, Parentage and Childrenʼs Rights – Through the Eyes of a Child

In this article I will focus on two important aspects of children's rights which are impacted by artificial reproductive technology (particularly surrogacy); being the rights to identity and the rights to legal parentage. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child acknowledges the importance of a child's right to identity, to be protected from discrimination on the basis of the status or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians or family members. For many children born through surrogacy arrangements, they may have only one or no legally recognized parent. The adults caring for them may have parental responsibility orders but this falls well short of providing children with the benefits and protections that legal parentage does. The issue of identity can be complex. Increasingly, states have recognized the importance of children knowing the circumstances of their birth and being able to access biological and genetic information including medical information. From a child's perspective the issues of identity and parenthood are intertwined. Given the importance of identity, more needs to be done to ensure that identifying information about children born as a result of artificial reproductive technology is properly stored and readily accessible for these children. Denying a child legal parentage when there are no concerns about the care being provided by their parents cannot be justified when considered from a children's rights perspective.     

Preventing Homelessness for System‐Involved Youth

Too many youth and young adults find themselves on the streets, couch‐surfing with friends, in emergency shelters or worse, after exiting the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. In some circumstances, youth have had court hearings until their exit from the legal system, but those hearings have not focused on long‐range plans of youth and emergencies youth may encounter. In other circumstances, there has been little or no planning prior to discharge, especially for young people who leave the juvenile justice system. Courts can and should prevent, alleviate or end youth homelessness for youth who appear before them through strategies that are enumerated in the recently‐passed NCJFCJ resolution. This article expounds on three of these strategies – coordinating transition and re‐entry plans, insisting on effective legal representation of youth, and utilizing sound judicial leadership. It also describes the concurrent efforts of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice and the American Bar Association's Homeless Youth Legal Network to remove legal barriers and improve outcomes for youth and young adults experiencing homelessness.     

Legal Reform and Good Governance: Assessing Rights and Economic Development in Chile

Legal reforms throughout Latin America have increased the transparency of the criminal justice process and improved defendants' rights. Many scholars conjecture that such reforms also improve “good governance” and by extension economic development. Paradoxically, despite such assertions, there are few quantitative studies that examine the precise effect of such legal reforms. Using original data sets, the impact of Chile's criminal law reforms on the rights of criminals and economic development is tested. The results show that Chile's criminal law reform has enhanced defendants' rights by reducing the percent of individuals incarcerated. The reform has had a positive effect on regional economic activity, but little effect on foreign direct investment at the regional level.     

论国际人权法对国际刑法的影响

冷战结束后,国际人权法获得了较为广阔的生长空间,国际刑法也进入复兴和快速发展的阶段。国际人权法对国际刑法各个领域的影响都十分明显,从基本原则到具体规则,从实体法到程序法,从刑罚制度设计到刑罚的执行,并努力在保护被害人与保障被告人权利两者之间保持微妙的平衡。然而,透过国际人权法推动国际刑法发展的帷幔,不难发现其背后＂人权＂和＂主权＂之间的紧张博弈：为保护人权,国际人权法引领着国际刑法试图突破国家领土的藩篱进而穿透国家主权的坚硬＂铠甲＂;国家则奋力祭起＂主权＂大旗并诉诸＂司法独立＂的坚固盾牌,抵御某些外部政治实体利用国际刑事司法机构干涉其内政、侵蚀其＂司法独立＂,以最大限度地维护国家利益。     

荷兰刑事诉讼权利保障的法律基石

荷兰刑事司法受到了现代人权法律的深刻影响。在荷兰刑事诉讼过程中,诉讼权利保障主要依据国际性和地区性的人权条约以及相关国内法。荷兰刑事诉讼程序运作体现了对人权的真切关怀：荷兰签署加入了多部国际公约和欧洲区域公约,国际条约、欧洲人权法院的判例法都对荷兰刑事诉讼中的人权保障起到了重要作用。在国内法体系中,荷兰的《宪法》、《刑事诉讼法》以及其他法律也规定了刑事诉讼程序权利保障。荷兰的法院、检察机关组织运作体制和诉讼制度设计较为完备,保障了诉讼参与者在刑事诉讼程序中的权利。在刑事审前程序中,检察机关发挥了主导作用,但参与其问的侦查法官则对检察官和警察的侦查权形成了有效制衡。从刑事诉讼权利保障法律体系的整体而言,荷兰审前程序权利保障的体制属于适度的职权主义诉讼模式,而审判程序中的权利保障体制则兼采当事人主义和职权主义的混合式诉讼模式。