Come On, U.S., Give the Kids Their Rights

November 20, 2009 is the 20th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). According to UNICEF, "The Convention on the Rights of the Child is the first legally binding international instrument to incorporate the full range of human rights—civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights."

Only two United Nations member states have not ratified it: Somalia and the United States.

Did you just say, "What?" Yeah, me too.

I'm not entirely sure why the U.S. hasn't ratified the Convention. It seems like a no-brainer. According to The Huffington Post article, Obama Administration Seeks To Join U.N. Rights Of The Child Convention, "[O]pponents in the U.S. have long argued that it could open the door to outside interference from government and U.N. officials in what they say are parents' rights to raise a child as they see fit."

I know the Obama Administration has a ton on its plate right now, but I mean, come on--it's children's rights: things like non-discrimination, protection from abuse, and protection for children without families, refugee children, and children with disabilities. Do we really need to think hard about this one?

The International Rescue Committee (IRC) has launched an online petition urging President Obama and the U.S. Congress to ratify the agreement. Amnesty International also has a sample letter template you can send to your Senator, and has created an unofficial summary of the 42 main provisions of the Convention for you to peruse.

If you know of a good reason why we shouldn't ratify this let me know, 'cause I can't think of one.

Related blogs:

Full disclosure: I donate to Amnesty International and UNICEF.

BlogHer Contributing Editor, Britt Bravo, also blogs at Have Fun * Do Good, WE tv's WE Volunteer blog, The Extraordinaries, and the Global Center for Cultural Entrepreneurship blog. She is a Big Vision Consultant.

Submitted by Britt Bravo (view blog

) on Fri, 11/06/2009 - 4:28pm

Posted In

Comments (4)

Twitter

Facebook

StumbleUpon

Comments

I'm not a lawyer, or even american

but I was told it was to do with the armed forces. The charter defines a child as somebody under 18 years of age, and the US allows people to sign up at 16 (I think).

However, looking at your link to the unofficial summary, it only talks about children under 15 with reference to armed conflict (Article 38) so I'm probably wrong.

http://myrope.wordpress.com

Submitted by kazari on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 15:47

Interesting

Hi Kazari,

That's interesting. I wonder where I can find out more info. I'll ask the folks at IRC if they can comment.

Submitted by Britt Bravo on Wed, 11/18/2009 - 10:32

Convention of the Rights of the Child

Dear Kazari,

Thank you for your query. Yes, you are correct, the Convention of the Rights of the Child prohibits the recruitment of children under the age of 15. That is why after the Convention was originally introduced in 1989, the international community saw the need to do more to protect children. This became especially important as more and more children 15 years of age and older began to be recruited into armed groups. As a result, an additional provision, or "protocol," was added to the convention. The first Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict came into force in 2002. It establishes 18 as the minimum age for compulsory recruitment and requires states to do everything they can to prevent individuals under the age of 18 from taking a direct part in hostilities. Also, in 2002 a second Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography was added to the Convention. It provides states with detailed requirements to end the sexual exploitation and abuse of children.

For more information you may wish to visit the United Nations Web site: http://www.unicef.org/crc/

Eduardo Garcia Rolland

Child Protection Technical Advisor

The International Rescue Committee

Submitted by IRC1933 on Thu, 11/19/2009 - 10:48