Parental Duties to Children Rights - Term Paper Example

Philosophy Student’s Name Course Professor Date Introduction Children and young people who have not attained the age of 18 years have all their right (D’Onofrio, 2005). However, those living away from home or those with disabilities have additional rights that mandate that they be treated fairly. In 1989, there was a declaration that children are human beings with distinct set of rights instead of passive objects of care and charity. The children are entitled to accommodative environment for their growth (D’Onofrio, 2005). The UN convention on human Rights of the child explain how parents and governments should collaborate to make sure that children enjoy all their rights under the CRC, it is demanded that the principle of best interest of a child be applied (Boylan, 2011). Parents are also obliged to making sure that they recognize children rights. All legislative and judicial bodies and other institutions must consider how children rights and interest are impacted directly of indirectly by their decisions. The responsibilities, rights and duties of a parent and any other person taking responsibility of a child must be respected (Boylan, 2011). Both parents have common responsibilities for upbringing and development of the child and must provide necessary assistance to the child and be legal guardians to child also (D’Onofrio, 2005). This article addresses the nature, role and limit of the child’s rights, the parent rights and states’ rights in connection to education policies and planning. And in case of any conflict of interest, whose rights should win. Philosopher’s perspective From a philosophical point of view, a person’s moral obligations are depended upon a contract or a form of agreement among them to come up with a society in which the live (Lotz, 2006). Hobbes, John Locke and Rousseau are known to be influential in such cases and their theories dominate the moral and political theories in the history (Baier, 1988). According to Hobbes authority and obligation are all founded on the individual self interest of member of the society and are somehow equal to one another, with no single individual given authority to rule over the rest, but at the same time having a conservative stand that the monarch must be given authority if the society has to survive (Baier, 1988). Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau believe that human rights are founded on valid universal norms. It is worth noting that, their philosophy was influenced by natural law theory (McCoy, 1963). Hobbes for instance is known to have raised a raw state of nature, developing laws and entering into contracts that kept the society from falling apart (Gauthier, 1988). Locke is known for stating that, “all men are created equal, and their creators gave them unalienable rights like, life, liberty and pursuit of happiness”. Rousseau social contract theory is very clear. This theory has substantial evidence of supporting the idea that rights were a natural product of social agreements (Baier, 1988). When individuals agree with each other to obey a certain authority they establish sovereignty by institution (Lotz, 2006). The motivation of establishing sovereignty is through fear (Lotz, 2006).. It is clear that, freedom and liberty are all well elaborated in Rousseau’s work and therefore were his great concern (Baier, 1988). He states that, man is different form animals for he has the ability to make choices, the ability to act against instinct and inclination, and therefore moral action is possible. Natural freedom encompasses the unlimited right to all things, what Hobbes refers to as right of nature. Educational themes Free speech Students have a right to speak their minds on public school ground. The law stipulates that, there must be safe, orderly school environment for good learning and students must speak or even engage in expressive activity (Cope, 2010). Speech is not just words; it also includes non verbal and symbolic expression. It is worth noting that, just as adults, children have rights but they are more vulnerable and fragile. Their liberties are restricted to ensure their security and wellbeing (Boylan, 2011). Children have liberty of opinion. In this case they are entitled to have opinion even though they are different from those of their parents. Irrespective of their age, their opinion should be considered. States and parents have an obligation to listen to the children and consider their opinion I decision making. Secondly, children have liberty of expression. Any questions that concern their life, they are entitled to expressing freely their opinion. No pressure from an adult, or force should be enacted to influence their opinion. Moreover, they have freedom of association whereby they can consult on issues which directly affect their rights and wellbeing. This means that, they have a right to be part of their life and society (Boylan, 2011). Faith school Parents have rights to educate their children and bring them up in the religion or belief of their choice without any coercion from the state. Religion however should not be the basis of selection in faith school but this is usually the case. Schools should not instill religious faith in children and schools. No child should be denied the right to education. The beliefs of pupils and their families should be respected. Sex education Children need high quality sex education and relationship education so that they can be well equipped to make substantial decisions. Parents have a right to withdraw their children from sex education other than that is the national curriculum like biological growth. Since the children have a right to relationships, it’s therefore their right to get education. At age 11sex and relationship education is compulsory. It is therefore their right. Schools must have written policy and sex education. There has been conflicting issues whereby the rights of sex education can be violated. When a child has the right to education, parents have a right to withdrawing them from such classes. Conflict of interest A child is dependent on the adult’s care. A child has the right to care, safety and good upbringing. Parents on the other hand are obligated to taking care of the child’s well being and at the same time have the authority and the right to decide for the child on serious matters (Millum, 2010). The parent therefore handles the legal and personal matters of a child. The civil right of the parent is correlated with the perspective of a child. For the child, it guarantees care and protection. However, civil rights of the parent might be a stumbling block in relation to the rights of a child when there is conflict of interest (Montague, 2000). The principle of the best interest of the child is well elaborated in the child legislation. When there is conflict of interest, or a violation, it is hard to get to the bottom of the situation due to the decision making capacity of the child. Interviewing the child happens without the consent of the child to avoid manipulation. The society also is entitled to providing protection for vulnerable children. This therefore means that, any measure aimed at a child is more considerable than as if it was directed to an adult (Scales, 2002). The parent’s right can be restricted by the law to protect other person’s liberties and rights. Literature depict that, when there is conflict of interest, both sides, the parent and the child must be balanced, but special importance given to the best interest of the child over the parent right to family life with the child. This therefore means that, when there is a conflict of interest, the right of child will be considered important than those of the parent (Vopat, 2003). Conclusion Children just like adult have right. Due to their vulnerability, they are accorded more emphasis. From philosophical perspective, a person’s moral obligations are depended upon a contract or a form of agreement among them to come up with a society in which the live. Hobbes, John Locke and Rousseau are some of philosophers who have explained more about the morality and freedom of individuals. Hobbies stated that, authority and obligation are all founded on the individual self interest of member of the society and are somehow equal to one another, with no single individual given authority to rule over the rest, but at the same time having a conservative stand that the monarch must be given authority if the society has to survive. Rousseau clearly indicated that, man is different form animals for he has the ability to make choices, the ability to act against instinct and inclination, and therefore moral action is possible. A child has rights governing its speech, education and religion. In case of conflict of interest, the right of child are considered more important that those of the parent. Works Cited Baier, A. (1988). "Pilgrim's Progress: Review of David Gauthier, Morals by Agreement.". Canadian Journal of Philosophy Vol. 18, No. 2. , 315-330. Boylan, M. (2011). “Duties to Children.” The Morality and Global Justice Reader. Michael Boylan, ed . Boulder, CO: ,: Westview Press , pp. 385-403. Cope, K. C. (2010). The Age of Discipline: The Relevance of Age to the Reasonableness of Corporal Punishment.”. Law and Contemporary Problems 73 , 167-188. D’Onofrio, E. (2005). "Child Brides, Inegalitarianism, and the Fundamentalist Polygamous Family in the United States". International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 19 (3) , 373 394. Gauthier, D. (1988). "Hobbes's Social Contract.". Noûs 22: , 71-82. Lotz, M. ( 2006). “Feinberg, Mills, and the Child's Right to an Open Future,”. Journal of Social Philosophy, 37(4) , 537–551. McCoy, C. N. (1963). The Modernized Theory of Natural Law and the Enlightenment. In Charles N. R. McCoy, The Structure of Political Thought: A Study in the History of Political Ideas (pp. Pages 187–221 i). New York: McGraw-Hill. Millum, J. (2010). “How Do We Acquire Parental Rights?” . Social Theory and Practice 36 , 112-132. Montague, P. (2000). “The Myth of Parental Rights.” . Social Theory and Practice 26 (): , 47-68. Scales, S. (2002). “Intergenerational Justice and Care in Parenting,” . Social Theory and Practice 4 , 667-677. Vopat, M. (2003). “Contractarianism and Children.”. Public Affairs Quarterly 17 , 49-63. Read More