The Contribution of the New Sociology of Childhood - Literature review Example

Evaluate the contribution of the New Sociology of childhood and the UNCRC to the improvement of a selected aspect of children’s lives in international contexts Raffaelli (2001, p. 396) has remarked that for matters affecting children and for their voices to be heard, there has been renewed demands in the recent years. Before these demands started getting registered, thanks to new sociologists, children were mostly thought about as a section of the society and socialisation that were at the passive receiving end. This was a concept of alienation of children from being active agents of the society; something that resulted in children being viewed as mere spectators. Frankel (2007, p.3) has further stated that the environment in which they became 'helpless spectators' was very pressing in nature. The genesis of this thought is said to be ingrained in the fact that children are not as powerful as adults, or worst still they are not powerful at all. Since lack of power does not attract attention, children were never thought of seriously about and not much research was directed at them. Levison (2000, p.125) equates this with once prevalent mindset of the society that women were not powerful, were secondary to men and did not count much. But, in a reassuring tone, he adds that it is this mindset that gave rise to what is now known as feminism. Alanen (2005, p.35) has stated that even though the equation is well-founded and subtle, but the childhood studies need to be put in a paradigm which is completely different. In the recent past social scientists have preferred to distance themselves from perspectives which adults have been holding about children. Social scientists now believe that children have their own lives, risks involved with it and more importantly their own rights, which means they deserve active engagement in research processes. Children have been made the centre of attention by the new sociology of childhood, which rejects the traditional perspectives on the same. It is not that this is a recent phenomenon altogether. The seeds for this change were sown by a couple of sociologists way back in 1960s. Man has been termed as an "over socialised" person at that point of time (Wrong, 1961, p.183). Six years later in 1967, Garfinkel, an investigator of ethnomethodology, said man was a "judgmental dope" (Cromdal, 2006, p.463). In Mackay (1975, p.187) recognised that children had an ability to "invent, reason and acquire knowledge". All said, argue researchers, that children have such a capability should not be construed as them being totally self-reliant, left on their own and left unguarded. Levison (2000, p.126) blames economists for the state of children that was. He states that economists have been portraying children as devoid of power and almost like an invisible entity. But, argues the sociologist, these assumptions cannot be taken at the face value since they lack any empirical validation. The new sociology of childhood opines that childhood is not a static but a dynamic process. This is because in any given social context, children hold their own and specific perspectives which, if taken seriously, can guide politicians, lawyers, educationists, families, health providers and other parties towards better prioritisation of their needs (Woodhead, 1997, p.68) and what contribution they can make to social research (Corsaro, 2011). The new sociology of childhood is centered on two perspectives. One is the social actor approach and other the generational view. The first view opposes the previously held views of childhood being as irrational and vulnerable (Leonard. 2004, p.55). This view states that children have the capacity to make sound decisions, just as other social actors are capable of doing. On daily basis children orientate themselves in the environment of which they are a part. In the same context, generational view has shaped new sociology's perspective on childhood. This view is more tilted towards socio-theoretical and socio-structural questions as being discussed in context of social order and social equality. All these happenings in context of childhood as triggered by new sociology of childhood are making tremendous impact on the institution of childhood and compelled the international community to take a serious note of childhood, recognise its needs and protect its rights. The improvement ahs been brought about or attempts being made in this direction even by researchers whose core areas of interest are not limited to sociology only but outside of it too. Sandy Hobbs, for example, has argued that in order to understand childhood better, psychology should remain as a key domain of study while researching childhood. Another scholar, Jim McKechnie, has stated that to make childhood research effective enough, such scientific methodologies should be adopted that give importance to children's perspectives and views. He adds that to improve childhood, the ideal research would be one that starts from the childhood itself. While the improvements are being talked about, debate in international forums and proved figuratively, there are researchers who raise concerns about the state of underprivileged children. They argue that real improvements can be counted when there exists uniformity in the same across all children, irrespective of their creed and social class. Notable of the few scientists who have raised this voice are Chris Jones, Niamk Stack, Henry Maitles, and Barry Goldson. In this direction making an important contribution is United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (the Convention), which advocates children's rights and their meaning in the new paradigm. Even though the convention is still meeting some resistance, but in a broader context this is seen as a change that will be instrumental in making the lives of children better, improving their standing in the international context and paving ways for meaningful changes in future (Tapp, 1998). The UNCRC does not only talk of child's rights, but also accords a new definition to children's competency and agency, value of multiple childhoods and the primacy of children's lived experience. UNCRC, by and large, is supported by professionals working with children or working on research related to them. These professionals advocate the need to change policies by influencing policy makers, educationalists, institutions and perceptions. This move is being seen as one which will increase children's self-determination, raise their status and make institutions responsible towards children and childhood. The convention is being seen as a move that will change perceptions on childhood in the long term by educating governments and agencies which are responsible for directly or indirectly towards changing the lives of children. This convention has major impact internationally on the way children must be treated and their lives improved. This is because the convention argues that children are social participants and citizens in their own right. This way the convention has brought about a shift in the way children were defined earlier. There is a tremendous shift 'children should be seen but not heard' adage as presumed a little over two decades ago. The new sociology of childhood has been successful in changing the earlier perception that children are property belonging to their parents; do not merit much consideration until they turn into adults. Boshier (2005, p.7) has remarked that this is "the most widely adopted human rights document in history, which is ratified by 192 countries. He further considers this as a backdrop, powerful in nature, to the Care of Children Act. New sociology of childhood and UNCRC together has also put the focus on childhood education. The preamble talks about the special care and safeguards needed by children, apart from importance of family support and family itself. This is clearly mentioned in Articles 28 and 29, which stress the need of children to have rights to education. Article 29 further states that education should be personality-specific i.e., which develops personality of the children, their physical and mental abilities and their overall talents such that their fullest potential is explored and nurtured. The Article further states that if children experience rich and healthy environments in childhood or infancy, they stand chances of reaching matchless standards of achievements in their adulthood. Evidence to support this has gradually started emerging even in case of children in poverty but given high-quality education in childhood (Barnett, 1999; Smith, Grima, Gaffney & Powell, 2000). Even though new sociology of childhood provides sound theoretical base for improvements in childhood, UNCRC is being considered as a major vehicle that can influence policy makers so that major changes are accepted and implemented. This is because UNCRC can prove to be a persuasive tool to fulfill this aim. Both UNCRC and the new sociology of childhood have also been able to improve childhood by shifting focus from children's "needs" perspective to their "rights' perspective. Thus the latter is attaining the significance of being a powerful antidote to the former. In this process it has broken certain previous notions of protectionist and paternalist construction on children, take as "powerless dependants", those who are "detached from" the rest of society and those who cannot shape their own destinies (Stainton, 2004). It can thus be concluded that keeping in view the new sociology of childhood and UNCRC convention by linking the "rights" word with children, w window to innumerable number of possibilities is opened. Both are an important tool to bring about a change in childhood internationally and pave way for providing effective childhood education. The need is to use both in a proactive manner so that reforms can be advocated and desired changes accomplished. Both are proving to be pillars of a shifting paradigm on children earlier thought to be passive recipients of interventions imposed by adults. This is arguably one reason why, in the recent years, greater emphasis has been laid on the relevance of childhood research in social context. Such research will be instrumental in reaching out to the hidden parameters of childhood which will have socially-beneficial outcomes even for the adult community. More than two decades after the UNCRC convention was passed, it should not be forgotten to give an account for what has changed all this while. Even though figures may not be too much to boast of, but they certainly are so optimistic that much more can be expected in the years to come. For example under-five deaths around the world have fallen -- in 1990 it was 12.5 million deaths, and in 2008 it was 9 million. Around 84 percent of children (primary school age) are going to schools throughout the world and the developing world is seeing gender gaps shrinking in the primary school enrolments. The AIDS pandemic fight is increasing and the results can be seen. During these two decades children's codes have been incorporated by more than seventy countries into their legislation. It is hoped that these changes would sooner or later reach those millions of children for whom essential services are still a dream. References Alanen, L. (2005). “Women’s Studies/Childhood Studies. Parallels, Links and Perspectives” in Mason, J (ed.). Children taken Seriously. In Theory, Policy and Practice. Retrieved May 17, 2010, from Linkoping University Library. Barnett, S. (1999). Long-term effects on cognitive development and school success. In W. S. Barnett & S. S. Boocock (Eds.), Early care and education for children in poverty: Promises, programs and long-term results (pp. 11-14). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Boshier, P. F. (2005). The Care of Children Act: Does it enhance children's participation and protection rights? Childrenz Issues, 8(2), 7-19. Cromdal, J. (2006). Socialization. Encyclopaedia of Language & Linguistics, 11(462-465). Corsaro, W. (2011) The Sociology of Childhood (3rd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. Frankel, S. (2007). Researching Children’s Morality: developing research methods that allow children’s involvement in discourses relevant to their everyday lives. Childhoods Today, 1 (1), 1-25. Levison, D. (2000). “Children as Economic Agents”. Feminist Economics. 6(1), 125-134. Leonard, M. (2004). “Children’s Views on Children’s Right to Work. Reflections from Belfast”. Childhood, 11(1), 45-61. Mackay, R. (1975). Conceptions of children and models of socialization. In R. Turner (Ed.), Ethnomethodology. Selected readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Raffaelli, M. et al. (2001). “How do Brazilian Street Youth Experience “The Street”? Analysis of a Sentence Completion Task”. Childhood, 8(3), 396-415. Smith, A. B., Grima, G., Gaffney, M., & Powell, K. (2000). Early childhood education: Literature review report to Ministry of Education. Dunedin: Children's Issues Centre. Stainton Rogers, W. (2004). Promoting better childhoods: Constructions of child concern. In M.J. Kehily (Ed.), An introduction to childhood studies (pp. 125-144), Maidenhead: Open University Press. Tapp, P. (1998). Use of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in the family court. In New Zealand Law Society (Eds.), Proceedings of the NZLS Family Law Conference (pp. 235-263). Christchurch: New Zealand Law Society. Wrong, D.H. (1961). The Oversocialized Conception of Man in Modern Sociology. American Sociological Review, 26 (2), 183-193. Woodhead, M. (1997). Psychology and the cultural construction of children's needs. In A. James & A. Prout (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood (pp. 63-77). Basingstoke: Falmer Press. Read More