More and more I’m starting to think we need such a thing as a children’s Bill of Rights. We always talk about rights of the parents but children’s rights seems to get just ignored completely in today’s society. I mean why does this child have to have their life potentially ruined and at the very least damaged markedly by the attitude of the parent. This kid didn’t choose to be born to the psycho parent, yet it’s going to have to feel the the effects of it.
It seems like “parental rights” is the new strategy that far right radicals are using to erode personal rights and freedoms. Up here in Canada they’re using it to force gender non-conforming children to be outted to their parents by their schools, and even acknowledge the violation to the rights of children through the use of the notwithstanding clause: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-bill-137-notwithstanding-clause-1.6993335
There is the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is an international treaty signed by all but 1 country in the UN. The only holdout is the US.
So, to be clear I think this is a fantasic idea and needed, but I don’t actually see it happening. Children aren’t a voting group who can advocate for their own rights, while conversely psychos like that in the image above will be quite vocal about “goverment interference”.
While something like this should be bipartisan and common sense to enforce basic facilities for children. I am certain that R’s would insist on “not ‘trans’ing’ children” or the rights of unborn children and the whole thing dies as part of culture war BS.
Maybe I’m jaded, but I don’t see how this could progress.
I would like it if we could also somehow make over feeding your child count as child abuse.
There are a lot of parents who will just throw pizza and McDonald’s at the child they have brought into the world rather than put the energy in to feed them nutritious healthy food.
Then you end up having third graders that weigh 175 lb becoming the norm.
And when you step back for just a moment and think, it is clear that that is child abuse. They are inflicting damage on that child that will last for the rest of their lives.
But making your child fat out of sheer laziness isn’t treated the same as starving your child out of sheer laziness, and I don’t know why.
You’re better off arguing that we should be offering nutritional food for free to children (or everybody) if that’s the case. This bypasses a lot of issues that might stem from poverty and location, and seems to show positive trends in physical, behavioral and educational health, plus, as a long-term investment, generates huge returns in the money spent.
“Put in the energy” what a judgemental prick. You have no idea what someone’s personal situation is, nor would you care if you did. Just another cake life dickhead looking down on others.
I want to know what these people think about the foster care system. When I see crap like that it raises so many questions. Do they know what actual child abuse looks like? Do they think that foster care is a better alternative to eating chicken nuggets? Have they thought about the implications of classifying certain foods as “child abuse” or how you would even enforce that? Do they really think all the people in that situationare lazy? Have they considered that many of those kids end up being latch key kids because their parents are underpaid and working constantly just to feed/cloth/house their kids? Have they ever touched grass?
Makes sense. Too much legislation gets passed to “protect the children” but maybe it would help to codify what that actually means and get some committee to find out what issues kids are currently facing (inappropriate homeschooling, lack of independent mobility…) as opposed to the fearmongering against E2E encryption etc.
In Norway we tried. We got overuled by the European Courts. A bunch of foster parents threw in the towel as a result, and hundreds of children were deprived of a stable home environment.
More and more I’m starting to think we need such a thing as a children’s Bill of Rights. We always talk about rights of the parents but children’s rights seems to get just ignored completely in today’s society. I mean why does this child have to have their life potentially ruined and at the very least damaged markedly by the attitude of the parent. This kid didn’t choose to be born to the psycho parent, yet it’s going to have to feel the the effects of it.
It seems like “parental rights” is the new strategy that far right radicals are using to erode personal rights and freedoms. Up here in Canada they’re using it to force gender non-conforming children to be outted to their parents by their schools, and even acknowledge the violation to the rights of children through the use of the notwithstanding clause: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/sask-bill-137-notwithstanding-clause-1.6993335
That’s because it was never about rights. It is about property.
Women used to be men’s property.
Children used to be parents’ property.
Minorities used to be white people’s property.
The right doesn’t want people’s rights, they want property rights.
Time to start owning republicans.
There is the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which is an international treaty signed by all but 1 country in the UN. The only holdout is the US.
A common enough thing for the US oddly enough.
The UN: “Hey, how about we made this basic, common sense, decent thing, part of what everyone could expect?”
The US: “Yeah, nah”
So, to be clear I think this is a fantasic idea and needed, but I don’t actually see it happening. Children aren’t a voting group who can advocate for their own rights, while conversely psychos like that in the image above will be quite vocal about “goverment interference”.
While something like this should be bipartisan and common sense to enforce basic facilities for children. I am certain that R’s would insist on “not ‘trans’ing’ children” or the rights of unborn children and the whole thing dies as part of culture war BS.
Maybe I’m jaded, but I don’t see how this could progress.
You’ve identified a key problem with top down “representative” democracy.
History hasn’t ended. We can evolve.
I would like it if we could also somehow make over feeding your child count as child abuse.
There are a lot of parents who will just throw pizza and McDonald’s at the child they have brought into the world rather than put the energy in to feed them nutritious healthy food.
Then you end up having third graders that weigh 175 lb becoming the norm.
And when you step back for just a moment and think, it is clear that that is child abuse. They are inflicting damage on that child that will last for the rest of their lives.
But making your child fat out of sheer laziness isn’t treated the same as starving your child out of sheer laziness, and I don’t know why.
You’re better off arguing that we should be offering nutritional food for free to children (or everybody) if that’s the case. This bypasses a lot of issues that might stem from poverty and location, and seems to show positive trends in physical, behavioral and educational health, plus, as a long-term investment, generates huge returns in the money spent.
“Put in the energy” what a judgemental prick. You have no idea what someone’s personal situation is, nor would you care if you did. Just another cake life dickhead looking down on others.
I want to know what these people think about the foster care system. When I see crap like that it raises so many questions. Do they know what actual child abuse looks like? Do they think that foster care is a better alternative to eating chicken nuggets? Have they thought about the implications of classifying certain foods as “child abuse” or how you would even enforce that? Do they really think all the people in that situationare lazy? Have they considered that many of those kids end up being latch key kids because their parents are underpaid and working constantly just to feed/cloth/house their kids? Have they ever touched grass?
Just so many questions…
And the fix for that is name calling? I agree, there is a lot more needed than “energy” but let’s have a discussion.
Makes sense. Too much legislation gets passed to “protect the children” but maybe it would help to codify what that actually means and get some committee to find out what issues kids are currently facing (inappropriate homeschooling, lack of independent mobility…) as opposed to the fearmongering against E2E encryption etc.
In Norway we tried. We got overuled by the European Courts. A bunch of foster parents threw in the towel as a result, and hundreds of children were deprived of a stable home environment.
Big win for the rights of abusive parents though!
Yeah I remember reading that. In Queensland, Australia it for some fucking insane reason is still legal to WHIP KIDS in private schools.
I thought there is no way that’s true… get your shit together Queensland.
Based on a Supreme Court ruling handed down in 1977, states have authority over the issue of corporal punishment in schools. Most states have banned it in public school settings. However, the practice is still legal (though sometimes restricted) in 17 states as of August 2023, and only three states—Iowa, New Jersey and Maryland—have banned physical discipline in private schools. The latest estimate from the National Center for Education Statistics suggests that more than 70,000 public school kids face physical punishment at least once during the school year
How fucked up is this. The supreme court ruled to leave the issue up to the states. “States rights” is how the supreme court ended Roe v. Wade too.
Ermmm. Thats the US. But agreed, it’s fucked that the US still hasn’t banned it nationally. Fuckety fuck fuck the supreme court.