Nov 17th, 2009
Posted by Nahal Zamani, Human Rights Program at 5:40pm	Children's Rights

20 Years of Neglecting Children's Rights

This coming Friday marks the 20th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the most comprehensive treaty on children’s rights. The convention has been ratified by nearly every country in the world, except for the United States. The convention would fill current gaps in U.S. laws, and provide all children in America with the same robust protections that children in 193 countries are already entitled to.

Twenty years ago, countries around the world came together and pledged to uphold children’s rights. Their pledge, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), is the most comprehensive treaty on children’s rights and was adopted on November 20, 1989. The CRC reflects the universal recognition of children’s unique human rights protection needs.

Only two countries haven’t ratified the treaty: Somalia (which has been a failed state without an effective government over the past two decades) and the United States.

The United States!?

How embarrassing! Although the U.S. had a critical role in drafting the international treaty, and President Clinton signed it in 1995, the Senate never actually ratified the treaty. (Under the U.S. Constitution, a treaty doesn't become law until the Senate gives its advice and consent to ratification.)

Even President Obama has recognized this embarrassment. During his presidential campaign, he said that it is "important that the United States return to its position as a respected global leader and promoter of human rights. It's embarrassing to find ourselves in the company of Somalia, a lawless land. I will review [the CRC] and other treaties and ensure that the United States resumes its global leadership in human rights."

The CRC would fill current gaps in U.S. laws, and provide all children in America with the same robust protections that children in 193 countries are already entitled to. The convention would offer much-needed protection to vulnerable populations — including minority and poor children, and students with disabilities — in areas such as access to quality education, health care and protection from harmful influences, abuse and exploitation.

The Obama administration has an opportunity to bring the CRC to the Senate for consent and approval. If ratified by the United States, the CRC would bolster existing protections and foster U.S. commitment to and promotion of children’s rights in the U.S. and around the world.

This week, we'll be blogging about ways the ACLU has been advocating for children's rights.

We can't afford to let another 20 years pass.

Permalink |	Children's Rights

Tags: CRC

1. Anonymous Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 9:51am

   It's tragically amusing that the ACLU is decrying the neglect for children's rights one day and advocating for abortion the next.

2. Anonymous Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 10:46am

   I agree with #1 poster. One day the ACLU is screaming for children's rights and the next, they are telling us to kill children, because that is exactly what abortion is...killing a child. No matter how you look at it, a life is a life. ACLU, if you want to protect children, protect ALL children, especially while they are in the womb and cannot protect themselves.

3. Anonymous Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 11:28am

   What's tragically amusing is the number of anti-choice zealots who could care less about "the children" once they are born

4. Anonymous Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 12:59pm

   Poster #3: Your statement seems to reflect a quite popular prejudice of today. In my opinion, it is a rather bold statement, and would perhaps be deeply offensive if it were not so vague... feckless even. The more I come across hollow ringing accusations like the one you expressed, the more clearly the arguments are exposed for what they truly are: mere sentiment.

   Claiming that certain groups could "care less" about children, besides being inherently undemonstrable (in the strictest sense), is only appropriate when based on some sort of empirical data from a significantly large population.

   Perhaps you were basing your statement on some such data. If so, I would be curious to know what it was. Anyway, seeing as the majority of charitable organizations in the U.S. are founded and operated by religious groups that hold a strict "anti-choice" policy (as you would call it), the obvious link between "anti-choice" and social justice might not have the inverse correlation that you expected.

5. Kenz Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 4:17pm

   just out of curiosity, but this blog is supposed to mention a celebration as well as an embarrassment correct? Then why would you bash the idea of it with another idea? abortion is a very interesting topic. Whether you support it or not shouldn't matter. it's a choice. Not to mention, can some truly be considered a child, or even human at the size of a simple molecule, or later on what seems to be a blob with a nucleus?

6. Anonymous Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 5:07pm

   Kenz:

   I posted comment 4.

   Why would I bash the idea of the post with another idea? Well, let's just say that I find the two ideas indissoluble and while I'd love to address the second half of your comment, I'll refrain.

   However, you are right that I veered away from the main topic of the blog, which had a notable point.

   I'll end my comments here, and perhaps the connected, yet peripheral discussion that has developed will end with them.

7. Dennis Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 8:21pm

   Pro-Life, NO -
   More like Pro-FETUS the way they strike me

8. Crystal Says:
   Nov 18th, 2009 at 9:34pm

   So because the ACLU supports abortion they should ignore the violation of child rights. If a women wants to have an abortion she will whether its legal or not. Protecting reproductive freedom is not supporting abortion. Would you rather have a mother have a child and sell it for sex like the horrible story on the news? If a mother doesnt wants a child then forcing her to have it wont make her a good mother. I abhor abortion but I realize that no matter how I feel some will make that choice. It better they have a safe abortion by a licensed doctor than some hack with a hanger.

Name

E-mail

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Homepage

• Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
• Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

What code is in the image? *

Enter the characters shown in the image. Case-sensitive.