Infant/child rights

[Okonomiyaki]

Deep breath. Right, this is my first post here, and I'm nervous. I am aware that my thinking is fuzzy and I am open to changing my mind. I've chosen this board because I would like a reasoned discussion. I'm certainly not trying to bash anyone else's parenting choices.

Ok, disclaimer done. My question - are there any fundamental rights of the infant/child that we can agree beyond eg physical safety and freedom from abuse/neglect?

For example, the right to Breastfeed? Not to have nude photos taken and displayed on the Internet? To have a consistent, responsive cater during infancy?

In cases where there is a clash between these rights and those of others', as there inevitably would be if any of my suggestions could be considered rights, what is to be done? I guess most of the time the conflict would be with the mother's rights (eg right to formula feed).

Wow, I'm almost scared to post. It's almost like every polarising debate on here rolled into one. But I am really interested. I have a young son and I very much want for him to look back and feel respected and heard, in a way that felt missing in a lot of my childhood.

Carer not cater.

Impressive first post Okonomiyaki!

Hmm, I'll think about this a bit more but atm I'm inclined to think that once you start getting into optimal care rather than just adequate care (BF v FF) then no, there has to be room for parental choice.

Besides, I'd imagine that the tales of terrible childhoods dont often include complaints of having been formula fed or the failure of parents to nurture artistic talent etc, the REAL issues that fuck children up either cant be legislated for (feeling unwanted/unlove) or are already, but still happen anyway - children are still neglected or abused.

There's never not going to be a spectrum of effective parenting, it's life.

I also think that any kind of care that is enforced rather than given freely is likely to damage the bond that is there naturally. The effect of that could be an awful lot worse (for both parent and child) than the thing that they were being pretected from in the first place.

Sorry, to clarify - first post in this topic. Many of my inane ramblings can be found on other areas...

This might help:

UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child

Hmm, actually I think the thing about looking back as an adult is a bit of a red herring. What I actually mean is if an infant/child were able to advocate on their own behalf in the present moment, what would they see as a right?

So while an adult looking back would be unlikely to give two hoots about how they were fed, an infant in the moment cares very much indeed. And probably expresses it, but is unable to trump the adult's choice/need.

Misterdarsey, thanks. I particularly like the one about the right to amongst the first to receive help when needed.

The idea of rights is a legal concept. It's not the same as a desire or even a need. If an infant cares about how they are fed, that doesn't automatically become a right.

You need an adult perspective. from an edult perspective, every child has the right to an education that is appropriate for them..

Eg I want Ds1 to go to school and I want him to be made to stop withdrawing under Mrs X's desk. She concedes to my wish and makes him come out and interact. He perceives that he has a need to be under the desk, not receiving an education.

Whose wish should overide here? Ds1's, or mine?

My favourites from the UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child are the right to education and the right to play.

I think the difficulty is that as human beings none of us were perfect. So if you enacted in law the things that you mention in your OP, the result would be that many people wouldn't be allowed to have children/would have them removed. Being removed from your family is something that is very very bad for a child and legally it should only happen in extreme cases ie where there is genuine risk of abuse or neglect or where those things are happening.

Ask most children what they want, from their perspective, and (for smaller ones anyway which is what I have) the answer is "to be with mummy / daddy / sibling" etc and any other close carers. Making it an enforcable right to have breastmilk, never be shouted at, have a sole primary carer and all of the other things would mean that for many children their very primary concern ie to stay with their families would be lost.

I don't know where the right never to be shouted at cam from.

I don't think it's particularly helpful to define additional rights in the way you describe. Once you get past the very basics of the right not to be neglected, harmed or abused, childhood is a personal and highly variable experience. What is ideal for one child can easily be traumatic for another. For every child that is grateful for having a carer permanently on hand responding to their every need there will be another that wished their parents had backed off and given them more space. For every child that wishes their parents had given them a healthier diet, there will be another that hated the macrobiotic, vegan food imposed on them.

Another reason for not wanting to standardise or sanitise childhood, I think, is that it might stifle individuality of character. If we remove all the grains of sand, we may save ourselves a few gritty sandwiches but we also risk never finding another pearl in an oyster.