The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: The Good, the Bad, and the Useless
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children (UNCRC), put forth in 1989, has generated a global movement in the direction of protecting and promoting children’s rights, resulting in a paradigm change in how children are perceived under the law. While the UNCRC is the most widely ratified international human rights treaty in human history, children’s fundamental right to protection continues to be violated through actions instigated by adults, such as neglect, physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, or being coerced into marriage, wartime activities, or slavery. This is largely a result of international law having no empirical legal binding; since countries are sovereign upon themselves, without domestic enforcement by each individual signatory country, there is no obligation to abide by the terms of international treaties. Applying both a philosophical and legal framework, this paper seeks to provide a critical analysis of whether or not treaties of international law, such as the Convention on the Rights of Children (UNCRC), have an unyielded potential to spark a tangible, beneficial change in the promotion of children’s rights, or if such doctrines are nothing more than glorified pieces of lip service paid to bolster the signatory country’s face value on a global level.
All authors have referenced and footnoted all ideas, words, and/or other intellectual property from other sources used in the completion of the essays. All authors have included a proper reference list, which includes acknowledgement of all sources used to complete the paper. The essays within this journal shall not be reproduced in any form without permission of the publisher or the author, and shall also not be resubmitted in any way for use in any academic setting.Â