How do childhood and children's rights mean what they mean? Innovating the debate around the social semantics of childhood and children's rights through an interdisciplinary approach.
Saved in:
| Title: | How do childhood and children's rights mean what they mean? Innovating the debate around the social semantics of childhood and children's rights through an interdisciplinary approach. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Farini, Federico, Scollan, Angela |
| Source: | Children & Society. Nov2024, Vol. 38 Issue 6, p2022-2035. 14p. |
| Subjects: | Child welfare, Interdisciplinary education, Diffusion of innovations, Debate, Autonomy (Psychology), Teaching, Human rights, Social case work, Social values, Semantics, Ontologies (Information retrieval), Intergenerational relations, Civil rights, Children |
| Abstract: | This article discusses children's rights as social semantics, approaching them as a form of self‐description of a paradoxical relationship that has emerged from the late twentieth century within several social systems, a relationship between generational order and children's position as holders of human rights. Charles Taylor's theory on the evolution of the semantics of human value is combined with a wide interdisciplinary array of contributions from Childhood Studies, Social Work, Pedagogy, Studies on Constitutionalism to propose an innovative social ontology of children's rights. Although the UNCRC has been the object of critical scrutiny since the early 1990s, the authors are not aware of any previous attempt to approach children's rights as social semantics in an attempt to illuminate the dynamic and paradoxical coupling within discourses on childhood between a fundamental social process, the reproduction of generational order and a fundamental social institution, human rights as codified in western modernity. The authors argue that while describing a paradoxical coexistence between intergenerational order and human rights, the semantics of children's rights maintains its unity as a cultural form because another semantic distinction, between human rights and personal rights continue to generate social meaning. It is hoped that the scholarly debate will benefit from the contribution of this article to enrich the debate around the social ontology of childhood and children's rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Children & Society is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | This article discusses children's rights as social semantics, approaching them as a form of self‐description of a paradoxical relationship that has emerged from the late twentieth century within several social systems, a relationship between generational order and children's position as holders of human rights. Charles Taylor's theory on the evolution of the semantics of human value is combined with a wide interdisciplinary array of contributions from Childhood Studies, Social Work, Pedagogy, Studies on Constitutionalism to propose an innovative social ontology of children's rights. Although the UNCRC has been the object of critical scrutiny since the early 1990s, the authors are not aware of any previous attempt to approach children's rights as social semantics in an attempt to illuminate the dynamic and paradoxical coupling within discourses on childhood between a fundamental social process, the reproduction of generational order and a fundamental social institution, human rights as codified in western modernity. The authors argue that while describing a paradoxical coexistence between intergenerational order and human rights, the semantics of children's rights maintains its unity as a cultural form because another semantic distinction, between human rights and personal rights continue to generate social meaning. It is hoped that the scholarly debate will benefit from the contribution of this article to enrich the debate around the social ontology of childhood and children's rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09510605 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/chso.12865 |
