Session Information
25 SES 11, Working With Roma and Migrant Children: Ethical and Methodological Issues
Parallel Paper Session
Contribution
Children are conceptualised across a number of seemingly contradictory paths. Developmental perspectives adopt a deficit notion of childhood and conceptualise childhood as a time of becoming, focusing on what capacities children are missing that they would need in adulthood (Mathews, 2008; 2009). Children are thought to have increasing capacity the closer they are to adulthood. Viewing childhood solely as a time of preparation for adulthood fails to acknowledge childhood as an important and distinct part of life in its own right and fails to recognise children as complete citizens (MacNaughton, Hughes and Smith, 2009) further perpetuating the dominant view of a society that exacerbates the power division between children and adults (Steinberg, 2011). By contrast, the sociological position of childhood acknowledges the experiences of children in their social worlds as integral to understanding children’s childhoods. The notion of childhood from a sociological perspective is viewed as a social phenomenon that has been influenced by current and historical contexts (Archard, 2004; James, Jenks and Prout, 1998; James and Prout, 1997) and acknowledges children to have capacity. Further to this, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child [UNCRC] outlines 54 articles of children’s rights that are considered equally important and should be afforded to every child. These rights are sometimes discussed as existing within three broader categories (the “3 P’s”) of protection, provision and participation rights (Hammarberg, 1990; Lansdown, 1994; Alderson, 2000). As an example, Australia, as with many other western nations, often neglects the issue of capacity. A recent review of Australia’s implementation of the CRC (United Nations, 2005), noted that the “best interests of the child” [Article 3] was often neglected in implementation of policy and legislation and that the “views of the child” [Article 12] were limited to non-representative groups with the average age of ‘child’ being 20 years old. In Australia’s response (August 2011), the notion of “best interests” was mentioned numerously, but did not explain what it would look like in implementation and practice. The report acknowledged a deficiency with taking the “views of the child” into account and appointed a national ‘Children’s Commissioner’. The Australian government also acknowledged the need to change from reactive measures that protect children after the fact, to a move towards prevention, promotion and early intervention (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009). This framework focuses on provision and protection, rather than participation and inclusion of the children themselves and acknowledging their capacity, despite the UNCRC outlining the need for children to be presumed to have capacity until the child proves otherwise (United Nations General Comment 12, 2009). This situation is not unique to Australia, with many governments worldwide failing to fully embrace and encompass the participation rights of all children as intended by the United Nations Committee. To do this, an acknowledgement of children’s capacities needs to be believed by all relevant stakeholders and evidence needs to be provided that outlines whether children have the capacity to conceptualise complex issues, therefore being capable informants on matters that affect them.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Crivello, G, Camfield, L & Woodhead, M 2009, ‘How can children tell us about their well-being? Exploring the potential of participatory research approaches within Young Lives’, Social Indicators Research, vol. 90, pp. 51 – 72. Fattore, T, Mason, J & Watson, E 2007, ‘Children’s conceptualization(s) of their well-being,’ Social Indicators Research, vol. 80, pp. 5 – 29. Fraillon, J 2004, ‘Measuring student well-being in the context of Australian schooling: Discussion paper’. Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). Australia: ACER. James & James (2004) Constructing Childhood: Theory, Policy and Social Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan. James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998) Theorizing Childhood. Polity Press: Cambridge, UK. James, A., & Prout, A. (1997). Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood (2nd ed.). Routledge, UK. Pollard, E L & Lee, P D 2003, ‘Child well-being: a systematic review of the literature’, Social Indicators Research, vol. 61, pp. 59 – 78. Rathi, N and Rastogi, R 2007 ‘Meaning in life and psychological well-being in pre-adolescents and adolescents.’ Journal of the Indian Academy of Applied Psychology, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 31 – 38. Ryff, CD & Singer, B 1998, ‘The contours of positive human health’. Psychological Inquiry, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1 – 28. Sargeant, J 2010 ‘The altruism of pre-adolescent children’s perspectives on ‘worry’ and ‘happiness’ in Australia and England’ Childhood, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 411-425. Sargeant, J 2007 Children being children: the value of an ‘importance filter’, Journal of Student Wellbeing, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 15 – 30. Swan, JK & Sargeant, J 2010 ‘Towards a workable definition of child wellbeing’ Paper presented at Australian Association for Research in Education 2010: Making a Difference. Melbourne, VIC: AARE.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.