Dark Days for Children's Rights

• Author: Martin Guggenheim
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12345
• Published date: 01 April 2018
• Date: 01 April 2018

DARK DAYS FOR CHILDREN’S RIGHTS

Martin Guggenheim

Children living in the United States have many things to be grateful for. The United States is a

world leader in many areas that translate into good things for children. It is among the wealthiest

countries in the world and one of its greatest assets is hope, realized by many, to grow up wealthy,

healthy, and safe.

But one thing American children lack is living in a country committed to positive rights. The

United States is not a party to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child nor has it ratif‌ied the

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The United States is a country

committed to negative rights, meaning our system of freedom is based on an understanding that lib-

erty depends on limiting the powers of government. Thus, among the greatest rights celebrated in the

United States is the right to freedom of religion and expression. But even these rights are expressed

in the Constitution in terms of what government may not do (e.g., “Congress shall make no laws

...”; in parallel ways we have the right to privacy and personal liberty through the Fourth Amend-

ment, which commands that “warrants may not issue except upon probable cause”). American laws

are organized around the libertarian idea that the less power the government possesses, the freer its

citizens.

Positive rights—the right to education, healthcare, food, clothing, and shelter—however, are

available only to the extent that elected of‌f‌icials choose to enact laws that promise them to people.

These rights are not universal or inalienable. They depend entirely on the will of the people as

ref‌lected through the laws enacted by government.

This is a fundamental reason so many who care about children in the United States, and particu-

larly children born into poor families, are frightened when contemplating the possibility of what

might happen when a populist President is elected on a promised platform of cutting taxes and

regulations. The promise of “small government” is a promise to do even less to help poor children

and families.

Make no mistake about it: America’s children, and particularly those children living in poor fami-

lies, are in desperate need of compassion and, even more, government largesse. The idea that market

forces are suf‌f‌icient to distribute goods and services to most people has left poor children in terrible

shape. Consider some key indicators that come from the federal government:

1

in 2014, more than

15 million children lived in deep poverty. This represents more than one in f‌ive children in the coun-

try. The percentage of Black and Latino children living in poverty is considerably higher. Whereas

slightly more than one in ten White children live in poverty, nearly one in four Black children do.

For Latino children the rate is more than one in three.

Poverty for these children means being hungry, having to skip meals, and even not eating for an

entire day. The percentage of children who live in such food-insecure households is staggering. One

in three Black children live in food-insecure homes, a percentage only slightly higher than for Latino

children. These numbers increased sharply from lower levels after 2008 when the United States’ eco-

nomic system collapsed. Before the Af‌fordable Care Act was enacted, more than one third of Black

and Latino children had no healthcare coverage. Black and Latino children suf‌fer disproportionately

from health problems caused by environmental factors created by society. For example, Black chil-

dren are two times more likely to have dangerous, elevated blood lead levels than White children.

Children of color also suf‌fer disproportionately from asthma, which is highly correlated to living in

inner cities or sites close to conditions that create unhealthy air.

Correspondence: Martin.guggenheim@nyu.edu

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 56 No. 2, April 2018 349–350

V

C2018 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts