Expert: Children's rights emerged over centuries of shifting views on kids
Children having rights may seem obvious today, but for much of history, views on kids were far less considerate, writes Tallinn University associate professor Ingrid Sindi.
Historically, children have been viewed and treated differently than is considered appropriate today.
In the 18th and 19th centuries, industrial societies relied on child labor. Many children as young as 4–6 worked long hours in factories and mines, often in harsh and dangerous conditions.
As child labor was gradually restricted, education systems also expanded. Going to school became a child's "job," a shift seen as a positive improvement but also tied to broader questions about the role of the state in shaping children's futures.
Was offering an education meant to protect children and support their development, or was its primary goal to produce obedient, productive members of society? Sindi says this tension still continues to shape debates about children's place in society and what their rights and "best interests" really are.
The modern concept of children's rights emerged in response to their exploitation in industrial societies, neglect and abuse and their significant vulnerability during 20th-century wars. Early efforts focused mainly on protecting children as a vulnerable group.
The framework of these efforts culminated in the United Nations' 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), the most widely ratified human rights treaty in the world. Estonia joined the convention in 1991, just two months after regaining independence from the Soviet Union.
Today, nearly every country in the world has ratified the UNCRC, with South Sudan and Somalia among the last in 2015; the United States, notably, has yet to join.
The treaty marked a key shift in thinking, emphasizing not only protection but also children's rights to develop to their full potential, be cared for, be treated with dignity and be heard.
The very idea that children should truly be listened to is a relatively recent one.
Priorities vary in practice
While this approach now feels obvious, Sindi argues children's rights remain a societal choice rather than a fixed norm. Research shows various societies continue to fluctuate between parental authority, children's rights and a middle ground between the two.
Norway, for example, tends to side more strongly with children's rights, while the U.S. places greater weight on parental rights, reflecting various differences in culture, awareness, politics and values.
Even in high-risk situations, she notes, views do not automatically shift toward prioritizing children's interests. That suggests children's rights require ongoing attention rather than passive acceptance.
Sindi concludes that whenever decisions are made for kids without their involvement, society risks moving backward. Children are not property, she writes, but individuals with their own rights, experiences, feelings and a voice that deserves to be heard.
--
Editor: Jaan-Juhan Oidermaa, Aili Vahtla
