`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England
Identifieur interne : 000559 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000558; suivant : 000560`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England
Auteurs : Paolo MorrowSource :
- The International Journal of Children's Rights [ 0927-5568 ] ; 1999.
Url:
DOI: 10.1163/15718189920494318
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Morrow, Paolo" sort="Morrow, Paolo" uniqKey="Morrow P" first="Paolo" last="Morrow">Paolo Morrow</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97</idno><date when="1999" year="1999">1999</date><idno type="doi">10.1163/15718189920494318</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000559</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000559</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Morrow, Paolo" sort="Morrow, Paolo" uniqKey="Morrow P" first="Paolo" last="Morrow">Paolo Morrow</name></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">The International Journal of Children's Rights</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">CHIL</title><idno type="ISSN">0927-5568</idno><idno type="eISSN">1571-8182</idno><imprint><publisher>BRILL</publisher><pubPlace>The Netherlands</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1999">1999</date><biblScope unit="volume">7</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="149">149</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="170">170</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0927-5568</idno></series><idno type="istex">AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1163/15718189920494318</idno><idno type="href">15718182_007_02_s002_text.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0927-5568</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader></TEI><istex><corpusName>brill-journals</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>alderson</json:string><json:string>young people</json:string><json:string>year olds</json:string><json:string>virginia morrow</json:string><json:string>pakistani origin</json:string><json:string>roche</json:string><json:string>falmer</json:string><json:string>ennew</json:string><json:string>falmer press</json:string><json:string>lansdown</json:string><json:string>morrow</json:string><json:string>human rights</json:string><json:string>international journal</json:string><json:string>pakistani</json:string><json:string>family decisions</json:string><json:string>schools councils</json:string><json:string>other hand</json:string><json:string>ethnic minorities</json:string><json:string>group discussions</json:string><json:string>martinus nijhoff publishers</json:string><json:string>schools council</json:string><json:string>minority children</json:string><json:string>community development</json:string><json:string>other words</json:string><json:string>theoretical framework</json:string><json:string>older children</json:string><json:string>younger children</json:string><json:string>wider community</json:string><json:string>youngest children</json:string><json:string>secondary school children</json:string><json:string>children conceptualise</json:string><json:string>good idea</json:string><json:string>head teachers</json:string><json:string>other people</json:string><json:string>different group</json:string><json:string>ekman ladd</json:string><json:string>school children</json:string><json:string>much rights</json:string><json:string>popular images</json:string><json:string>childhood dependency</json:string><json:string>young children</json:string><json:string>family therapy</json:string><json:string>open university press</json:string><json:string>young carers</json:string><json:string>best interests</json:string><json:string>political rhetoric</json:string><json:string>school toilets</json:string><json:string>gender</json:string><json:string>researcher</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>Morrow</name></json:item></author><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><qualityIndicators><score>5.012</score><pdfVersion>1.2</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>595 x 842 pts (A4)</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><keywordCount>0</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>0</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>8858</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>48885</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>22</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>1</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>7</volume><pages><last>170</last><first>149</first></pages><issn><json:string>0927-5568</json:string></issn><issue>2</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1571-8182</json:string></eissn><title>The International Journal of Children's Rights</title></host><categories><wos></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>economic & social sciences</json:string><json:string>social sciences</json:string><json:string>social work</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>1999</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1999</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1163/15718189920494318</json:string></doi><id>AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</title><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>BRILL</publisher><pubPlace>The Netherlands</pubPlace><availability><p>© 1999 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands</p></availability><date>1999</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><surname>Morrow</surname></persName></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">The International Journal of Children's Rights</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">CHIL</title><idno type="pISSN">0927-5568</idno><idno type="eISSN">1571-8182</idno><imprint><publisher>BRILL</publisher><pubPlace>The Netherlands</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1999"></date><biblScope unit="volume">7</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="149">149</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="170">170</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1163/15718189920494318</idno><idno type="href">15718182_007_02_s002_text.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1999</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1999">Created</change><change when="1999">Published</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2016-10-10">References added</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2017-01-17">References added</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus brill-journals not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/2.3/journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="e-issn">15718182</journal-id>
<journal-title>The International Journal of Children's Rights</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title>CHIL</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="ppub">0927-5568</issn>
<issn pub-type="epub">1571-8182</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>BRILL</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>The Netherlands</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1163/15718189920494318</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title>`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Morrow</surname>
</name>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<year>1999</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>7</volume>
<issue>2</issue>
<fpage>149</fpage>
<lpage>170</lpage>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>© 1999 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>1999</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands</copyright-holder>
</permissions>
<self-uri content-type="pdf" xlink:href="15718182_007_02_s002_text.pdf"></self-uri>
<custom-meta-wrap>
<custom-meta>
<meta-name>version</meta-name>
<meta-value>header</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<p>The International Journal of Children’s Rights 7: 149–170, 1999. © 1999 Kluwer Law International. Printed in the Netherlands. 149 ‘We are people too’: Children’s and young people’s perspectives on children’s rights and decision-making in England VIRGINIA MORROW LSE Gender Institute, Houghton St, London WC2A 2AE, UK Background The ratification by many countries of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) represents a potentially dramatic shift in approaches to children’s rights within those countries. The CRC provides a framework for addressing rights relating not only to children’s need for care, protection and adequate provision, but also for participation (Lansdown 1994, 1995). Article 12 stipulates that States parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child . . . For this purpose, the child shall, in particular, be provided with the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative procedures affecting the child. Boyden and Ennew (1997) note that there are two definitions of participation, participation in the sense of ‘taking part in’, or being present, and participa- tion in the sense of ‘knowing that one’s actions are taken note of and may be acted upon’ (p. 33). However, there are tensions between ‘protection’ and ‘participation’, particularly in respect of children (see Harris 1996; Marshall 1997), and a number of factors need to be considered. Firstly, social and cultural constructions of childhood (i.e. definitions of who is a child, and what children are expected to do) differ widely and fundamentally both between and within countries, and the meanings of ‘childhood’ are likely to have a profound impact upon how (and indeed whether) the UN CRC is imple- mented (Ennew and Milljiteig 1996). The extent to which children and young people ‘participate’ will vary both between and within societies, and in coun- tries where children join the workforce early and many adults have few rights, there may be less of a distinction between adults and children’s rights, and human rights become an issue. In the UK, young people ‘are provided with</p>
<p>150 VIRGINIA MORROW few opportunities to engage in discussions about their economic, social, and environmental futures. . . . It would seem that . . . participation is conceived to be an adult activity’ (Matthews et al. 1998). A second consideration is that popular and political rhetoric about children’s rights has an unfortunate tendency to be somewhat extreme, to the extent that ‘children’s rights have become a subject of jokes’ (Minow 1987, p. 1869). Underlying this is a concern that according children their ‘rights’ may involve adults relinquishing their ‘power’ and control; it will also involve over-burdening children with responsibility for decision-making and thus will deny them their ‘childhood’. They must be protected because they are children and as children they lack competence and autonomy presumed by the idea of a right (Minow 1987). The full complexity of ‘children’s rights’ has occasionally been reduced to a discussion of whether or not children should be given the right to vote (see Hughes 1988). Political rhetoric about children’s rights is also caught up in notions of the rights of individuals and conflictual models of rights. In the UK, the debates are often framed in terms of parents versus children (for example in the case of parents’ rights to use physical force to discipline their children), or young people versus the community (for example, marauding the streets and thus needing laws which enforce ‘child curfews’ (see Drakeford and Butler 1998)). However, as Minow has suggested, rights are about solidarity, not individualism, and rights are relative, not absolute (Minow 1987). There is a growing body of writing that now falls under the heading of ‘children’s rights’, generated by academic lawyers (Freeman 1996; Freeman and Veerman 1992; Veerman 1992), philosophers (Ekman Ladd (1996) for a collection of readings), political scientists (O’Neill 1995), and social theorists (Franklin 1986, 1996; Therborn 1996). However, whatever the position, the consensus among most writers is generally that children are effectively denied rights to make decisions about their affairs which as adults, we take for granted; indeed we consider the possession of such rights to be essential to a democratic way of life. This denial of rights straddles both the public realm of children’s involvement in education and the care arrangements of the state and the private realm of the family . . . This denial of rights to children is uncontentious,. . . a simple matter of fact (Franklin 1992, p. 90). But what are ‘rights’ in the context of childhood? The notion and language of ‘rights’ as enshrined in some of the articles of the UN CRC (for example, Articles 11–16) appear to be based on western individualising discourses, in which ‘there is an emphasis on separateness, clear boundaries, individuality and autonomy within relationships’ (Dwivedi 1996, p. 160). An Na’im (1994,</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 151 pp. 64–65) notes that ‘Modern international human rights, such as the rights of the child, are premised on the assumption of universal normative consensus on who is a human being, and what is due to a human person by virtue of his or her humanity, without distinction on grounds of race, gender, religion and so forth’. On the other hand, other provisions of the UN CRC, such as Articles 8 and 9, which emphasise the embeddedness of children in family/community relations, seem to reflect non-Western cultural and religious traditions. The popular rhetoric about children’s rights may be based on a misreading of the concept of ‘rights’, or at least an unwillingness to engage with some complex philosophical and legal concepts which go beyond dualistic notions of rights. Some writers are dismissive of ‘rights talk’ in general, let alone children’s rights (King 1997). However, for others, like Lansdown (1995) the recent emphasis on participation is about a new way of thinking about rights in general and children’s rights in particular – not as an individualising discourse, but one which precisely establishes the interconnectedness of our lives (Minow 1987). Thirdly, the burgeoning field of work on children’s rights is generated by adults. How do children conceive of the notion of rights? What do they think their rights should be? Are they aware of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? Do they feel that they have a say in making decisions (Article 12)? Do they want participatory rights? Does it ultimately matter what they think? Published studies that have explored children’s perspectives on their rights are relatively few though this is an expanding area and there is a good deal of ‘grey’ literature, particularly with pressure groups or practitioners working with children who are in contact with child protection agencies (Examples include Alderson 1999; Alderson and Arnold 1999a, b; Highfield 1997; Melton and Limber 1992; Tapp 1997 for New Zealand; Lansdown and Newell 1994, and young people’s lobby groups like Article 12 and PEG). Melton and Limber (1992) give four key reasons for why children’s perspec- tives on their rights are important. First, children’s perspectives on their rights may differ from those of adults in important ways. They suggest that, in the US at least, so-called experts are rarely skilled ‘in identifying those matters that are of most concern to children’ (p. 167). Secondly, children’s concepts of their rights ‘may be useful in the design and procedures for implementation of their rights in a manner that is most protective of children’s dignity’ (p. 168). Thirdly, eliciting children’s views on their rights shows respect for children as persons: Melton and Limber (1992) suggest that the spirit of Article 12 ‘goes beyond the right to be heard on individual matters to the right to voice opinions on matters affecting children as a class’ (p. 170). Finally, ascer- taining children’s perspectives on their rights has implications for children’s legal and political socialisation, though for Melton and Limber this is the</p>
<p>152 VIRGINIA MORROW least important of the four considerations: ‘even if one does not care about children’s rights for the sake of children themselves, one still might support the stimulation of thinking about the nature and fulfilment of rights, because such experiences are likely to result in greater support for democratic values, including responsibility for creating just law and tolerance for expression of rights by others’ (p. 171). Moving beyond these arguments, exploring children’s perspectives on their rights is also worth undertaking because it may have important implications for what is termed in the UK ‘Citizenship Education’. In other words, children’s perspectives on their rights might be a useful starting point for finding out what they already know and understand about ‘citizenship’, ‘participation’, and politics (see also Hart 1997; Spinks 1997). Theoretical framework and background to data This paper draws on two sources of data (one collected in 1990, before the ratification of the UN CRC, the other collected in 1996 and 1997, after the ratification of the UN CRC) to explore children’s perspectives on their rights and the extent to which they feel they have a say in decision making processes at a range of levels, in their families, schools and neighbourhoods. Both projects used qualitative research methods, the first was a study of children’s activities outside school (730 children aged between 11 and 15) (Morrow 1994, 1996; Ennew and Morrow 1994), and the second a study of children’s conceptualisations of family (183 children aged between 8 and 14) (Morrow 1998, 1999). The theoretical framework informing both studies was influenced by the emergent sociology of childhood based upon the work of two British social anthropologists James and Prout (1990, 1997). They argue that we need to move beyond psychologically-based models of childhood as a period of socialisation, and emphasise that childhood is to a large extent socially constructed, in that children’s roles are differentiated according to histor- ical period and culture. The view that children are active social agents who shape the structures and processes around them (at least at the micro-level), and whose social relationships are worthy of study in their own right raises interesting questions about how children conceptualise their rights. This is not to claim that children are ‘just as mature, rational, competent and social as adults’ (Hutchby and Moran-Ellis 1998). As Hutchby and Moran-Ellis suggest, we have to take care to avoid the kind of relativism which would deny the essential difference of childhood as opposed to adulthood and thus risk</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 153 failing to see the often very real consequences of the power relationship between adults and children (p. 17). This paper suggests that in order to move on from the polarised arguments that dominate much of the rhetoric about children’s rights, we need a more complex account of children’s rights, which attempts to take account not only of children’s different competencies at different ages, but also their different social and cultural backgrounds and experiences. The following sections draw (first) on children’s accounts of what they think their rights should be, and secondly their accounts of their participation in decision-making processes, and concludes that children recognise not only the limits of their autonomy, but also the need for guidance from adults; all they are asking for is some inclusion in decision-making processes, which involves according them some respect and dignity. Project 1: What should children’s rights be? Data from Project 1 are drawn from research on the extent of children’s involvement in work outside school, which included a collection of essays from 730 children in Birmingham and Cambridgeshire. Consent was obtained from head teachers and schools governors for children to spend one lesson writing an essay on ‘What I do when I am not at school’. They were told that the project was about ‘the work that children do, such as a part-time job or holiday job, and also helping at home’, and they were asked to describe ‘all the things they do (not just work) in the mornings, lunch hours, evenings, weekends and during the holidays’. Open-ended questions were used, for example, ‘what do you do when you are not at school?’, rather than ‘what work do you do?’ because the concept ‘work’ tends to be constructed as formal wage labour, and the project was exploring domestic and family labour as well as paid labour. If they finished early, the children were asked to draw their family or to make a list of what they thought children’s rights should be (Ennew and Morrow 1994). The concept of rights was not explained to them. 66 children ranging in age from 11 to 16 wrote about children’s rights and their lists ranged in length from one sentence to a couple of pages. These data were not collected particularly systematically, and what follows is not representative of all children, nor can it be generalised to the current day when children may be now more aware of their rights than they were nearly 10 years ago, before the ratification of the UN CRC. The following examples suggest that children’s main concern seems to be with being respected and trusted; in effect, they wanted to be regarded ‘as people’. There were a few prescriptive lists: ‘children should not stay up late,</p>
<p>154 VIRGINIA MORROW should not swear etc.’ (11 year old boy). Very few of these children seemed to desire total freedom, although there were one or two examples of this: ‘Go to bed any time you want’ (13 year old girl); and some were qualified: ‘Have no homework, or not as much anyway’ (11 year old boy). The most commonly voiced preoccupations that children had related to their experiences of school, and the way their schools were run; over half the children mentioned some aspect of school. They asked that teachers should not be sexist or racist, and they they should not be hypocritical: ‘Treat us as pupils, not little machines that aren’t allowed to forget books, or as things they can take their bad moods out on’ (12 year old girl). ‘We go to school to learn’, commented one 13 year old boy, ‘Not to be punished’. Some children wrote about rights to being allowed to chose what to wear and what to eat. Some asked for clear government rules about the rate of pocket money, related to age or even the level of statutory child benefit. In this category, there were also pleas from children under the age of sexual consent for access to contraceptives. An eloquent request from a 15 year old girl concerned the right to information about drugs: More educational provision should be given to bring people’s awareness to the dangers of drug abuse especially hard drugs, as they are becoming easier to get hold of. I was offered some drugs at a party, I may [might] have tried some if I hadn’t done some education previously on drugs. Just about two weeks before I had done a folder [school project] on drugs. Up until then I didn’t have all that much understanding about drugs. The work I done was very useful – as I also convinced three other people not to try it! Very few of these children requested the right to vote, but all those who mentioned voting had clearly given some thought to the matter: ‘ Children should be able to say what they think without people telling them off’ (13 year old girl). ‘Children should be taught more about politics and how money works’ (12 year old girl). ‘Children should be allowed to vote – have more say in things . . . should be able to stand up in court and fight for their own things . . . without their parents doing it for them’ (13 year old girl). ‘Children should be allowed to vote but in their own polling station’ (15 year old boy). ‘We should be asked our opinion. Even if it is not taken into account it would be nice to be told what is going on in elections’ (13 year old girl). One 13 year old boy included in his list the idea that there should be a ‘Ministry for Children’: ‘with money to make facilities for children’. Above all, what comes across clearly in these accounts is that children felt their voices were seldom heard and, if heard, usually discounted. Adults not only ‘boss children around’, according to one boy, they are also ‘hypocrites</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 155 . . . who tell you off for something then do it themselves’. Children would like to be able to ‘go to the head teacher and put sensible suggestions to her or him’ (13 year old girl); or have ‘a right to say something in family decisions’ (13 year old girl). They ask for ‘decent’ teachers who ‘will take your word’ (12 year old boy), the right to ‘stick up for ourselves against our parents and not get told off for doing so’ (13 year old girl). Mostly these children’s accounts reflect that fact that childhood is part of the life cycle is when an individual has little control over their own affairs, (Shamgar Handelman 1994, p. 252): Not only do children not control their own lives, but they are asked and/or persuaded (and many times even forced) to invest their own resources – physical strength, intellectual capacity, and emotional power – in goals not of their own choice. Moreover, rewards accruing from this investment are forthcoming chiefly when the childhood period is over; children enjoy only very limited social rewards that they can legitimately control and use while they are still children. In summary, it was not the lack of the right to vote that preoccupied these children, but the lack of autonomy and inclusion in decision-making, often with regard to mundane, everyday issues. The paper now turns to a more detailed discussion of children’s accounts of their experiences of participation in decision-making, drawing on data from the second project. Project 2: Children experiences of ‘having a say’ Data from Project 2 come from recent research which explored children’s definitions of family, in a rural and an urban context, with 184 school children aged between 8 and 14. Data were collected in 1996 and 1997; 99 of the children were in Village schools; with the urban sample, a proportion (n = 44) were Muslim children whose families originate from the Mirpur/Azad Kashmir district of Pakistan (in the remainder of this paper I have followed the advice of the local Multi Cultural Education Service and referred to them as ‘children of Pakistani origin’). These children were bilingual (or trilingual) and English was not their first language. The reasons for carrying out research with these groups of children were as follows: first, to explore stereotypical assumptions reflected in the media about kinship and family with an ethnic minority group assumed to be very different from the ‘mainstream’ culture. Pakistanis are a well- established minority ethnic group in the UK. The children in the study were mostly third-generation immigrants from the Mirpur area in Pakistan. Pakistani kinship patterns are based on extended family groups and wider</p>
<p>156 VIRGINIA MORROW ‘clan’ (biraderi) networks and children’s ideas about family participation and decision-making need to be seen in this context. Family and kinship patterns are further complicated by strong Islamic principles contained in the Qur’an ‘which emphasise the importance of family obligations and inter- dependence’ (Hylton 1995, p. 15). A second reason for carrying out research with this group was that all children are subject to the same laws and social policies which are themselves ethnocentric, particularly around notions of childhood and families (and minority children and subject to the same practitioner-input as majority children, whether in schools, in community development, or in social work practice). Thirdly, the research aimed to redress an imbalance in that the experiences and perspectives of children from ethnic minorities are under-represented in social research in general. Finally, the samples were selected to reflect age and gender differences, and schools were chosen because their composition reflected a range of socio-economic circumstances. The research used a number of qualitative data-collection techniques including small group discussions on a range of topics including media images of families, children’s rights and ‘being listened to’ (Morrow 1998, 1999). This part of the paper explores the children’s discussions about “being listened to” and “having a say” in relation to a range of decision-making settings: family, school and neighbourhood. A broad range of topics, from the length of the working week, caning in schools, the state of school toilets to security measures following Dunblane were discussed – most of these reflected current affairs at the time the research was carried out. On the whole, the discussions about rights and participation were much fuller with the older children, though the data do show that younger children can engage meaningfully with notions of decision-making and participation. Children also discussed whether they felt they had a say in making decisions (broadly speaking) in families, school and wider community, and if they felt they were listened to. There was also a possible cultural and/or linguistic difficulty for the youngest children of Pakistani origin for whom English was a second (or third) language, and I explained them briefly (by talking about “who decides, chooses” and “what you can and can’t have/do”) if they did not appear to be familiar with the terms. All the secondary school children were asked in the group discussions about the UN CRC and whether they could say something about it. About half of them had heard of it, and could recall working on it in school, either in PSE (Personal and Social Education) or Lifeskills. One boy commented ‘we had to put them [the Articles] in order of importance, which was quite hard . . . ’ and another boy added ‘everything should be as important as everything else, really, they should all be important . . . ’. Some of them also recalled</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 157 hearing about the CRC on TV. Another boy said ‘I think its a good idea, but . . . it probably works in Western countries, but like the Third World, I mean, it just doesn’t happen’. The over impression, though, was that the UN CRC was not common currency in schools, and some children thought it did not concern them, but was for children in developing countries (see Alderson and Arnold (1999a, b) for details of a more systematic study). Having a say in family decisions Most of the younger white children were clear that their opinions should be heard, though they did not necessarily want to have full control over decision- making. Some were quite clear about this, as in the following extract from a discussion with a group of 9 year old Village children: Sam (a boy): I think mums and dads should listen to children so children can get what they want when they want, go where they want, all the time, and they never have to do what their mums and dads have to do. Keri: [that’s] not fair, what about the grown-ups? . . . when you grow up, you want to do what you want, when you want, get what you want, and its not gonna be like that, you’ve got to do what your children say, you’ve had this all your life, and your children are going to feel like left out, you’re going to be taking care of yourself all the time, when you want, going where you want, [interrupted] . . . you’d get selfish, and you wouldn’t have any respect for any other people, you’d just have respect for yourself and nobody else. Other children interjected but she continued “but we can’t always get our own way, we should get our own way sometimes, but not all the time . . . ”. The youngest children of Pakistani origin tended to say that parents and other relatives made decisions for them, for example, “My mum and my dad make all the decisions and my sisters”. Some mentioned themselves, “Me and my mum decide”. The 10 year old girls of Pakistani origin also described how parents and other adults make decisions on their behalf: “I listen to my mum and dad, children should listen to parents, that’s good manners”. Another girl added “You should respect your mum and dad” and another “Miss, you should listen to your parents and love them”. Other girls mentioned mums, dads, brothers, sisters, cousins, cousin brothers as making decisions. Boys of Pakistani origin, on the other hand, saw the question about children’s rights as being about physical punishment, though one boy did say about “being listened to”: “Miss, when they talk we have to listen to them, when you talk, they listen to you”. In another group of boys the question led to a discussion</p>
<p>158 VIRGINIA MORROW about deciding whom to marry, when to go to Mosque, and whose choice it was: Miss, in Islam, miss, when you get married, you don’t have to listen to your parents, its up to you, who you want to get married to . . . /. . . / you want to go the Mosque, and your mum and dad say no don’t go to the Mosque, its your choice whether you wanna go or not . . . Another boy disagreed, saying “no its not, its Gods choice, you have to” Researcher: so what about decisions, decisions are made for you, do you feel? Them: yes . . . [unintelligible] sometimes we talk about if you’re gonna do this or not . . . and they sometimes let you and sometimes don’t . . . you discuss this . . . Boy: children,. . . sometimes their mum and dad don’t let them make decisions, they make decisions for them,. . . their children start hanging around with bad boys, then their mum and dad will lose their temper and start shouting, they’re not gonna hit them or anything, just make the child understand . . . Overall, the 10 year old boys of Pakistani origin were much more voluble in discussions of decision-making than the girls. This may reflect a cultural expectation to be obedient and honour elders, which may differ according to gender; girls may not be encouraged to speak out in the same way as boys (Dosanjh and Ghuman 1996; Lau 1988). In the older Village sample (i.e. white), one 12 year old boy said “If its got something to do with children, I think they should have a say in it”. Another group of 12 year olds had the following discussion: Researcher: . . . what do you think about children’s rights, being listened to, having a say in decision making . . . Megan: interrupting: they don’t! . . . well, they do sometimes, but mainly you’re just told what to do, and with things at school, they ask the parents, but the parents aren’t in the lessons, /. . . / they just, if they just wanna ask you if you’re not happy about things, they ask your parents, but parents don’t go to the school so they won’t know. Shannon: Its really unfair, because its us that everything’s based around, you know, we will be adults and be the world, so why shouldn’t we have a say about what happens? These girls are reflecting on the fact that frequently they are not directly “listened to” and that parents may act as proxies to comment on their behalf. Further, gender is likely to have an important effect on which kinds of</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 159 decisions children might be able to or allowed to take. A group of 14 year old girls commented: Researcher: . . . Do you think you get listened to? Them: No . . . Not very much at school, but [we do] at home, /. . . / Sophie: I think your parents care for you and they, like, listen to you, Stephanie: they wanna listen, in case you got a problem and its serious, so they listen, in case it could involve getting hurt or something, Others: Yeah Stacey: cos they would listen because they care for you more than the people at school do . . . ‘cos they’re your flesh and blood, in’t yer . . . /. . . / Sophie: and teachers probably have problems of their own at home . . . In another group, Melanie, 13, said “it depends. If you’ve got a good point to say, then they listen, but if you haven’t, they just shut off. Oh, its only a kid, you know.” In a different group, a 13 year old boy said: “children’s opinions should count, because if you did it all on adult’s opinions it wouldn’t be fair for the children”. Another boy in the same group said “most people listen to adults instead of children”. Some children commented on how they felt that they had not had enough of a say in specific family matters. One group of 12 year olds had the following discussion: Callum: I think its very important because sometimes you’re supposed to be making family decisions, and the children just get pushed out of it, its just the parents making the decisions . . . John: I have that going on at the moment, with my mum and dad, they’re deciding who, when I’m gonna see my dad and when I’m gonna see my mum, and then not concerning me when I want to do anything. Like I had this football tournament going on in Canada, and my dad wanted me for that week to take me to France, somewhere, and I wanna go to football, but mum’s arguing that she wants me to stay home, my dad’s arguing that he wants me to go to France with him, and I’m not getting a decision in anything at the moment, [all of this said quite lightly and matter-of-factly] Callum: if its got something to do with children, I think they should have a say in it. These children seem to be saying that they want to have a say in decisions rather than make the decisions themselves. In a discussion with Village 11 year olds, Nicole disagreed with her class mates and said “No, I don’t think they should get what they want, most of the time,. . . they’ve got to have some- thing over you, you know, haven’t they; you can’t just go wandering off and doing exactly what you want”. This view was expanded on in a different group, of 14 year old girls:</p>
<p>160 VIRGINIA MORROW Stacey: it depends how old you are, whether you make all your decisions or not, when you get old enough to make important decisions for your future, and that sort of thing, I think you should be given help in making decisions,. . . Charlotte: . . . my mum thinks I’m old enough to make decisions,. . . but I don’t feel that I am ready to make all the decisions yet in my family, but I can make some, like what I was gonna do, or something, but I haven’t made hardly any decisions, important ones, recently Sophie: I think like your mum and dad like try and push you to make your own decisions,. . . I think some decisions you should make for yourself . . . but sometimes there are some decisions that you can’t make on your own, you need to like either get your friends involved, or your teachers or your parents, or your family . . . These girls seem to be reflecting the notion that making decisions may be problematic. They recognise that as they get older, they need to make more decisions, but that they need to have some help in doing so. They seem to express an awareness of the limits of their autonomy, and are clear that decision-making is contingent upon what the decision is about. Decision-making in schools A range of topics were mentioned about decision-making in school, and many of the secondary school children described their schools councils and made various comments about them. As noted children in Project 1 often mentioned schools in their lists of what children’s rights should be. As Lansdown and Newell (1994) suggest, schools have an important role to play in promoting children’s freedom of expression. However, they also note that ‘the school system throughout the UK tends to operate in a formal and authoritarian way which does not encourage children to explore and contribute their ideas for the provision and development of education’ (p. 9). Further, they note, the pressures of meeting the demands of the National Curriculum allow little room for child-oriented initiatives or issues of concern to children which are not part of the prescribed work programme’ (p. 9; see also Alderson 1999). Freeman (1996, p. 98) draws attention to the irony in this, ‘for one of the aims of education is to enhance the capacity for decision-making and yet, in crucial areas, participation in major decisions is removed from those most affected by those decisions’. Despite the fact that by asking about rights and ‘having a say’ I was giving children the opportunity to voice their complaints, there were positive as well as negative comments. Younger children in the sample did not seem</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 161 preoccupied by rights or decision-making at school, though one of the 11 year old girls did mention how she was constrained to fit in with school rules: Nicky: but its like if the teachers want us to do something, they say, you’ve got to stay in if you like it or not, if I wanted I could just walk out of the classroom, but I know I’m not allowed to do that, Researcher: cos you’d get into more trouble Nicky: Yeah but it don’t seem right, cos they can say you’ve got to stay in whether you like it or not, or you’ve got to do your work, you’ve got to do this . . . On the other hand, one 13 year boy mentioned that ‘in some ways we’ve got more rights in school than most adults, because the adults in school listen to you, because the school is meant for you’. Another boy added: ‘they’re here to help you’. Schools councils were also mentioned in several groups. Schools are not under any statutory obligation to run a ‘school council’ (a group of teachers and pupils representative of various year groups in the school), but some schools do have such systems in place (see Rowe (1998) for a wider study of schools councils). In both secondary schools, there were school councils in operation. In the Village Secondary School, the Year 8 (12–13 year olds) children mentioned that only the Year 7 (11–12 year olds) and Year 9 (13–14 year olds) had representation on the schools council: in one group, one boy commented that ‘I reckon it would be quite a good idea [to have a Year 8 rep]’ and John commented that ‘because the Year 7s are deciding what we should do in the school, and the Year 8s and that aren’t having no say, its like family decisions again’. One group of Year 9 children at the Village school were more critical: Chelsea: we have got a schools council, at least Alvin: that’s all hype, its all hyped up, its not very good, I’m a member of the council, its not good. Researcher: why not? Alvin: its like this, its like giving us this much power [indicating small measurement with his fingers] Paul: they say, what do you want to do, then we say, oh [whatever] and they say no, we have to pass it with the senior management, and they say no and so we’re back to square one Alvin: its like they’re trying to make it look as though we’ve got some power, but we haven’t. Chelsea: they’re just listening, not doing . . .</p>
<p>162 VIRGINIA MORROW Some of the groups of Town secondary school children were similarly critical of their schools council, although it had organised trips, bowling and discos and complained about the state of the school toilets: Boy 1: I’m a councillor for my tutor group,. . . we don’t seem to have any meetings anymore, that’s the trouble, and if anyone’s got any problems they tell me and I report back to the teachers at the meeting every two weeks, which we don’t seem to have any more, for some reason, its just suddenly stopped. Researcher: but does it work? Boy 2: no Boy 1 rep: well there’s some things that have been done, like we started on the toilet and new bins, and trip to [ ] was organised Boy 2 interrupting: that would have happened anyway, wouldn’t it? Boy 1: not really, Boy 3: the toilets should have happened anyway . . . One 14 year old boy commented ‘it would be nice if they had like a student governor’. Civic participation: The wider community Local authorities are under no obligation to consult with young people about provision of services and facilities in their communities, though some local authorities do have a Youth Forum or Youth Council (see Matthews et al. 1998). However, in some of the group discussions it did emerge that children were well aware that they had not been directly consulted in decisions about what was happening. In the Village primary school, the issue of the local playground was discussed: Biz: we’ve got a petition up right now for not moving the playground and that, Researcher: . . . is that in the village? Barney: it’ll be better, just walk up from school and that . . . Biz: No but it’ll take ages /. . . / There’s good reasons and bad reasons, because the play park up there stinks right now, cos its next to like a farm and that, James: and its graffiti and Others: yeah Biz: but if its going to be next to the school, people are going to come and vandalise it and then like break into the school and that</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 163 In the Town secondary school, many of the children of Pakistani origin lived in a well-circumscribed part of the Town centre and came by bus to the school, which was located in a ‘new town’ on the outskirts of the city. Though the numbers of these children in this part of the sample were very small and were nearly all boys, it was interesting to note in this discussion that they felt quite well served by the local community: Waqas: you know like, the community, the area, you know where [youth club] is? near that area, like most people live in that area, they ask people, discuss if they can, if they can afford the money they’ll do it, if they can’t they’ll do something for you. Researcher: do they listen to you, young people, Others: yeah Waqas: cos you go to that place, you play about there, like football and anything, and if you want anything, trips you know, there a leaflet, they give you leaflets, the youth workers, and all activities are on there. Any problems you can go to them and they’ll sort it out. Other 13–14 year old (white) Town children were much more cynical when asked whether the local authority consulted with them about facilities and services in their area: Girl: No, [they ask] either the parents, or the older people that live there Girl: they say “is your mum there? we’d like to build a new park, can we have your mum’s permission?”, you think “oh, yeah, mum’s gonna play on the swings, in’t she!” [sarcastically] and in a group of 13–14 year old boys: Them: yeah, you get approached, there was a petition for a basket ball net and they put it up, Boy: they petitioned for a net in their area and they got one. Me: so there’s some notion of having a say Boy: yeah, if there’s a lot of people asking, yeah, but if there’s just one, I don’t think they’d take any notice Bob: cos they went round like saying to everybody do you mind if we have this, and they all said yes, just don’t play around in the area where like everybody lives</p>
<p>164 VIRGINIA MORROW A note about rights and responsibilities In the UK, popular and political rhetoric links ‘rights’ with responsibilities as if they were two sides of the same coin. There is a powerful discourse of ‘responsibility’ in schools which was reflected in some of the discussions with the children. Hudson has suggested the problem of adolescence for teenagers is that they must demonstrate maturity and responsibility if they are to move out of this stigmatised status, and yet because adolescence is conceived as a time of irresponsi- bility and lack of maturity they are given few opportunities to demonstrate these qualities which are essential for their admission as adults (Hudson 1984, p. 36). This contradictory situation was directly reflected upon by some of the 12–13 year olds in some of the group discussions: Callum: I don’t think that many people, I mean parents, don’t put respon- sibility on their children, it works both ways, cos they don’t think they’re gonna be like responsible enough to make decisions, so they don’t even let them try Boy: well parents don’t seem to, Boy: they don’t give children a chance On the other hand, a group of 14 year old girls realised that adults have more responsibilities than children: Sophie: children, I think should have as much rights as adults, because we’re going to take over next generation, Stacey: I don’t think they should have quite as much, Stephanie: no, you should only have as much rights as adults when you become 18, because adults can like, vote, for like, be MPs and stuff, Stacey: they have different things to worry about than us, I mean, Sophie: and adults have bigger, um, responsibilities, Various: they have to look after the home, the car, children, family, /. . . / and we couldn’t do that, could we, ‘Not yet’ /. . . / Then I asked them more about what responsibilities they did feel they had: Dana: you have a responsibility to like get your homework done, and get yourself ready for school, and stuff like that Other: and then help your friends, look after your friends, not do something stupid like take drugs. Several of the girls had described looking after young nieces or nephews, and in two cases, one 14 year old girl and one 14 year old boy described helping</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 165 their mothers, who had both had surgery and needed help around the home: ‘my mum’s going to hospital, I’ve got to look after her [when she comes out]’. However, they did not use the word ‘responsibility’ when describing these tasks and as I have explored elsewhere, (a lack of) responsibility is a preoccupation of adults have about children, rather than an important issue for children themselves (Morrow 1994). Some children carry a heavy burden of responsibility caring for sick or disabled parents, but this work is largely invisible (though see Tatum and Tucker 1998; Aldridge and Becker 1998). Holland, in a recent discussion of popular images of children and young people as wild, dangerous and out of control, describes how such images lead to an ‘enforced irrationality’ and points out how children themselves make use of the imagery ‘to define themselves and their experiences’ (Holland 1992, p. 174). The social construction of childhood dependency, which leads to a normative view of children as irresponsible and non-productive, and which is likely to become particularly irksome as children approach adulthood, prevents us from detecting what may well be, at the very least, reciprocal relations between family members, highlighted in these examples. It is too simplistic to see dependence and independence as in opposition to each other, because the relationship is more complex. Adults are frequently interdependent, but the high value placed on individualism and independence in adulthood in western societies often masks this interdependence (cf. Oliver 1989 writing about disability). Discussion This paper has shown a range of responses in children’s views about what children’s rights should be, being listened to and having a say in decisions. There is now effectively a disjunction between adulthood and childhood, and contradictions between various aspects of children’s lives as they approach adulthood and full ‘citizenship’. This may be what underlies the comments about children’s rights from the older children in Project 1, described in the first part of this paper. Many of the comments reflected a simple wish to be accorded some dignity and respect. Data from Project 2 showed that some children did feel they had a say in family decision-making, others did not. Most children felt it was important to have a say in matters affecting them, though this varied according to gender and ethnicity in that the questions did not give rise to much discussion among 10 year girls of Pakistani origin. Interestingly, quite young children (9 year olds) could engage meaningfully with the notion of rights and being listened to. Some of the children seemed to reflect that they would like to have a say in the process of decision-making, to be heard, not that they make decisions on their own or have ultimate control</p>
<p>166 VIRGINIA MORROW over the decision-making process. They want to be talked to and consulted, and given information, and to be able to give their point of view and have their opinions taken into account. Even quite young children saw decision-making as potentially problematic and could see this from others’ perspectives. In many popular (i.e. adultist) discussions of children’s rights, absolute decision-making seems to be the dominant theme. It is unusual to find a relative position expressed in popular discourse, yet this was effectively the notion expressed by children in the two studies described in this paper: they want to have a say in, but not necessarily make, the decisions themselves, and further, ‘it depends on what is being decided’. In other words, they are asking for inclusion and participation and are aware of their exclusion and lack of participation. The focus in most previous research on children’s rights has been on dramatic, spectacular and profound, life-changing decisions – where to live post-divorce, life-or-death situations, or that old chestnut, the right to vote. Children in the two studies described here appeared to be more concerned with the everyday, even mundane, problems of being accorded little dignity or respect, and having little opportunity to simply have a say and contribute to discussions. This reflects what Eekelaar (1994) has called ‘dynamic self-determinism’, that is, not the straightforward delegation of decision-making to children but rather, enabling children to make decisions in controlled conditions, the overall intention being to enhance their capacities for mature, well-founded choices. Some involvement in the decision-making process, depending on the nature and complexity of the decision, seems to be what children themselves are requesting. Research from two other recent studies that have focused on children’s perspectives on decision-making have drawn similar tentative conclusions (Neale and Smart 1998; Thomas 1998). The children reported in this paper seem to be reflecting what has been termed a ‘social’ model of citizenship which emphasises ‘the ways in which people are connected to each other, rather than being viewed as acting as individualised, autonomous, rational beings separate from each other’ (Cock- burn 1998, p. 100). It also reinforces Alderson’s (1993a, b) suggestion (in relation to children’s consent to medical treatment) that competence to partic- ipate in decision-making develops through a combination of experience and relationships and should not necessarily be seen as age-related. This may seem a somewhat modest conclusion to reach, but it is worth bearing in mind that it was only in 1997 in the UK that a 15 year old girl, who wrote to her local paper complaining about teaching standards at her school, was excluded from school for doing so ( Guardian July 25th 1997). On the face of it, cases like this suggest that the Victorian adage ‘children should be seen and not heard’ remains alive and well. Ultimately the extent to which children are ‘listened to’ is a socio-cultural construction which will vary from</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 167 micro-level (within families) to macro-level, and is likely to be intersected by the individual characteristics of each particular child. As Roche suggests, ‘there is no single voice of childhood’ (Roche 1996, p. 36): Children . . . live in differently constituted households, in particular communities which are fundamental to their identities (inseparable from notions of their welfare and rights). In much of the children’s rights liter- ature ‘the family’ is assumed to be the western, nuclear family. There is little or no sense of other family forms or cultures (Roche 1996, p. 35). How children conceptualise their rights, then, needs to be set firmly in the cultural/social context of those particular children, though it would be a mistake to overemphasise the differences between minority children and white children – they are all ‘children’ and subject to status markers set by the adult world. Further, children don’t tend to use the language of ‘rights’, not surprisingly; rather, they use a language of participation and inclusion, encapsulated by the phrase used by many of them, the desire to ‘have a say’ in decisions that affect them. This in turn emphasises their embedded- ness in sets of social relations, whether familial, institutional, or within their communities. Conclusion In conclusion, children themselves seem to be well-aware of the fact that, as children, they are effectively denied a range of rights that adults take for granted. This awareness becomes problematic as children get older. Contrary to stereotypical images and/or adult fears, the evidence suggests that children and young people are not as rebellious and disaffected as much dominant imagery depicts them to be (Roberts and Sachdev 1996). According children participatory rights does not necessarily mean that adults have to relinquish their power. ‘Rights’, if equated with ‘individualism’, is too dichotomous – we need a more complex and relative approach to rights which is less based upon a categorical distinction between adults and children and which takes account of differences between children according to age, experience, gender and cultural background (see also Roche, 2000). Some readers may find this a disappointing conclusion, but giving it deeper thought reveals just how radical it is, because it is in direct contradiction to how children have traditionally been conceptualised in English society. In the words of a 15 year old girl: we are people too and shouldn’t be treated like low-lifes just because we are younger. I think kids deserve the same sort of respect that we are expected to give to so-called adults.</p>
<p>168 VIRGINIA MORROW Acknowledgements The author gratefully acknowledges funding from the ESRC (research studentship) for Project 1 and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (Research Grant) for Project 2. She is also immensely grateful to the children and young people who participated in this research, and to their teachers and head teachers, for help in conducting the research. Thanks are also due to Priscilla Alderson, Shelley Day Sclater, Nina Hallowell, Audrey Osler, and Jeremy Roche for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. References Alderson, P., Children’s Consent to Surgery (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1993a). Alderson, P. and M. Goodwin, “Contradictions Within Concepts of Children’s Competence”, International Journal of Children’s Rights 1993b (1), 303–313. Alderson, P., Human Rights and Democracy in Schools (Mimeo, Institute of Education, University of London, 1999). Alderson, P. and S. Arnold, School Students’ view on Schools Councils and Daily Life at School (Mimeo, Institute of Education, University of London, 1999a). Alderson, P. and S. Arnold, Civil Rights in Schools: The Implications for Youth Policy (Mimeo, Institute of Education, University of London, 1999b). Aldridge, J. and S. Becker, Young Carers and Their Families (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998). An-Na’im, A., “Cultural Transformation and Normative Consensus on the Best Interests of the Child”, in P. Alston (ed.), The Best Interests of the Child. Reconciling Culture and Human Rights (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994). Boyden, J. and J. Ennew, Children in Focus – a Manual for Participatory Research with Children (Stockholm, Sweden: Radda Barnen, 1997). Cockburn, T., “Children and Citizenship in Britain”, Childhood 1998 (5)1, 99–117. Dosanjh, J.S. and P.A.S. Ghuman, Child-Rearing in Ethnic Minorities (Clevendon: Multilin- gual Matters, 1996). Drakeford, M. and I. Butler, “Curfews for Children: Testing a Policy Proposal in Practice”, Youth and Policy 1998 (62), 1–14. Dwivedi, K.N., “Race and the Child’s Perspective”, in R. Davie, G. Upton and V. Varma (eds.), The Voice of the Child: A Handbook for Professionals (London: Falmer Press, 1996). Eekelaar, J., “The Interests of the Child and the Child’s Wishes: The Role of Dynamic Self- Determinism”, International Journal of Law and the Family 1994 (8), 42–61. Ekman Ladd, R., Children’s Rights Revisioned. Philosophical Readings (Belmont, CA: Wadswroth Publishing Co, 1996). Ennew, J. and P. Miljeteig, “Indicators for Children’s Rights: Progress Report on a Project”, International Journal of Children’s Rights 1996 (4), 213–236. Ennew, J. and V. Morrow, “Out of the Mouths of Babes”, in E. Verhellen and F. Spiesschaert (eds.), Children’s Rights: Monitoring Issues (Gent, Belgium: Mys and Breesch, 1994). Franklin, B. (ed.), The Rights of Children (Oxford: Blackwell, 1986). Franklin, B., “Children and Decision-Making: Developing Empowering Institutions”, in M.D. Fortuyn and M. de Langen (eds.), Towards the Realization of Human Rights of Children (Netherlands: Children’s Ombudswork Foundation/DCI, 1992).</p>
<p>WE ARE PEOPLE TOO 169 Franklin, B. (ed.), Handbook of Children’s Rights: Comparative Policy and Practice (London: Routledge, 1996). Freeman, M., ‘The Convention, an English Perspective”, in M. Freeman (ed.), Children’s Rights. A Comparative Perspective (Dartmouth: Aldershot, 1996). Freeman, M. and P. Veerman (eds.), The Ideologies of Children’s Rights (Dordrect, Nether- lands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1992). Harris, J., “Liberating Children”, in M. Leahy and D. Cohn-Sherbrok (eds.), The Liberation Debate. Rights at Issue (London: Routledge, 1996). Hart, R., Children’s Participation. The Theory and Practice of Involving Young Citizens in Community Development and Environmental Care (London: Earthscan/UNICEF, 1997). Highfield Junior School, Changing our School: Promoting Positive Behaviour (Highfield Junior School/Institute of Education, Univesity of London, 1997). Holland, P., What is a Child? Popular Images of Childhood (London: Virago, 1992). Hudson, B., “Femininity and Adolescence”, in A. MacRobbie and M. Nava (eds.), Gender and Generation (Basingstoke: Blackwell, 1984). Hughes, J., “The Philosophers Child”, in M. Griffiths and M. Whitford (eds.), Feminist Perspectives in Philosophy (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1988). Hutchby, I. and J. Moran-Ellis (eds.), Children and Social Competence. Arenas of Action (London: Falmer Press, 1998). Hylton, C., Coping with Change. Family Transitions in Multi-Cultural Communities (London: National Stepfamily Association 1995). James, A. and A. Prout, Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood (London: Falmer Press, 1990, 1997). King, M., A Better World for Children? Explorations in Morality and Authority (London: Routledge, 1997). Lansdown, G., Taking Part: Children’s Participation in Decision Making (London: Institute for Public Policy Research, 1995). Lansdown, G., “Children’s Rights”, in B. Mayall (ed.), Children’s Childhoods. Observed and Experienced (London: Falmer Press, 1994). Lansdown, G. and P. Newell (eds.), UK Agenda for Children (London: Children’s Rights Development Unit, 1994). Lau, A., “Family Therapy and Ethnic Minorities”, in E. Street and W. Dryden (eds.), Family Therapy in Britain (Milton Keynes; Philadelphia: Open University Press, 1988). Marshall, K., Children’s Rights in the Balance. The Participation-Protection Debate (Edin- burgh: The Stationery Office, 1997). Matthews, H., M. Limb, L. Harrison and M. Taylor, “Local Places and the Political Engage- ment of Young People: Youth Councils as Participatory Structures”, Youth and Policy 1998 (62), 16–30. Melton, G. and S. Limber, “What Children’s Rights Mean to Children: Children’s Own Views”, in M. Freeman and P. Veerman (eds.), The Ideologies of Children’s Rights . Dordrect, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1992). Minow, M., “Interpreting Rights: An Essay for Robert Cover”, Yale Law Journal 1987 (96), 1860–1915. Morrow, V., “Responsible Children? Aspects of Children’s Work and Employment Outside School in Contemporary UK”, in B. Mayall (ed.), Children’s Childhoods. Observed and Experienced (London: Falmer Press, 1994). Morrow, V., “Rethinking Childhood Dependency: Children’s Contribution to the Domestic Economy”, The Sociological Review 1996 (44)1, 58–77.</p>
<p>170 VIRGINIA MORROW Morrow, V., Understanding Families: Children’s Perspectives (London: National Children’s Bureau/Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 1998). Morrow, V., “ ‘If You Were a Teacher, It Would be Harder to Talk to You’: Reflections on Qualitative Research with Children in School”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice 1999 (1)4, 297–313. Neale, B. and C. Smart, Agents or Dependents? Struggling to Listen to Children in Family Law and Family Research. Working Paper 3 (Centre for Research on Family, Kinship and Childhood, University of Leeds, 1998). O’Neill, J., “On the Liberal Culture of Child Risk: A Covenant Critique of Contractarian Theory”, in A.M. Ambert (ed.), Sociological Studies of Children , Vol 7, 1995. Oliver, M., “Disability and Dependency: A Creation of Industrial Societies?”, in L. Barton (ed.), Disability and Dependency (London: Falmer Press, 1989). Roberts, H. and D. Sachdev (eds.), Young People’s Social Attitudes: Having Their Say. The Views of 12–19 Year Olds (London: Barnardos, 1996). Roche, J., “The Politics of Children’s Rights”, in J. Brannen and M. O’Brien (eds.), Children in Families. Research and Policy (London: Falmer Press, 1996). Roche, J., “Children: Rights, Participation and Citizenship”, Childhood 2000. Rowe, D., The Business of Schools Councils London: The Citizenship Foundation, 1998). Shamgar-Handelman, L., “To Whom Does Childhood Belong?”, in J. Qvotrup et al. (eds.), Childhood Matters. Social Theory, Practice and Politics (European Centre: Vienna/Avebury, 1994). Spinks, R., “It’s Good to Talk? Young People’s Roles and Responsibilities in the Participation Process”, Paper to Urban Childhood Conference (Trondheim, Norway, 1997). Tapp, P., ‘Children’s Views on Children’s Rights: You Don’t Have Rights You Only Have Privileges”, Childrenz Issues 1997 (1)1, 7–8. Tatum, C. and S. Tucker, “The Concealed Consequences of Caring: An Examination of the Experiences of Young Carers in the Community”, Youth and Policy 1998 (61), 12–27. Therborn, G., “Child Politics: Dimensions and Perspectives”, Childhood 1996 (3)1, 29–44. Thomas, N., “Finding a Voice for a ‘Muted Group’: Children’s Involvement in Decision Making When They Are ‘Looked After’ in Middle Childhood”, Paper presented to Children and Social Exclusion Conference (University of Hull, March 1998). Veerman, P.E., The Rights of the Child and the Changing Image of Childhood (Dordrecht, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1992).</p>
</body></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>`We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="family">Morrow</namePart></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>BRILL</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">The Netherlands</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1999</dateIssued><dateCreated encoding="w3cdtf">1999</dateCreated><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1999</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>The International Journal of Children's Rights</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>CHIL</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0927-5568</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1571-8182</identifier><part><date>1999</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>7</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>149</start><end>170</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1163/15718189920494318</identifier><identifier type="href">15718182_007_02_s002_text.pdf</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© 1999 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>BRILL Journals</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Psychologie/explor/TherFamFrancoV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000559 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000559 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Psychologie
|area= TherFamFrancoV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:AE1D7CA8D771C03E031563AB682B27CA57BF0F97
|texte= `We are people too': Children's and young people's perspectives on children's rights and decision-making in England
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.29. |  |