In Their Best Interest?: The Case Against Equal Rights for Children

Cornell University Press (1992)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Proponents of children's liberation (CL) argue that there are no morally relevant differences between children and adults. Consequently, special protective laws that limit children's freedom are unjustified, and should be abolished. Protectionists reject the premise of this argument, and hence also the conclusion. Proponents of CL mostly fix upon the capacity for instrumental reasoning as the criterion that should separate autonomous from non-autonomous individuals. I argue that most children are substantially worse at instrumental reasoning than most adults, and although drawing a line between the two categories has an arbitrary element, outstanding exceptions on both sides can be justly accommodated. Furthermore, the capacity for instrumental reasoning is a necessary but not sufficient basis for equal rights. A morally decent society is more demanding of individuals than the skeptical or libertarian one that most plausibly grounds CL. To construct and live in such a society requires both prudence and morality. But there is evidence that children need protection and limits to develop these traits. So there are morally relevant differences between children and adults after all, and the argument from justice fails. The utilitarian arm of the argument also fails: because of these morally relevant differences, CL would have worse consequences than those envisioned by its supporters. Parents would lose important authority, and there would be more homeless children. Consequently, the gap between advantaged and disadvantaged persons would become larger and more irreversible.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,623

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

In Their Best Interest? The Case Against Equal Rights For Children. [REVIEW]Randall Curren - 1996 - Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 12 (4):44-45.
Children’s Capacities and Paternalism.Samantha Godwin - 2020 - The Journal of Ethics 24 (3):307-331.
Vulnerability and Children’s Rights.Jonathan Herring - 2022 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 36 (4):1509-1527.
What rights (if any) do children have.Harry Brighouse - 2004 - In David Archard (ed.), The moral and political status of children. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 31--52.
Children and the Argument from 'Marginal' Cases.Amy Mullin - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (3):291-305.
Equality, Self-Government, and Disenfranchising Kids: A Reply to Yaffe.Michael Cholbi - 2020 - Moral Philosophy and Politics 2020 (2):281-297.
Rights, Children, and Education.Anita Lafrance Allen - 1979 - Dissertation, University of Michigan
Libertarianism, Autonomy, And Children.Morris Lipson & Peter Vallentyne - 1991 - Public Affairs Quarterly 5 (4):333-352.


Added to PP

95 (#180,258)

6 months
9 (#456,657)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Laura Purdy
Wells College

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references