Disabled children's rights in everyday life: problematising notions of competency and promoting self-empowerment

J. Davis, N. Watson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Children’s rights in Scotland are covered by a number of Acts, Rules, Regulations and Guidance which include: the Children (Scotland) Act (1995), the Adoption (Scotland) Act 1978, Children’s Hearings1 (Scotland) Rules 1996, the Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991, educational guidelines, Rules and Acts relating to the Court of Session and the Sheriff Court, regulations relating to adoption, fostering, residential childcare and child protection, recent amendments brought about by the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 and the recently enacted Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc. (Scotland) Act 2000. Despite this protective web2 (which we will refer to as guidance and legislation) there is still much uncertainty surrounding how children’s rights are upheld in practice. Whilst the guidance and legislation (post the UN Convention on the Rights of The Child) stresses the importance of taking the child’s views into account, it also contains caveats that can be used to limit a child’s ability to have his or her voice heard and taken account of during a variety of proceedings and in different settings (Marshall 1997; Tisdall 1997).We find that very often in Scotland the wording of guidance and legislation includes provisos such as: ‘taking into account age and maturity’,3 ‘when in the child’s best interest’, ‘wherever possible’, or ‘where costs are not prohibitive’. This means that many institutions have ‘get out clauses’ when it comes to including children. For example, schools were given exemption from the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 requirement that those providing services from children should take account of their views (Children in Scotland 1999) and the Standards in Scottish Schools etc (Scotland) Act 2000 states that schools only have to say whether they consulted children about their development plans, there being no requirement that they should consult children. Despite the inclusion in the Act of a requirement that children’s views should be taken into account when considering ‘significant decisions’, schools are under no legal obligation to consult children on everyday matters (see Tisdall et al. forthcoming). As well as this ‘special’ status afforded to schools, the Scottish guidance and legislation (like that in England) (Bell 1993) allow children’s opinions to be overlooked on the grounds of ‘safety’ (when inclusion in decision making processes could harm the child) or ‘competency’ (when the child is not thought capable of understanding the process).
LanguageEnglish
Pages211-228
Number of pages18
JournalInternational Journal of Childrens Rights
Volume8
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2000

Fingerprint

children's rights
everyday life
empowerment
act
legislation
school
legal capacity
inclusion
regulation
UN Convention
exemption
decision making process
child protection

Keywords

  • children
  • disabilities
  • self-empowerment

Cite this

@article{48c3f25d71384eb8998fb2d91bbb96b2,
title = "Disabled children's rights in everyday life: problematising notions of competency and promoting self-empowerment",
abstract = "Children’s rights in Scotland are covered by a number of Acts, Rules, Regulations and Guidance which include: the Children (Scotland) Act (1995), the Adoption (Scotland) Act 1978, Children’s Hearings1 (Scotland) Rules 1996, the Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991, educational guidelines, Rules and Acts relating to the Court of Session and the Sheriff Court, regulations relating to adoption, fostering, residential childcare and child protection, recent amendments brought about by the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 and the recently enacted Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc. (Scotland) Act 2000. Despite this protective web2 (which we will refer to as guidance and legislation) there is still much uncertainty surrounding how children’s rights are upheld in practice. Whilst the guidance and legislation (post the UN Convention on the Rights of The Child) stresses the importance of taking the child’s views into account, it also contains caveats that can be used to limit a child’s ability to have his or her voice heard and taken account of during a variety of proceedings and in different settings (Marshall 1997; Tisdall 1997).We find that very often in Scotland the wording of guidance and legislation includes provisos such as: ‘taking into account age and maturity’,3 ‘when in the child’s best interest’, ‘wherever possible’, or ‘where costs are not prohibitive’. This means that many institutions have ‘get out clauses’ when it comes to including children. For example, schools were given exemption from the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 requirement that those providing services from children should take account of their views (Children in Scotland 1999) and the Standards in Scottish Schools etc (Scotland) Act 2000 states that schools only have to say whether they consulted children about their development plans, there being no requirement that they should consult children. Despite the inclusion in the Act of a requirement that children’s views should be taken into account when considering ‘significant decisions’, schools are under no legal obligation to consult children on everyday matters (see Tisdall et al. forthcoming). As well as this ‘special’ status afforded to schools, the Scottish guidance and legislation (like that in England) (Bell 1993) allow children’s opinions to be overlooked on the grounds of ‘safety’ (when inclusion in decision making processes could harm the child) or ‘competency’ (when the child is not thought capable of understanding the process).",
keywords = "children, disabilities, self-empowerment",
author = "J. Davis and N. Watson",
year = "2000",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1163/15718180020494622",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
pages = "211--228",
journal = "International Journal of Childrens Rights",
issn = "0927-5568",
number = "3",

}

Disabled children's rights in everyday life : problematising notions of competency and promoting self-empowerment. / Davis, J.; Watson, N.

In: International Journal of Childrens Rights , Vol. 8, No. 3, 01.03.2000, p. 211-228.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disabled children's rights in everyday life

T2 - International Journal of Childrens Rights

AU - Davis, J.

AU - Watson, N.

PY - 2000/3/1

Y1 - 2000/3/1

N2 - Children’s rights in Scotland are covered by a number of Acts, Rules, Regulations and Guidance which include: the Children (Scotland) Act (1995), the Adoption (Scotland) Act 1978, Children’s Hearings1 (Scotland) Rules 1996, the Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991, educational guidelines, Rules and Acts relating to the Court of Session and the Sheriff Court, regulations relating to adoption, fostering, residential childcare and child protection, recent amendments brought about by the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 and the recently enacted Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc. (Scotland) Act 2000. Despite this protective web2 (which we will refer to as guidance and legislation) there is still much uncertainty surrounding how children’s rights are upheld in practice. Whilst the guidance and legislation (post the UN Convention on the Rights of The Child) stresses the importance of taking the child’s views into account, it also contains caveats that can be used to limit a child’s ability to have his or her voice heard and taken account of during a variety of proceedings and in different settings (Marshall 1997; Tisdall 1997).We find that very often in Scotland the wording of guidance and legislation includes provisos such as: ‘taking into account age and maturity’,3 ‘when in the child’s best interest’, ‘wherever possible’, or ‘where costs are not prohibitive’. This means that many institutions have ‘get out clauses’ when it comes to including children. For example, schools were given exemption from the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 requirement that those providing services from children should take account of their views (Children in Scotland 1999) and the Standards in Scottish Schools etc (Scotland) Act 2000 states that schools only have to say whether they consulted children about their development plans, there being no requirement that they should consult children. Despite the inclusion in the Act of a requirement that children’s views should be taken into account when considering ‘significant decisions’, schools are under no legal obligation to consult children on everyday matters (see Tisdall et al. forthcoming). As well as this ‘special’ status afforded to schools, the Scottish guidance and legislation (like that in England) (Bell 1993) allow children’s opinions to be overlooked on the grounds of ‘safety’ (when inclusion in decision making processes could harm the child) or ‘competency’ (when the child is not thought capable of understanding the process).

AB - Children’s rights in Scotland are covered by a number of Acts, Rules, Regulations and Guidance which include: the Children (Scotland) Act (1995), the Adoption (Scotland) Act 1978, Children’s Hearings1 (Scotland) Rules 1996, the Age of Legal Capacity (Scotland) Act 1991, educational guidelines, Rules and Acts relating to the Court of Session and the Sheriff Court, regulations relating to adoption, fostering, residential childcare and child protection, recent amendments brought about by the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 and the recently enacted Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc. (Scotland) Act 2000. Despite this protective web2 (which we will refer to as guidance and legislation) there is still much uncertainty surrounding how children’s rights are upheld in practice. Whilst the guidance and legislation (post the UN Convention on the Rights of The Child) stresses the importance of taking the child’s views into account, it also contains caveats that can be used to limit a child’s ability to have his or her voice heard and taken account of during a variety of proceedings and in different settings (Marshall 1997; Tisdall 1997).We find that very often in Scotland the wording of guidance and legislation includes provisos such as: ‘taking into account age and maturity’,3 ‘when in the child’s best interest’, ‘wherever possible’, or ‘where costs are not prohibitive’. This means that many institutions have ‘get out clauses’ when it comes to including children. For example, schools were given exemption from the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 requirement that those providing services from children should take account of their views (Children in Scotland 1999) and the Standards in Scottish Schools etc (Scotland) Act 2000 states that schools only have to say whether they consulted children about their development plans, there being no requirement that they should consult children. Despite the inclusion in the Act of a requirement that children’s views should be taken into account when considering ‘significant decisions’, schools are under no legal obligation to consult children on everyday matters (see Tisdall et al. forthcoming). As well as this ‘special’ status afforded to schools, the Scottish guidance and legislation (like that in England) (Bell 1993) allow children’s opinions to be overlooked on the grounds of ‘safety’ (when inclusion in decision making processes could harm the child) or ‘competency’ (when the child is not thought capable of understanding the process).

KW - children

KW - disabilities

KW - self-empowerment

UR - http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/15718182

U2 - 10.1163/15718180020494622

DO - 10.1163/15718180020494622

M3 - Article

VL - 8

SP - 211

EP - 228

JO - International Journal of Childrens Rights

JF - International Journal of Childrens Rights

SN - 0927-5568

IS - 3

ER -