In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

R. Brian Howe and Katherine Covell, Cape Breton University The question for this book was this: At what level is Canada’s commitment to the rights of the child, as revealed in its record of implementing the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? The possibilities included these: (1) symbolic commitment, where words have been used as substitutes for deeds; (2) wavering commitment, where deeds have been sporadic, uneven, and halting; (3) expanding commitment, where deeds have shown a pattern of steady progress; and (4) deep commitment, where there has been sustained, vigorous, and comprehensive implementation of children’s rights on all fronts. As discussed in chapter 1, at first glance there is good reason to be suspicious of Canada’s commitment: symbolism would appear to be the most fitting description. One reason for suspicion has been a general failure of Canadian governments to incorporate the Convention into domestic law or into the goals of public policy. Indeed, rarely has reference even been made to the CRC in legislation or in the objectives of child-related public policies. Another reason for doubt has been the failure to establish a national children’s commissioner responsible for child advocacy and for promoting the implementation of the Convention on a nationwide basis. Provincial child advocacy offices do exist, but their mandates are limited to particular areas of children’s rights in particular provinces. A third reason for doubt has been Canada’s failure to establish an effective monitoring and coordinating mechanism, as long urged by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. Still absent is a permanent body to track 16 Conclusion Canada’s Ambivalence toward Children R. Brian Howe and Katherine Covell 395 developments on a regular basis and to coordinate efforts among Canadian governments in translating the rights of children into realities. Yet despite these shortcomings in processes and procedures, it still may be the case that Canada has made progress in the substance of implementing the rights of children. The task of this book has been to examine substantive developments and to determine whether Canada’s level of commitment has risen above the symbolic. Canada’s Level of Commitment Our chapters indicate that we can rule out symbolic commitment as a characterization of Canada’s record. Words have not been used as substitutes for deeds. Action has been taken. In the area of provision rights, measures have been undertaken to reduce child poverty, expand child care, and improve child health. As explained in chapter 2, child benefits have been steadily enlarged and have had a modest impact in countering child poverty. In the area of protection rights, laws have been enacted to protect children—more so than before—from sexual abuse and exploitation , and a new Youth Criminal Justice Act has been established to reduce the use of custody and to give more attention to the rehabilitation and reintegration of youth in conflict with the law. In the area of participation rights, initiatives have been taken at all levels of government to give youth a greater voice in decisions that affect them. These developments cannot be dismissed as insignificant. To characterize them as merely symbolic would be grossly inaccurate. But at the other extreme, we can easily rule out deep commitment. If deep commitment were the case, Canada’s record on reducing child poverty and improving child care would be among the best in developed nations, not among the worst. Not only that, but Canada would have removed the legal defence for corporal punishment and would have ensured the stricter enforcement of laws against sexual abuse and exploitation. Furthermore, Canada would have taken comprehensive measures—not sporadic ones— to ensure that children have a voice in decisions that affect them and to educate children about their human rights. As noted in chapter 10, for a country officially committed to the Convention, it is amazing that the rights of the child can be described as one of Canada’s best-kept secrets. Finally, if deep commitment were the case, Canada’s Aboriginal children would not be living in such poverty, nor would they be experiencing such high rates of infant mortality, inadequate health care, and suicide. They also would not be so overrepresented in the child welfare system, and Aboriginal Child and Family Services would not have to deal with so many cases with so few resources and so little funding. Children in alternative 396 R. Brian Howe and Katherine Covell [3.17.150.163] Project MUSE (2024...

Share