John Santos
 |
| Columnist John Santos |
The United States and Somalia are about as opposite as two countries can be. So why is the United States the only country that stands with Somalia in failing to ratify the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, one of the most important international advancements in children’s rights ever? The United States prides itself as a nation of justice, freedom and prosperity. Somalia, on the other hand, has virtually no government, is run mostly by pirates and warlords, and is one of the poorest countries in the world. If the United States truly wants to be a leader in human rights, shouldn’t we at least ratify landmark human rights treaties?
Recently,
a U.N. special representative on children’s rights called on all U.N. members
to ratify two additions to the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. The
convention was written in 1989, with heavy influence from the United States, as
an effort to promote and protect children around the world. Under the
convention, “the child’s view must be considered
and taken into account in all matters affecting him or her.” The
convention protects everything from a child’s right to healthcare to his or her
right to play and even his or her right to freedom of thought and religion. This
recent effort to extend children’s rights has again brought attention to the
fact that the United States has not yet ratified the convention, which would
obligate us to do everything possible to protect these rights. Why has the
United States yet to adopt the treaty, when it was written with American input during
the Clinton and Reagan administrations?
The
reason is a large opposition from the right. There are groups such as
ParentalRights.org, a conservative group of parents pushing for a
‘parental-rights’ amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In Congress, 37 senators
currently support S.R.99, a bill that asks the President not to submit the convention
to the Senate for ratification. Their main fear is that ratification of the
convention would override U.S. laws and families, even though the convention
explicitly places the responsibility of children on parents and guardians.
Fears of U.N. intervention in United States laws are also misguided; no
international treaty can override the Constitution as ruled in Supreme Court
case Reid v. Covert in 1957.
Opposition
groups also argue that ratification is unnecessary because the United States
already has laws in place to protect the rights of children. While this is
true, failure to ratify is still a huge embarrassment to the United States. The
convention simply requires reports to the U.N. outlining the situation of
children in the country, as well as an explanation of how the country is
striving to protect the rights of their children. Ratification would give the
United States a voice in U.N. discussions about other countries’ implementation
of the convention. Without the convention, we hardly have a voice in children’s
rights worldwide. The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child would restore
U.S. leadership in human rights. Putting this convention into action would only
help strengthen the motto of liberty and justice for all, regardless of age.
The
U.S. Campaign for Ratification of the Convention, a non-profit organization has
proposed November 20, 2012, International Children’s Day, as the target date
for ratification. Getting the 67 votes needed is not going to be easy with 37
Senators already expressing their opposition, but if the United States wants to
keep the reputation of a leader in human rights, we need to ratify this
convention as soon as possible.
