NHELD
does not believe in fear mongering.
NHELD believes in the distribution of facts so that individuals can
formulate their own opinion. Through
this bulletin and the two which will follow, NHELD hopes to distribute facts
about the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child. NHELD also offers its opinion in this
bulletin about the possible effects of
Did You Know? The
How does the current treaty, the United
Nations Convention…., affect federal and state law?
We
strongly suggest that you read all of the provisions of the Convention on the
Child in its entirety. To do so, you can go to the following: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm
To review
every provision in that document would be too cumbersome. Therefore, we have chosen a few provisions as
examples. Again, keep in mind when the treaty talks about the “State”, it means
the “nation”, or in our case, the federal government. Our opinion or questions
will be posed immediately following each provision:
“The States Parties
to the present Convention …Considering
that the child should be fully prepared to live an individual life in
society, and brought up in the spirit of
the ideals proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations… Have agreed as
follows:
Comment: A thorough review
of the Charter of the United Nations is warranted for a complete understanding of the “spirit and ideals
proclaimed”. A signatory of this treaty
would be compelled to bring up the child in accordance with these ideals. Federal laws could be adopted to implement
this provision.
Article 3, section 1:
…In all
actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social
welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative
bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration…
Comment: The treaty does not specify according to whom
the “best interests” of the child will be determined. This could be problematical if the “best
interests” are determined by a committee, for example, made up of members of
countries antithetical to the culture and values of this country.
Article
4…Parties shall undertake all
appropriate legislative, administrative, and other measures for the
implementation of the rights recognized in the present Convention…
Comment: Again, this is a mandatory directive that our
legislation must implement the rights recognized by the Convention. We, the people, would have no legislative or
judicial recourse to the imposition of such laws. The only argument that could be made is that
the treaty, and thus, those laws do not comport with our Constitution.
Article
9, Section 1…States Parties shall ensure
that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will,
except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in
accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is
necessary for the best interests of the child…
Comment: The treaty does not specify who the
“competent authorities” are. Are they
“authorities” in
another country? Who determines their competency? What recourse does anyone have if they are
not competent? What recourse does anyone
have to appeal such a decision?
Article
9, Section 2… all interested parties
shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their
views known…
Comment: How are the parties to “make their views
known”? It is not specified. To whom are the parties to make their views
known? It is not specified. Is the opportunity to make their views known
after the decision is made, before it is made, or during the proceeding in
which it is made? It is not specified.
What, if anything, is the decision maker required to do
after hearing the “views” of the parties?
It is not specified. What recourse is there if the decision maker
refuses to hear the “views” of the parties?
It is not specified.
Article
13, Section 1… The child shall have the
right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek,
receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers,
either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other
media of the child's choice….
Comment: There is no provision in this section for
parental regulation of the child’s “freedom of expression” or “freedom to seek,
receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds”. Is the parent powerless to filter information
that the parent deems inappropriate for the child? Is the parent subject to arrest or other
sanctions such as loss of custody of the child if the parent attempts to
regulate the appropriateness of the information received or imparted by the
child? It is not specified.
Article
14, Section 3…Freedom to manifest one's
religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed
by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals, or
the fundamental rights and freedoms of others….
Comment: Can the United Nations or a committee
composed of members of nations antithetical to a member of this country’s
religious beliefs limit the religious freedom of the child in the name of
maintaining “public order” or some other possible excuse? Is this provision contrary to the
Constitution’s First Amendment provision for freedom of religion? Who is the final arbiter to decide? Are the
limitations to be prescribed by international law, United Nations law, or
Article 17… Parties
recognize the important function performed by the mass media and shall ensure
that the child has access to information and material from a diversity of
national and international sources, especially those aimed at the promotion of
his or her social, spiritual and moral well-being and physical and mental
health. To this end, States Parties shall:
(a) Encourage the mass media to disseminate
information and material of social and cultural benefit to the child and in
accordance with the spirit of article
29;
(b) Encourage international co-operation in the
production, exchange and dissemination of such information and material from a
diversity of cultural, national and international sources;
(c) Encourage the production and dissemination
of children's books…
Comment: What if parents do not want to have their
children utilize information and material from international sources, but want
to utilize information and material primarily from their own country’s
sources? What, if any, sanctions do
parents face? Do they face imprisonment
or loss of custody of the child simply because their opinion differs from the
United Nations? It is not specified.
Article 18, Section 1…Parents
or, as the case may be, legal guardians, have the primary responsibility for
the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child
will be their basic concern.
Comment: Again, the question is:
the best interests according to whom? In
addition, who oversees whether the parents are undertaking their
“responsibility”? What, if any, are the
sanctions for parents who disagree with “authorities” as to what the “best
interests of the child” are? What recourse do the parents have to appeal any adverse
decisions? It is not specified.
Article
18, Section 2… For the purpose of
guaranteeing and promoting the rights set forth in the present Convention,
States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to parents and legal
guardians in the performance of their child-rearing responsibilities and shall
ensure the development of institutions, facilities and services for the care of
children.
Comment: What is the definition of “appropriate
assistance”? Who determines what is
“appropriate”? What recourse do parents
have if they disagree about the “appropriateness”? What is the definition of
“child-rearing responsibilities”? Who
determines what that definition is? Do
parents have any say in determining what that definition is or what their own
“child rearing responsibilities” are?
What sanctions do parents face for failing to undertake their “child
rearing responsibilities”, whether intentionally or unintentionally? Does it make any difference for the purposes
of sanctions that the parents did not intend to disregard their “child-rearing
responsibilities”? What if the parents
were unaware that they had particular “child rearing responsibilities” in
accordance with treaty provisions? Do
they get a second chance or do they lose custody of their children or face some
other sanction for inadvertent mistakes? Are parents ever entitled to legal
assistance in any part of the treaty when accused of failing to uphold any of
its provisions? Are parents entitled to due process of law or any rights
guaranteed under our Constitution? It is
not specified.
Article 19, Section 1… States Parties shall take all appropriate
legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the
child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect
or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse,
while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has
the care of the child.
Comment: What is the definition of “all appropriate
legislative, administrative, social and educational measures? Who defines it? Do parents have any say in defining it? What rights do parents have under the
legislative, administrative, social and educational measures? Are parents afforded due process and other
rights in accordance with our Constitution?
Are the children afforded due process and other rights in accordance
with our Constitution? What are the sanctions?
Is loss of custody a sanction? If
so, is it a temporary loss of custody or a permanent loss of custody? Is there any provision to appeal any
decision? It is not specified.
Article
19, Section 2…Such protective measures
should, as appropriate, include effective procedures for the establishment of
social programmes to provide necessary support for the child and for those who
have the care of the child, as well as for other forms of prevention and for
identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment and follow-up of
instances of child maltreatment described heretofore, and, as appropriate, for
judicial involvement.
Comment: What are the “social programmes”? Do they include mental health
screenings? Do they include forced
medication? Who deems these “programmes” as “necessary”? Are the parents afforded the full protection of
their rights under our Constitution before these “social programmes” are
“established”? What are the “other forms
of prevention”? Who determines what
those forms are? How are children “identified”, “reported”, “referred”,
“investigated”, and “treated” and by whom? Do parents have any rights regarding
such identification, reporting, referral, investigation, and treatment? Are those rights afforded by our Constitution
or by United Nations or foreign law? What is “maltreatment” and who defines
it? What recourse do parents have if
they disagree with any of these “programmes”? What rights to parents have to
appeal any decisions about these “programmes”?
It is not specified.
Article
20, Section 3… Such care could include,
inter alia, foster placement, kafalah of Islamic law, adoption or if necessary
placement in suitable institutions for the care of children.
Comment: Do the parents have any say in the
“placement” of the child? What recourse
to parents have if they disagree with the
“placement”? What is the procedure used
to determine whether “placement” is necessary?
Is it done in a court of law with all rights afforded to the parents
under our Constitution, or does a United Nations bureaucrat get to decide? What is the appellate process, if any?
Article 28, Section 1…
Parties recognize the right of the child to education,
and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal
opportunity, they shall, in particular:
(a)
Make
primary education compulsory and available free to all…
Comment: This, of course, is one of the most
controversial topics for our purposes.
What is the “right of the child to education”? What kind of “education” does the treaty
mean? It would appear that the treaty
refers to government education. The
treaty specifically states that the “parties” “shall” “make primary education
compulsory”. What is “primary education”, how is it provided, by whom is it provided, and how is
its “compulsory” nature implemented? The
treaty does not specify. Primary education could mean many things. It could mean what we think of as K-12
education. Then, again, it could mean
education in “primary” issues, subjects, causes, etc. Who deems it compulsory? Is it compulsory in accordance with the
United Nations? Is it compulsory
according to national law? Is it
compulsory according to state law? It is
not specified. Because primary education
is “compulsory”, does that mean that parents cannot instruct their own children
at home? It is not specified.
(e) Take
measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and the reduction of
drop-out rates…
Comment: What
“measures” are required to be “taken”?
What constitutes “encouragement” as opposed to “coercion”? What if parents reject the “encouragement” in
favor of instruction of the children at home?
Will the parents be subject to sanctions? If so, what are the sanctions? Who is in charge
of the “encouragement” and who is in charge of enforcing such “encouragement”? What is the definition of a “drop-out”? Is a
“drop-out” someone who homeschools? How
are the “drop-out” rates to be “reduced”?
Are they to be “reduced” by compulsion? It is not specified.
Article
28, Section 3… Parties shall promote and
encourage international cooperation in matters relating to education, in
particular with a view to contributing to the elimination of ignorance and
illiteracy throughout the world and facilitating access to scientific and
technical knowledge and modern teaching methods.
Comment: What is “international cooperation in matters
relating to education”? Does that mean
that another country may interfere with a parent’s right to homeschool in this
country? May the two countries
“cooperate” to sanction a parent for homeschooling? It is not specified. Who defines “encouragement”? Again, does “encouragement” include
“coercion”? Does the “elimination of illiteracy” include the “elimination of
illiteracy” that currently exists in our public schools? How will “parties” “contribute” to this? It is not specified.
Article 29, Section 1…
States Parties agree that the education of the child shall be directed to:
(a) The
development of the child's personality, talents and mental and physical
abilities to their fullest potential;
(b) The
development of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and for the
principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations;
Comment: This may be most problematical. By this treaty, “parties” agree that the
“education” of the child shall be directed “for the principles enshrined in the
Charter of the United Nations.” Many may
agree with those “principles”, but what if parents don’t agree with them? What if parents want to direct the education
of their children to the principles of the country of their choice? Who will enforce this provision? How will it be enforced? What rights, if any, to parents have to
disagree with the enforcement? Do
parents face sanctions for directing the education of their children in accordance
with the principles of their choice? If
so, what are they? Do parents have due process and other rights under our
Constitution? What is the appellate
process? It is not specified.
Article
29, Section 2…No part of the present
article or article 28 shall be construed so as to interfere with the liberty of
individuals and bodies to establish and direct educational institutions,
subject always to the observance of the principle set forth in paragraph 1 of
the present article and to the requirements that the education given in such
institutions shall conform to such minimum standards as may be laid down by the
State.
Comment: So, in other words, the “liberty of
individuals and bodies to establish and direct educational institutions” is not
supposed to be interfered with, but only if those individuals and bodies are
“observing” the “principle set forth in paragraph 1”, the principle that the
education is to be directed “for the principles enshrined in the Charter of the
United Nations.” It would appear clear
that if those individuals and bodies are not establishing and directing
educational institutions for the principles” enshrined in the Charter of the
United Nations”, they could be “interfered with”, although it is not specified
how that “interference” would occur. Also, it appears that even that limited
restraint on interference does not apply to individuals and bodies who
establish and direct the education of their own children, as opposed to
“institutions”. How much interference
and of what kind would parents be subject to for directing the education of
their own children when not observing the principles “enshrined in the Charter
of the United Nations”? It is not
specified.
Article 32, Section 1…1. States Parties recognize the right of the
child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work
that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child's education, or
to be harmful to the child's health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or
social development….
Article
32, Section 2… a) Provide for a minimum
age or minimum ages for admission to employment;
(b) Provide for appropriate regulation of the
hours and conditions of employment;
(c) Provide for appropriate penalties or
other sanctions to ensure the effective enforcement of the present article.
Comment: Would the United Nations provisions supplant
currently existing state laws regarding the kind of work and the hours of work
in which children being homeschooled could be employed? Who is in charge of enforcement? Who decides what the penalties will be? What recourse do parents have if they
disagree? It is not specified.
Article
40, Section 2…(a) No child shall be
alleged as, be accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law by
reason of acts or omissions that were not prohibited by national or
international law at the time they were committed…
Comment: Does this mean that in order for a child to
be held accountable for breaking a law, the act of the child must have been
prohibited by national or international law at the time it was committed? What if the child breaks a state law? Would the child not be responsible? Would the parents be responsible? It does not specify.
Article 41… Nothing in the
present Convention shall affect any provisions which are more conducive to the
realization of the rights of the child and which may be contained in:
(a) The law of a State party; or
(b) International law in force for that
State.
Comment: Again, keep in mind that when the United
Nations talks about the “State”, it is talking about a nation, federal
government. In other words, this
provision says that this treaty does not affect any provisions that are more
conducive to the rights of the child if those provisions are contained in a
federal law or in an international law. One could reasonably infer, then, that
the treaty does affect provisions that are not more conducive to the rights of
the child.
Article 43… there shall be established a Committee on the Rights of the Child, which shall carry out the
functions hereinafter provided.
Article
43, Section 8…The Committee shall
establish its own rules of procedure.
Comment: What are the rules of procedure? By what process will the rules of procedure
be adopted? Will there be any public
input into the rules? Will there be any
ability for the rules to be amended? It is not specified.
Article
44, Section 1…. States Parties undertake
to submit to the Committee, through the Secretary-General of the United
Nations, reports on the measures they have adopted which give effect to the
rights recognized herein and on the progress made on the enjoyment of those
rights…
Comment: Under this provision, nations will “report”
to the United Nations on the “measures” they have adopted to implement this
treaty and on the “progress” they have made in the “enjoyment” of those
rights. For what
purpose? Does the nation have to
adopt specific “measures” or else face sanctions? Does the nation have to
achieve some specific “progress” or else face sanctions? What are the sanctions? Who imposes the
sanctions? Do countries that have
adopted fewer “measures” and made less “progress” get to determine the “progress”
of another nation and to impose sanctions for not achieving such “progress”? It is not specified.
Article
44, Section 4… The Committee may request
from States Parties further information relevant to the implementation of the
Convention….
Comment: What kind of “further information” might be
required? To whom is it given? For what purposes is it given? It is not specified.
Article
44, Section 6…States Parties shall make
their reports widely available to the public in their own countries…
Comment: What information will be contained in the
reports? Will personal information about
families be contained in them? Is there
any provision to delete personal information from those reports? Is there any provision for families to refuse
consent to release personal information to the public in those reports? It is not specified.
Article 51, Section 2…2. A reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the present
Convention shall not be permitted.
Comment: This provision means that even if a country
has “reservations” about a particular part of the treaty, although it can
present those “reservations” to the United Nations, a “reservation” that is not
compatible with the “object and purpose” of the treaty “shall not be
permitted.” It would appear that a party can only present “reservations” that abide by treaty
provisions. Does this mean that all parties are required to comply no matter
what? It is not specified.
NHELD opposes this treaty as it is
written. It leaves too many questions
unanswered, it invites more federal regulation, and that federal regulation may
supersede parental rights under state law.
Under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,
each nation may adopt national laws implementing its provisions. How those
national or federal laws affect parents will become more apparent in time. Already, there is controversy in the European
Union regarding this treaty. It has
affected the rights of parents to homeschool in
and http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51484
Will
Congress adopt laws to implement the treaty that will affect our right to
homeschool in this country? That remains
to be seen.
The time may come when a parent disagrees with a provision in this
treaty, and the issue comes before a court. How will the court decide? Will the court decide the treaty’s provision
does not comport with the Constitution and, therefore, the parent will prevail
under state law? Maybe. Maybe not. That also
remains to be seen.
At the moment, just understand that while the President has
entered into this treaty, the Senate has not yet ratified it.
NHELD
has a lot of questions about this treaty; you may have a lot of questions about
it as well. More importantly, the Senate should have a lot of questions about
this treaty. Perhaps the Senate
does. Perhaps that is why the Senate has
not yet ratified it. Whatever your opinion is about this treaty, your Senators
need to hear from you !
It
is extremely important for every American to become informed and to remain
informed. It is also extremely important
for each of us, after formulating our opinion about issues such as this, to engage
in a dialogue with our representatives in government. In this case, it is important to engage in
such dialogue with our Senators and their aides. It is likely that you will have more access
to their aides than to the Senators.
That doesn’t necessarily mean that the Senators will not get your
message. The aides have the Senators’
ears in more ways than one. They not
only could pass on your written message to the Senator, but also they could
inform the Senator when action on this or another issue comes up that there are
constituents in the Senator’s district that feel strongly about the issue such
that he should weigh the facts heavily before voting.
One
website that you can use to contact your Congressional Representatives is at http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/ Senators can be contacted through
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
If
not for your sake, for your children’s sake and for their children’s sake, we
encourage everyone to take the time
to become informed and to ask questions of your Senators, to make your opinion
known, and to make your voice count.
Once
a treaty or a law is adopted, if you decide you disagree with it, it is much
more difficult to get it repealed.
Unfortunately,
this treaty is not the only “law” that the federal government could enact that
may affect your rights as parents or that may affect your rights under state
law.
There
are other federal initiatives that may affect your rights under state law that
are currently underway. We recommend that you take a look at all of them and
decide for yourself what you agree with and what, if anything, you want to do
about them.
Some
of them are the following:
Charter of the Organization of American States
http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/iachr/oascharter.html
NAFTA
http://www.mac.doc.gov/nafta/naftatext.html
CAFTA
http://www.export.gov/fta/complete/CAFTA/index.asp?dName=CAFTA
NHELD
suggests that all treaties, agreements, and conventions are extremely
troublesome when they create new “regional” or “international” government
structures that eviscerate the United States Constitution. In addition to being concerned about the U.N.
Convention on the Rights of the Child, NHELD suggests reading about the
Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America that was signed by
President George Bush in 2005. Please keep in mind and refer to the United
Nations’ definitions of “treaty”, “agreement”, and “convention” while reading
about any international “agreement”. Of
particular concern in this international “agreement” are references to
“regulatory cooperation”, “ensure compatibility of regulations”, “expanding
partnerships in higher education, science and technology”. While the ideas may be laudable, the
practical and legal effect of “regulatory cooperation” regarding a “treaty” or
international “agreement” may be the eradication of Constitutional protections
and state laws already in existence.
You
can read about the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America at the
government’s websites:
http://www.spp.gov/factsheet.asp
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050323-2.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050323-3.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050627-2.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050323-1.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060331-1.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060331.html
http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/S-3/sppcover.htm
http://www.pi.energy.gov/naewg.html
The
most important thing is to become informed, and to remain informed. Then let your representatives in government
at the local, state, and federal levels know your opinion. Don’t let them adopt new laws without making
them understand the impact they will have on your lives and the lives of your
children.
Attorney Deborah Stevenson - Executive Director of
National Home Education Legal Defense. – www.nheld.com or email
: info@nheld.com
Judy
Aron - Director of Research, NHELD – imjfaron@sbcglobal.net