Twenty-five years spans a generation, with its attendant social change and shifts in attitude, but from one generation to the next, it's sometimes difficult to convey the extent of incremental progress.
A generation ago, at the UN General Assembly in New York, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) was adopted. Those children born in the first year of its existence are now adults, and I hope, for some at least, that the Convention has made a difference to their lives.
The Convention represented a global promise to protect and promote a child's right to survive and thrive, to learn, to be healthy, to make their voices heard and to achieve their full potential. But 25 years on, despite significant change, there is still much to be done.
In celebrating this anniversary, it is useful to reflect on how far we have come as well as where we must go, to remain true to the spirit of the Convention.
The UNCRC changed the way children are viewed and treated and the fact it is the most widely ratified human rights treaty in history, shows a global commitment to advancing children's rights.
Though conventions are sometimes dismissed as statements of high-minded ideals, I believe the UNCRC can act as a touchstone for anyone trying to effect change.
In Scotland, I have seen excellent examples of children and young people being recognised as rights-holders. For example, the recent Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 reflected the broad shift in towards better realising children's rights.
And strenuous efforts have been made to tackle health inequalities with a focus on prevention and early years. The Convention brings a global perspective to how we do things in Scotland. Our approach to juvenile justice is recognised around the world, further enhanced through the Children's Hearings Act where children's rights became the principles the system is based on.
While these are all significant achievements, it would be blinkered not to recognise how much more we can do. Too many children are still regarded as the property of adults and subjected to various forms of abuse and exploitation.
Nor can we claim we live in a world where "children's best interests are the primary consideration in all decisions affecting them" (Article 3 UNCRC).
Sadly, all too often children are the victims of poverty. Just last month, parent groups and teaching unions warned inequalities will become entrenched and councils in Scotland may fail to meet legal obligations on education because of spending cuts. The BMA recently published a report raising serious concerns about the health and human rights of children in the UK criminal justice system.
Issues like these highlight why this anniversary must be an urgent reminder about what remains to be done to realise the vision of the UNCRC. I believe we need to use the UNCRC in its widest sense as a legal instrument that defines the responsibilities of Governments, as a framework for action and as an ethical statement.
There are areas where we need to be more assertive on children's rights. I am concerned about the rights of the most vulnerable, especially disabled children and young people. Welfare reform and austerity are leading to cuts that impact directly on children's services, care facilities, social work and recreational facilities.
I am also concerned that, despite evidence of increases in serious mental health problems in under-18s, too many children continue to wait for treatment or are treated in inappropriate places, in violation of their rights. The post-referendum discussions are a natural juncture for those working to advance children's rights to consider how we might better do this under a new constitutional framework.
A new approach could see the UNCRC incorporated into Scots law, placing on our Government clear responsibility to put the best interests and views of children and young people at the centre of every decision they make.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article