Welcome back to MHREC’s Empowering Children: Building a Rights-Respecting Community Campaign, an awareness series on children’s rights! Today, we’re diving into two critical theories about children’s rights: welfare/interest theory and will/choice theory.
What Does It Mean for Childhood to Be a Social Construct?
The concept of childhood as a social construct suggests that biological factors do not solely determine our understanding of what it means to be a child but are also shaped by cultural, historical, and social influences. This idea draws from the broader philosophical debate on natural kinds versus social kinds. Natural kinds refer to categories that exist inherently in nature, such as biological sex, while social kinds are categories created by social norms and contexts, like gender.
Biological Versus Social Constructs
Physical immaturity is a natural fact; children are biologically different from adults in terms of development and capabilities. However, how societies interpret and respond to these biological differences varies significantly. For example, the age at which children are considered capable of taking on certain responsibilities or being granted specific rights is primarily determined by social norms, which can differ across cultures and historical periods.
Implications of Childhood as a Social Construct
- Diverse Interpretations: Recognising childhood as a social construct allows us to appreciate how childhood is experienced and understood across different cultures and times. What is considered appropriate behaviour or responsibilities for children? It can vary widely and be influenced by societal values and economic conditions.
- Policy and Legal Frameworks: This understanding has profound implications for policy and legal frameworks. It challenges the notion that there are universal benchmarks for children’s rights and well-being. Instead, it suggests that policies should be flexible and sensitive to cultural contexts.
- Education and Socialisation: Viewing childhood through this lens also impacts how we approach education and socialisation. It encourages us to consider whether our educational systems and social norms support the holistic development of children according to their unique cultural and social contexts.
- Critical Examination of Norms: The idea prompts us to critically examine the norms and practices that shape childhood. For instance, are certain expectations of children based on outdated or biased views? How do these norms impact the well-being and development of children?
Balancing Biological and Social Perspectives
While it’s crucial to acknowledge the role of social constructs in shaping childhood, it’s equally important to recognise the biological realities of child development. Childhood should be considered a hybrid concept incorporating biological immaturity and socially constructed understandings. This balanced perspective allows for a more nuanced approach to children’s rights and development, which respects both the universal aspects of childhood and the particularities dictated by cultural and social contexts.
Conclusion
By recognising the interplay between biology and social context, we can better understand the complexity of childhood development and support children’s diverse needs and rights worldwide.
Il-Homework tal-Ġimgħa: Discussion
Can you share an anecdote about a time when you felt you were misidentified as either a child or an adult? How did this experience impact your perception of your maturity and capabilities? Share your views in the comments below.
This activity is part of the project “Strengthening Children’s Rights Advocacy through International Training”. Partly funded by the Government of Malta Social Causes Fund.
MHREC 
You must be logged in to post a comment.