This article discusses the significance of the United States’ ratification of the CRC, concluding that even if the treaty is not self-executing, ratification would make a major difference. It would enable the United States to better promote children’s rights abroad, and it would push the United States to develop its domestic law in dramatically new directions that empower children. The CRC provides children with powerful affirmative rights and imposes reciprocal duties on nation-states. It provides rights to participate, including rights to be heard and to make decisions on personal and political matters; rights to receive important benefits, including health, support, and education; rights to protection against maltreatment; and rights to nurturing parental care. All this contrasts with U.S. law’s negative rights tradition, its emphasis on parental rights, limited recognition of children’s rights, and related restriction of state power to protect children. U.S. ratification could have a positive impact, particularly in connection with parental relationship rights and related maltreatment issues. However, there is also a risk of negative impact, given the problematic CRC provisions on international and transracial adoption. The solution is ratification with a reservation regarding Articles 20 and 21.
Abrams, Douglas E., and Sarah H. Ramsey .2007. Children and the law: Doctrine, policy, and practice. St. Paul, MN: West.
2.
Alston, Philip.1991. Australia and the convention. In The UN children’s convention and Australia, eds. Philip Alston and Glen Brennan, 1-5. Canberra , Australia: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission .
3.
Bartholet, Elizabeth.1991. Where do black children belong? The politics of race matching in adoption. University of Pennsylvania Law Review139:1163-1256.
4.
Bartholet, Elizabeth.1999. Nobody’s children: Abuse and neglect, foster drift, and the adoption alternative. Boston, MA: Beacon.
5.
Bartholet, Elizabeth.2006. Commentary: Cultural stereotypes can and do die: It’s time to move on with transracial adoption. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law34:315-20.
6.
Bartholet, Elizabeth.2007. International adoption: Thoughts on the human rights issues . Buffalo Human Rights Law Review13:151-98.
7.
Bartholet, Elizabeth.2008. International adoption: The child’s story. Georgia State University Law Review24:333-79.
8.
Bartholet, Elizabeth.2010. International adoption: The human rights position. Global Policy1:91-100.
9.
Bastarache, Michel.2000. Children’s rights in the framework of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms with reference to section 15. In Bringing international human rights law home: Judicial colloquium on the domestic application of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 144-59. New York, NY: United Nations.
10.
Bellotti v. Baird, 1979. 433 U.S. 622.
11.
Blanchfield, Luisa.2009. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Background and policy issues. Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
12.
Board of Education v. Earls. 2002. 536 U.S. 822.
13.
DeShaney v. Winnebago County. 1989. 489 U.S. 189.
14.
Dillon, Sara.2009. International children’s rights. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
15.
Graham v. Florida. 2010. 130 S. Ct. 2011.
16.
Grosz, Maya.2006. Provisions for alternative care for children deprived of their family environment. In The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child: An analysis of treaty provisions and implications of U.S. ratification, eds. Jonathan Todres, Mark E. Wojcik, and Cris R. Revaz, 207-44. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers.
17.
Guggenheim, Martin.2005. What’s wrong with children’s rights. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18.
Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. 1993. Available from http://hcch.e-vision.nl/upload/conventions/txt33en.pdf .
19.
Helander, Einar A.2008. Children and violence: The world of the defenceless. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
20.
Hodgkin, Rachel, and Peter Newell.2002. Implementation handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Geneva, Switzerland: UNICEF.
21.
Holmstrom, Leif, ed. 2000. Concluding observations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: Seventeenth Session, 1993-1998. Leiden, the Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
22.
In re Gill.2008. 11th Cir. Available from www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file16_37906.pdf .
23.
In re Guardianship of Phillip Becker. 1981. No. 101981. Cal. Super. Ct. Affirmed by Guardianship of Phillip Becker. 1983. 139 Cal. App. 3d407.
24.
Kingsley v. Kingsley. 1993. 623 So. 2d 780.
25.
Medellin v. Texas. 2008. 552 U.S. 491.
26.
Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994. 1996 (amended). Pub. L. No. 103-382, §§ 551-55, 108 Stat. 4056. As amended by Interethnic Adoptions Provisions of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-188, § 1808, 110 Stat. 1755.
27.
Morse v. Frederick. 2009. 551 U.S. 393.
28.
Nauck, Barbara J.1994. Implications of the United States ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Cleveland State Law Review42:675-703.
29.
Roper v. Simmons. 2005. 543 U.S. 551.
30.
Santosky v. Kramer. 1982. 455 U.S. 745.
31.
Shepherd, Robert E., Jr.1990. Civil rights of the child. In Children’s rights in America, eds. Cynthia Price Cohen and Howard A. Davidson , 135-47. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
32.
Simmons, Beth.2009. Mobilizing for human rights: International law in domestic politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Smith v. Organization of Foster Families. 1977. 431 U.S. 816.
34.
Todres, Jonathan.2006. Analyzing opposition to U.S. ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. In The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child: An analysis of treaty provisions and implications of U.S. ratification, eds. Jonathan Todres , Mark E. Wojcik, and Cris R. Revaz, 19-31. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers.
35.
Todres, Jonathan, Mark E. Wojcik, and Cris R. Revaz .2006. Overview. In The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child: An analysis of treaty provisions and implications of U.S. ratification, eds. Jonathan Todres, Mark E. Wojcik, and Cris R. Revaz, 3-7. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers.
36.
Troxel v. Granville. 2000. 530 U.S. 57.
37.
United Nations (UN).2005. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969. Treaty Series1155. New York, NY: United Nations. Available from http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf.
38.
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.2003 a. General Comment no. 3. HIV/AIDS and the rights of the child . Geneva, Switzerland: UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.
39.
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.2003 b. General Comment no. 5. General measures of implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Geneva, Switzerland: UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.
40.
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.2005 . General guidelines regarding the form and content of periodic reports to be submitted by States Parties under Article 44, Paragraph 1 (b), of the convention. Geneva, Switzerland: UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.
41.
UN General Assembly.1989. Convention on the Rights of the Child. Res 44/25. New York: NY: United Nations. Available from www.un.org/documents/instruments/docs_en.asp .
42.
UN General Assembly.2009. Guidelines for the alternative care of children. A/HRC/11/L.13. New York, NY: United Nations. Available from www.unicef.org/aids/files/UN_Guidelines_for_alternative_care_of_children.pdf .
43.
Unicef.2005. Children orphaned or made vulnerable by Aids. Available from www.unicef.org/voy/explore/sowc/explore_1652.html.
44.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. 2004. Summary report of the study on the impact of the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. New York, NY: UNICEF. Available from www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/CRC_Impact_summaryreport.pdf .
45.
Vite, Sylvain, and Herve Boechat.2008. Commentary on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Article 21: Adoption. Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff.
