Marinus H. van IJzendoorn, M. Bakermans-Kranenburg, R. Duschinsky, Guy C. M. Skinner
{"title":"Legislation In Search of “Good-Enough” Care Arrangements for the Child","authors":"Marinus H. van IJzendoorn, M. Bakermans-Kranenburg, R. Duschinsky, Guy C. M. Skinner","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.5","url":null,"abstract":"Attachment is the inborn bias of human children to seek the availability of familiar caregivers in times of stress. It has been observed from ancient times and in many cultures, and scaffolds further physical, cognitive, and socioemotional development. The security of these relationships is shaped by the continuity and quality of the child-rearing environment, and is independent of biological ties to the caregiver. In this chapter, the child’s right to a “good-enough”—that is, at least minimally adequate but not necessarily ‘best’--family life and the importance of a stable network of attachment relationships is highlighted. Legal issues raised by multi-parent care, including questions around the use of attachment-based assessments for custody decisions, are addressed. Attachment theory is well equipped to inform what caregiving arrangements children need, and legislators, judges, and lawyers may consult it as a source of insight into “good-enough” care arrangements in the interest of the child.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124996730","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Children’s Right to Privacy","authors":"Ayelet Blecher-Prigat","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.18","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines how (if at all) children’s right to privacy is concretely implemented in the legal realm. It considers children’s privacy when they are involved in legal proceedings, children’s privacy in schools, children’s online privacy, children’s involvement with media publicity, and children’s right to confidential medical advice and treatment. It also considers children’s privacy in their relationship with their parents, focusing on parents’ surveillance and monitoring of their children and parents’ use of social media in a manner that involves their children. Existing legal policies and rules across these contexts fail to carve out a space where children can be free from constant adult gaze and supervision. This chapter argues that there is insufficient research about children’s needs and interests in privacy, and where research does exist lawmakers fail to take notice of its findings; privacy theories are mainly adult-centered and cannot adequately be applied to children; and family law conceptions still focus on parental authority, and around the idea of “the family” as a unit.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127956366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"“Of Sound Mind and Body”","authors":"F. Vandervort, V. Palusci","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.4","url":null,"abstract":"Substance abuse is a major medical and social problem. Estimates suggest that each year some 15 percent of the 4 million babies born in the United States are exposed to drugs or alcohol. Research demonstrates that exposure to these substances is harmful to the children in both the short term and across their developmental trajectory. This chapter summarizes the harms that might result from such prenatal exposure and considers the ways that both federal and state law respond to this. The chapter argues for universal drug testing of newborns in an effort to ascertain whether they have been prenatally exposed to such substances so that treatment and other services can be provided.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116979225","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Relational Parents","authors":"R. Wilson","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.23","url":null,"abstract":"Significant changes in family forms and dynamics (such as increases in nonmarital cohabitation, children cared for by extended family, and same-sex couples with children) have prompted policymakers to rethink the question of who is a legal parent. Specifically, the law is grappling with which adults will be granted parental status or rights based on their relationship with a child’s parent and why. This chapter reviews the mounting number of doctrinal hooks used by courts, legislatures, and law reformers for deciding when adults can make claims in children. It examines traditional parentage and family privacy doctrines, reviews justifications for a dramatic widening of the parental tent, and then turns to a set of fairness and child-welfare concerns raised by these concepts, highlighting four major worries. It argues that costs of considering the parentage claims of relational parents—both to the legal parent and to the child—have received inadequate weight to date.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126671981","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Contested Child Protection Policies","authors":"Elizabeth Bartholet","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.20","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.20","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter discusses the tension over recent decades in child welfare policy in the United States between two conflicting value systems, one focusing on parent and group rights over children, and the other focusing on child rights to grow up with nurturing parental care. It describes the leading legal and policy movements that have promoted keeping children with the family of origin and in the racial, ethnic and national group of origin. It contrasts these with some laws and policies that have instead prioritized protecting children against abuse and neglect, and placing them with nurturing parents including in adoption. It situates domestic US child welfare policy debates within the larger international context.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129804559","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Regulation of Reproduction and Best Interests Analysis","authors":"I. Cohen","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.2","url":null,"abstract":"In its 1972 decision in Eisenstadt v. Baird, the US Supreme Court announced that: “it is the right of the individual, married or single, to be free from unwarranted governmental intrusion into matters so fundamentally affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.” But, in fact, both within and outside the United States, this firm-sounding principle has often been honored in the breach. Both as to coital and assisted reproduction, but particularly the latter, the state has asserted significant control over reproductive decision-making. This chapter details various forms of reproductive regulation prevalent today in a variety of areas including: Sterilization, abstinence education, surrogacy, sperm and egg “donor” anonymity and paternity, insurance funding, cloning, and mitochondrial replacement therapy. More conceptually, it divides state regulation of reproduction along the axes of attempts to influence whether, when, with whom, and how we reproduce and the means by which the state intervenes. Finally, it examines variations on child welfare justifications the state has or might offer for such reproductive regulation, and raises some questions about those justifications.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"211 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131428192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reforming Child Welfare","authors":"M. Lowry","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.39","url":null,"abstract":"Child welfare has changed in some superficial ways over the years but key problems remain. The foster care population is once again rising, and most states fall far short of meeting even lax federal standards. States seem to have short attention spans to address these problems, reacting to the inevitable abuse- or neglect-related deaths of children with calls for more “preventive” services, while many such services are often inadequate, unproven, and not individualized. Rather than tolerating systemic problems—such as the shortage of meaningful services, high worker caseloads, and low numbers of foster homes, particularly adequate ones—many states continue to seek to reduce their in-care populations, leaving children with neither foster care nor necessary services. Litigation on behalf of children can change that, or at least move things forward. Marcia Robinson Lowry, a long-time child advocate engaged in many landmark child welfare lawsuits, surveys the current landscape from the vantage point of years seeking to reform child welfare systems, points out the advantages to this litigation, and urges more common sense approaches to delivering what children need.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128407482","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Adoption Versus Alternative Forms of Care","authors":"B. Sloan","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.9","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter, which focuses on English law, considers preference for adoption in some circumstances from a comparative law perspective, before comparing the treatment of adoption to that of other forms of care: parental care, kinship care, foster care, and institutional care. It argues that although adoption is the most satisfactory outcome for some children, it should not be considered a panacea. While a range of options is available for children in England whose parents encounter difficulties in looking after them, the government has a stronger preference for adoption than is the case in many other jurisdictions. I view this preference with a critical eye, given that it is likely to be “easier” than investing properly in foster care services and other forms of lesser intervention.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132338358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"School Accountability","authors":"Morgan Polikoff, Shira Korn","doi":"10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.25","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190694395.013.25","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter summarizes the history and effects of standards-based school accountability in the United States and offers suggestions for accountability policy moving forward. It analyzes standards-based accountability in both the No Child Left Behind Act and the Every Student Succeeds Act, and discusses the effects of accountability systems. The authors argue that school accountability systems can improve student achievement, but that unintended consequences are possible. How accountability systems are designed—the metrics and measures used and the consequences for performance—has both symbolic and practical implications for the efficacy of the system and the individuals affected. Synthesizing what is known about the design of school accountability systems, the authors propose policy choices that can improve the validity, reliability, transparency, and fairness of these systems.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121421527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Race and Education","authors":"Raquel Muñiz, Erica Frankenberg","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.26","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780190694395.013.26","url":null,"abstract":"In 1954, the Supreme Court overturned the long-held legal doctrine of “separate but equal” in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, holding that separate facilities for black and white students were inherently unequal, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Brown marked the beginning of the civil rights era, an era in which the Supreme Court would no longer tolerate dual school systems separated along racial lines. However, the progress toward unitary school systems plateaued and seemed to reverse itself in the 1970s. This chapter reviews the legal and extra-legal developments that have complicated full integration. It suggests pursuing legal and political efforts at federal, state, and local levels—voluntary integration plans and inclusive policies, mediation, and litigation at the federal and state levels—to eradicate segregation and fulfill the promise of Brown in the increasingly diverse society of the twenty-first century in US public schools.","PeriodicalId":234430,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of Children and the Law","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128886182","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}