Beyond the Child's Voice: Towards an Ethics for Children's Participation Rights

Abstract

This article begins by identifying some of the reasons why children are marginalised in adult social and theoretical contexts. Western styles of thinking, whether of a liberal or poststructuralist persuasion, install what the anthropologist Tim Ingold refers to as a 'logic of inversion' that variously complicates, translates and blocks possibilities for the actualisation of children's participation rights. A key strategy to redress the child's social exclusion has been attending to 'the child's voice' in both political and research contexts. Whilst this has led to children's voices becoming heard and innovations in research methods, the extent to which the definition of 'the child's voice' steers clear of the difficulties identified in the first part of this article is questionable. A significant concern is the extent to which researchers, as authors of texts, reinscribe adult interests in the crafting of 'the child's voice' as it appears in their writing. Having problematised some of the ways in which 'the child's voice' has been mobilised in research, the article then addresses some of the ethical responsibilities for adults in moving beyond these limitations. Taking up such responsibility, it is argued, involves new forms of ethical practice that acknowledge the other's subjectivity and the limits of knowing that this implies, together with writing practices that interrupt the appropriation and colonisation of the child's experience.

Children’s data journeys beyond the ‘supply chain’: co-curating flows and frictions

“…These data have been used to determine children’s needs and to identify how they may be better met by governments, not-for-profit organisations, corporations and society more broadly. Over the last 15 years, there have been calls to move away from extractive data gathering methods towards those that configure children as collaborators in university-based research, resulting in more participatory methods that can document children’s ‘voices’ (L’Anson, 2013) and leverage digital platforms to do so (Third et al, 2017). The claim is that data contributed by children – particularly that which documents the insights and experiences of vulnerable, disadvantaged or marginalised children – do not always adequately inform policy and practice efforts, and that this must be rectified.…”

An Ecological Exploration of the Internet of Toys in Early Childhood Everyday Life

“…In essence, Craft detailed the evolution of the Sociology of Childhood in a digital age, yet her conceptualisation has not translated into empirical research approaches for understanding children and technology in Education. Two decades ago James, Jenks and Proud (1998) provided an overview of The Sociological Child, which contributed to a significant shift in research, policy and practice regarding children's agency and competence (Ärlemalm-Hagsér, 2014;Esser, Baader, Betz, & Hungerland, 2016;I'Anson, 2013). Yet, while perceptions of 'child' have moved on considerably over this time, the focus on the agentic child around technology still lacks a research base.…”

The International Economy of Children’s Rights: Issues in Translation

“…Such tensions might be seen as characteristic of the field to date. Thus, for example, whereas activists would be keen to extend opportunities for children and young people to be consulted in matters that concern them, theorists have questioned a number of tropes associated with children's rights discourse, such as 'voice' as having been mobilised somewhat uncritically in practice, without a critical reading of some of the epistemological assumptions that these entrain (James, 2007;I'Anson 2013I'Anson , 2016. As Moon (2012: 876) observes:…”