Children’s rights and school psychology: Historical perspective and implications for the profession

Abstract

School psychology and children’s rights have great potential, well beyond what has been realized, for advancing the best interests of children, their communities, and societies. A child rights approach infused into school psychology can significantly contribute to the fulfillment of this potential. To respect and illuminate these factors and possibilities, a brief history of children’s rights is presented, its major components as embodied in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and their relevance for education and the school community are clarified, and the opportunities for school psychology to champion and deeply integrate children’s rights in policy and practice are explored. Employing this base, a proposal is made for a new social contract between school psychology and those it serves which moves beyond reactive problem oriented interventions to give primacy to proactive promotion of the well-being and full holistic development of the child, employing a prospective human development models emphasizing progressive achievement of self-stewardship for all children.

Keywords

Authentic self child protection child rights children’s rights dignity education holistic development participation personality prospective human development protection respect school psychology well-being

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN General Assembly, 1989) embodies universal requirements and aspirations for the learning, development, and quality of life for the child that are expected to serve both the best interests of the child and the child’s society. Its themes and standards are intended for worldwide application at international, national and local levels with respect for cultural differences and adherence to the spirit of its intent. The Convention includes Articles that are both specifically and generally applicable to life and development within and through formal and informal education. Schools represent society’s institutionalized systems of education and child rearing. Ideally, schools are responsible for guiding and supporting both short and long term development of young people toward the goals of their societies, communities, parents, and of the child. The school is the only government agency through which the Convention can be applied to the life and development of virtually all children across the majority of their developmental period, directly and indirectly, in a pervading manner.

Psychologists who practice in schools are the primary child development and learning experts in that environment. They are equipped and have responsibilities to assist the child directly and through other persons and mechanisms to effectively meet needs and develop in healthy and fulfilling ways (Hart & Pavlovic, 1991). The potential for synergy among child rights, education, and school psychology is powerful. This article provides the historical context for the Convention, explanation of the relevance of a sample of the Convention’s principles and standards for education and school psychology, and projected applications of a child rights approach to deal with major issues and opportunities of education and school psychology.

Historical context for children’s rights

Evolution of human rights

A long and complex path has been taken to bring attention and support to human rights. Lewis (2003) provides a history of the ‘events, documents, and speeches’ that have given form and direction to this path. In this history, some 85 items are presented as they fell within the historical periods labeled ‘classical civilization, faith, and freedom’, with inclusions such as The Code of Hammurabi (1800 BC), The Mayflower Compact (1620), and the ‘I have a dream’ speech of Martin Luther King (1963). These historical elements embody advances in thinking, ethical, and moral support for human rights.

During the last 500 years, this path progressively focused concern and respect on the protection, needs, and potentials of persons applied toward the construction and establishment of human rights. The English Bill of Rights (1689) and the United States Bill of Rights (1791) represent strong early explicit expressions of human rights—both gave primacy to protection from exploitation and abuse of power by government; for example, securing freedom of speech, privacy, independent judiciary, and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment. These successful national codifications of rights have been followed by further advances to assure entitlements and opportunities necessary for persons to live fully and to experience well-being or good quality of life (Hart & Pavlovic, 1991; Hart & Shriberg, 2014). Internationally, the broad support for the human rights of persons (emphasis on adults) was advanced particularly through the establishment of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948 (United Nations, 2012a). It has proved to be the foundation of moral imperatives for further advances in human rights (Hart, 2007) and is available in its entirety online (http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf). The Universal Declaration embodies a comprehensive, coherent, and holistic framework of principles and standards providing essential guidance toward respect for the dignity of persons. It is an ethical/moral document, not a legal instrument, but it has been reformulated into two legally binding United Nations multilateral treaties, namely the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (both adopted in1966 and entered into force in 1976). While these Covenants can be considered to be relevant for all persons, the majority of the language and references make clear that it was written primarily to apply to adult men and women.

The pathway leading directly to children's rights

Progress in promoting and formalizing the human rights of children had a clear international beginning in the adoption of the Geneva Declaration of the Rights of Child by the League of Nations in 1924 (United Nations, 2012b), which was reconfirmed in a broadened revision in 1959 adopted by the United Nations as the Declaration of the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 2012c). Both forms of the ‘Declaration’ are ethical, moral statements that include minimum requirements as well as aspirations for children and society. Neither is legally binding.

A review of these documents and their place in the larger historical context is instructive as to the nature of the evolving consideration of children’s issues and rights. Abuse appears as the first ‘rights’ area given strong attention for children. It was slowly and progressively taken seriously at official levels. In the 18th century concern about children having the misfortune to experience abuse in factories was added to already existing concern for children experiencing abuse in their homes. Some control to limit abuse in labor occurred at the beginning of the 19th century, while abuse in the home, not prohibited by laws, was approached by application of animal rights at the end of that century in the United States (Myers, 2006). It took more than another half century for national law and regulation to be applied to protect children from abuse. Interventions in this area are yet to approach sufficiency (Hart, Lee, & Wernham, 2011). Both Declarations deal with abuse though the League of Nations statement touches only on ‘exploitation’ in the context of earning a living and the later UN document prohibits ‘neglect, cruelty and exploitation’. Additionally, both Declarations give consideration to the following: Support for development; relief when in danger; non-discrimination due to race, nationality or religion; special help for those with disabilities; and preparation for contributions to the welfare of others. Going from the first to the second Declaration, attention to support for preparation to earn a living has been replaced by multiple prohibitions regarding conditions of employment; and attention has been added for numerous topics, including the following: Personal identity; education; support of affection, moral, and material security (particularly from within a family); play and recreation; development of tolerance and respect for others; and consideration of the child’s best interests. These Declarations set the stage for the most important milestone in children’s rights history, the establishment of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (also herein referred to as the Convention) was developed through a 10-year (1979–1989) process of consultation and negotiation among the nations of the world under the auspices of the United Nations at the prompting of the government of Poland. Impetus was provided by the unsatisfactory state of the world’s children and the potential but inadequacy of the existing Declarations on the Rights of the Child. The Convention was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1989 without dissent from any nation (see the Convention its entirety at http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx). It is a legally binding document, guided by but superior to previous declarations in its coverage of issues of relevance to children. The Convention is by far the most successful human rights treaty in history by virtue of the support for its adoption, the speed of entry into force (2 September 1990), and the number of nations which have become States parties (193 nations, as compared to 167 for the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and 160 for the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights). Arguably, it is humankind’s best to-date ‘human rights expression of enlightenment regarding the necessities, aspirations and dignity of human existence and fulfillment’ (Hart, & Shriberg, 2014).

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights included some elements generally applicable to adults and not children, which are absent in the Convention, such as freedom of movement in residence and country, marriage, property ownership, involvement in government, right to work, and duties to community. Future transformations in society will determine whether any of these or others should be added to the Convention. Some experts have argued that all rights of adults should be accorded to children (Farson, 1974; Holt, 1974). The Convention is a living document, meant to be applied fully now and to be upgraded as found necessary.

The Convention includes nearly all of the factors considered in the two cited Declarations on children’s rights, and much more. At the center of its coverage is the principle of the ‘best interests of the child’, which is expected to be ‘a’ primary consideration (rather than ‘the’ primary consideration) in all actions concerning children. This principle is probably best delineated in the Convention’s consistent promotion of five domains of child development: Physical, mental (i.e. psychological), social, spiritual, and moral; and in its expectations for the development and character of the child as set forth in its aims of education (to be further addressed in the next sections). In its comprehensive coverage of factors vital to a child’s rights and well-being, the Convention considers health, education, work, leisure, liberty, and freedom as well as individual, family, community, and societal contexts.

The Convention frames its principles and standards in 54 Articles, the first 41 addressing substantive rights and the last 13 addressing mechanisms and processes supportive of implementation. ‘The rights contained in the Convention represent officially recognized obligations to children—a bedrock of universal values to be applied to all children, in all sectors of life, by all persons, at all times’ (Hart & Shriberg, 2014). The detailed history of its drafting is available and illuminating (Detrick, Doek, & Cantwell, 1992). As the Convention is approached, it is important to know that drafters intended for all of its Articles to be given equal status in a holistic and synergistic fashion. Four of the Articles are considered general principles of basic relevance to the implementation of all other Articles. They focus on the child’s right to freedom from discrimination (Article 2), to have the child’s best interests considered in all decisions of relevance to him/her (Article 3), to life, survival, and development (Article 6), and to be listened to and taken seriously (Article 12).

Although the Convention is a legal document, the UN does not use legal action at the international level to assure compliance by ‘States parties’ (i.e. officially committed and obligated nations). Instead, a program of moral persuasion and encouragement exists to make information on status and progress broadly available, provide review and advice, and apply planning and technical assistance toward advances. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (hereinafter also referred to as the Committee), 18 experts elected by the States parties to the Convention, is responsible for international oversight of and encouragement toward Convention implementation (for current membership see: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/Convention/members.htm). States parties are required to provide reports of status and progress of implementation to the Committee every five years. These government reports and alternate reports by national civil society leaders and coalitions are reviewed by the Committee, related consultations are held, and the Committee provides guidance through these consultations and ‘Concluding Observations’ to the governments, which may include recommendations for technical assistance. States party reports and related Committee concluding observations may be found through links (www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/Convention/). Persons concerned about the status and needed advances for child rights in their countries have a variety of means for advocacy, including consultation with government officials and civil society interests which develop reports to the Committee.

The Committee has developed ‘General Comments’ (GCs) on many of the Articles and themes of the Convention to provide further guidance toward its successful implementation. Article 29, establishing the Convention’s aims of education, was selected by the Committee for the construction of its first GC. This underlines the significance given to education. There are presently 17 GCs (available at ww2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/Convention/comments.htm). Additionally, as an expression of the living document nature of the Convention, it is worthy of note that ‘optional protocols’ can be produced to supplement and augment the Convention’s coverage of any set of topics for which they are considered necessary. The two existing optional protocols in force for the Convention are concerned with (a) involvement of children in armed conflict (www2.ohchr.org/english/law/Convention-conflict.htm); and (b) sale of children, child prostitution, and child pornography (www2.ohchr.org/english/law/Convention-sale.htm).

Provisions of the Convention and their relevance for psychologists in schools

The entirety of the Convention is relevant to all psychologists who work with and for children throughout the world. Using North American and international level interest as examples, the relevance and the importance of the child rights, and the Convention specifically, have been strongly recognized in endorsements, commitments, and targeted activities by the psychology in general, through the American Psychological Association (APA), and by psychology in the schools, through the International School Psychology Association (ISPA), the National Association of School Psychologists (NASP), and APA’s Division 16. As examples, see APA’s Resolution on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention’s Optional Protocols (http://www.apa.org/about/policy/rights-child-2001.aspx); ISPA’s contribution to the International Year of the Child (1979) in producing the ‘Declaration of the Psychological Rights of the Child (Catterall, 1979, 1982) and fostering associated publications (Hart, 1982; Viewpoints in Teaching and Learning, 1982) and establishment of the primacy of rights in its Mission Statement (http://www.ispaweb.org/About%20ISPA/mission.aspx); USA’s NASP Position Statement on Child Rights (http://www.nasponline.org/about_nasp/positionpapers/ChildRights.pdf); and associated publications, such as child rights focused editions of the American Psychologist (1991, 46/1; 1996, 51/2), School Psychology International (2001, 20/2); and School Psychology Review (1991, 20/3).

There is good reason for psychology to embrace children’s rights and, in particular, the Convention. The Convention, as a whole, represents the positive ideology of the child, previously missing in the spirit and aims of virtually all the world’s societies (Hart, 1991). It provides the coherent and comprehensive orientation to children and to service in their best interests (and that of our societies) that is presently incomplete in the ethos, ethics and human development conceptualizations of psychology. A child rights orientation, based on the Convention, argues for service continuity and depth to chart and promote the well-being (now) and becoming (future) of the child in ways which will realize the child’s full holistic potentials, uniqueness, and possibilities for responsible life in a free society. As such, it respects not only what the child can do to meet the needs of others but the needs, potentials, aspirations and quality of life of the child. Nastasi & Naser (2014) clarify the need and educational opportunities for a child rights approach for school psychology ethics, professional standards, and training.

The particular importance of children’s rights to the school has been recognized and explored, and partial guidance toward operationalization has been provided (Bennett & Hart, 2001; Hammarberg, 1997; UNICEF & UNESCO, 2007). Applied within the school community, this positive holistic ideology of the Convention can significantly enhance the purposes, processes, and consequences of schooling. The major themes of the Convention, often labeled ‘survival, protection, development, and participation’, are all relevant to school life and purposes; as are the Convention’s General Principles (Article 2, non-discrimination; Article 3, best interests; Article 6, survival and development; Article 12, right to express views and be heard). For the fundamental right to non-discrimination (Article 2; i.e. fairness and equal opportunity), Shriberg and Poonam (2014) have set forth the strong social justice context of relationships and supports, and Garbarino and Briggs (2014) have suggested a creative and challenging design for achieving accountability. For the right to participation, to be listened to, and taken seriously in education, Lansdown, Jimerson, and Shahroozi (2014) provide illumination and guidance. Articles 28 and 29, which set forth the provision expectations and the aims of education, are the most direct in application to schools and can be meaningfully supported by psychologists in schools. These will be addressed in the next section.

Again, it is important to recognize that each substantive Article of the Convention has relevance for school life and its learning and development influences on the child, and all fall under the very broad umbrella of extant or potential service by psychology. For example, Articles 9 to 11 deal with possibilities and problems of a child being separated from his/her parents, which the school, through the help of a psychologist, might address by supporting effective use of alternative forms of communication, creating extended family structures within the school community, and/or providing individual and group counseling or therapy. Additionally, embedded within the Articles of the Convention but not given full Article status themselves, are some rights’ themes that deserve to be given strong attention by schools and their psychological services. As examples, the evolving capacities and the age and maturity of the child (see Articles 5 and 12) are identified as necessary mediating factors to be applied in guiding the child’s exercise of rights. Their relevance for education and psychology are self-evident. The holistic nature of the Convention, as recognized, and the pervasive, deep, and broad child development implications of schooling for child development and quality of life argue that all Articles of Convention are relevant to the work of psychologists in the schools. Here, a brief analysis will be provided for the Articles of particularly strong relevance.

Education-specific Articles 28 & 29

Article 29 is the Convention’s central and guiding statement of respect for the child’s potential and of commitment to assuring the child’s full and healthy development and functioning in ways serving the child and broader society. It expects education to promote the full development of the child in every area of physical and mental potential—of personality; to develop respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, for parents, for one’s own culture and the culture of others, and for the natural environment; and to prepare the child for a responsible life in a free society, emphasizing understanding, peace, and non-prejudicial discrimination. Power and Scott (2014) provide clarification and guidance regarding Article 29’s specific promotion of effective democratic citizenship. This Article embodies the elements of Piaget’s superordinate goal for education—autonomy—inferring full development of independence, social responsibility, and self-actualization (Kamii, 1984, 1991). As such, it also provides inherent support for development of the unique, authentic self—personality—of the child, identified by many great thinkers as central to meaning and purpose in life (Hart, 2010; Kierkegaard, 2004/1849). Article 29’s far-reaching aspirations, setting expectations beyond present conditions in any existing nation, demand at least minimum support for and from the other Articles of the Convention. In this sense, it is arguably the Convention’s clearest single statement of the best interests of the child (GC14 addresses the ‘Best Interests of the Child’). As previously noted, Article 29’s significance is further underlined by the fact that it was the first Article of the Convention to be selected by the Committee on the Rights of the Child for the development of a General Comment (http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(symbol)/CRC..GC.2001.1.En). The General Comment should be reviewed to acquire a full understanding of the meanings of the Article. For psychologists working in the schools, Article 29 provides the primary child development aspirational framework for their research, preparation, policy, practice and advocacy.

Article 28 presents some of the conditions necessary for the provision of education and recognizes that their demands may be so challenging to some nations that they will need to be achieved progressively. It covers expectations for primary, secondary, and higher education; indicating the primary education should be available and free to all, secondary education should exist in a variety of forms and be available and accessible to all (with encouragement for education to be feeless or with financial assistance), and that higher education should be accessible based on capacity. It is permissive in terms of who is required to provide education and in what settings it will be provided. With the exception of encouraging the provision of vocational information and guidance, it defers to Article 29 to identify the aims and curriculum for education. With the following two exceptions, it is permissive in terms of the conditions under which the child will be educated: It encourages regular attendance and requires that school discipline will respect the child’s human dignity and conform to the Convention. Article 28 provides psychologists working in the schools with opportunities to assist school and community forces to formulate alternative structures and forms of education to serve the developmental potentials of the child and needs of society, to justify and support full participation in school by the child, and to assure the child’s dignity will be respected in child management and disciplinary procedures.

Child development

Article 6 recognizes the child’s inherent right to life and right to be ensured of survival and development. States parties are given discretionary power to establish whether and/or when life begins before birth. The child’s survival and development are to be supported to the maximum extent possible. In the original UN Committee on the Rights of the Child Guidelines for Periodic Reports (United Nations, 1996), States parties are directed to apply the holistic spirit of the Convention in fulfilling Article 6: ‘to create an environment conducive to ensuring to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child, including physical, mental, spiritual, moral, psychological and social development, in a manner compatible with human dignity, and to prepare the child for an individual life in a free society’ (para. 40). Subsequent editions of the Guidelines for Periodic Reports (e.g. the most recent, United Nations, 2010) do not contradict this position or any other cited herein from the original edition. Article 27, dealing with the right to an adequate standard of living invokes the same list of development domains. Article 29, embodying the aims of education, promotes development goals.

The composite list from these Articles provides a set of universally recognized child development imperatives to be operationally defined and pursued by schools and their communities; GC7 addresses early child development. School psychology can contribute meaningfully in all these tasks, including promoting accountability (Garbarino & Briggs, 2014; Scherer & Hart, 2001), which can be particularly meaningfully framed in child well-being terms (Kosher, Jiang, Ben-Arieh, & Huebner, 2014).

Protection

Articles 19, 33, 34, 35, and 36 deal directly with child protection issues. Article 19 requires that the child be protected ‘from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse’ while in the care any person(s). The Article specifically expects educational measures to be among those applied to fulfill its standards. General Comment 13, ‘The right of the child to freedom from all forms of violence’, clarifies the meanings, implications, and applications of this Article, giving strong emphasis to primary prevention through promotion of health and well-being. School psychologists guiding school community child protection and maltreatment prevention programs can use its contents quite productively (see Fiorvanti & Brassard, 2014, for clarification and guidance). Its provisions are applicable to all forms of violence and maltreatment including those covered by other Convention Articles. Article 33 focuses on illicit use of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and requires that all appropriate measures, including educational, be taken to prevent use of children in the production and trafficking of such substances. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has specifically recognized the importance of schools in carrying out this mandate (United Nations, 1996). Schools are both environments in which drug trafficking and abuse occur and where related prevention and recovery strategies can be effectively applied. Article 34 requires protection from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse. The positioning of its standards as separate from rather than included solely within Article 19 gives added emphasis to concerns about the exploitive use of children in prostitution and pornography and reflects the existing heightened state of societal moral indignation applied to sexual maltreatment of children. Article 35 requires implementation of measures to prevent ‘abduction of, sale of, or traffic of children for any purpose or in any form’. It has been interpreted, more specifically, to include concern about trafficking related to child labor, adoption, sexual exploitation, organ transplants, and armed conflict (Hodgkin and Newell, 1998). Article 36 requires the child be protected ‘against all other forms of exploitation prejudicial to any aspects of the child’s welfare’. It is non-specific in regard to the types of exploitation deserving attention. It is considered to target ‘social’ exploitation, including exploitation of gifted children, exploitation of children by the media, and exploitation of children by medical or other scientific researchers.

Schools are interpersonal and institutional settings capable of intervening to prevent or reduce physical, psychological, and sexual maltreatment, including exploitation, occurring within or outside the school; and capable of assisting in reducing or overcoming the negative child development consequences of maltreatment. The potential for a child to mistreat himself/herself, such as through suicide attempts and substance abuse, endangers child survival and development, and has been so recognized in GC13. This possibility requires knowledge-based vigilance and intervention. Schools must meet a particularly high standard of preventing maltreatment within their parameters of responsibility because the children they are intended to serve, in most cases, have had their liberties constrained by virtue of being required to attend. School personnel are also capable of assisting to recognize incidents or patterns of exploitation and trafficking, and of applying preventive and corrective action to overcome the occurrence and effects of exploitation and trafficking through their influence on and monitoring of developmental progress, and through their potential for being trusted advocates and caring mentors of children.

Psychology can contribute significantly in many areas to the effectiveness of schools in dealing with child protection. Increasingly, research and expert opinion are identifying the psychological meanings, concomitants, and consequences of maltreatment as major and possibly the key factors of its perpetration, mediation, and impact. Sexual abuse appears to be primarily psychological in nature, the psychological abuse associates of physical abuse have been found to be better predictors of long term developmental impact than the severity of physical injury suffered, and psychological maltreatment appears to occur at higher levels of incidence and frequency and, with the exception of homicide, to have the longest lasting and most devastating impact of all forms of maltreatment (Hart et al., 2011; Hart & Glaser, 2011). Additionally, psychological maltreatment is considered the most frequent form of maltreatment experienced within school environments (Binggeli, Hart, & Brassard, 2001). The possibilities for psychologists to contribute expert knowledge on these topics and on the related developmental needs, vulnerabilities, processes, and potentials of the child places them in a strong position to be of assistance. This is particularly true because they, and the schools in which they work, are oriented toward promoting healthy development and well-being in ways that make maltreatment and its effects less likely.

Civil rights

Articles 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 all deal with civil rights and relate to the child’s participation in and influence on personal and community life in various ways. Article 12, respecting the views of the child, is one of the four Articles designated by the Committee on the Rights of the Child as a general principle (United Nations, 1991, 1996) because of its foundational and pervading significance to the Convention. It requires that any child capable of forming his or her own views shall have the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child and that these views are to be given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child. It goes on to emphasize that this right shall apply to relevant judicial and administrative proceedings. While Article 12 gives the child the right to be involved in decision-making though not the right to full self-determination, references to the evolving capacities of the child in Articles 5 and 14 have been interpreted to ‘emphasize the need to respect the child’s developing capacity for decision making’ (Hodgkin & Newell, 1998, p. 145). The execution of this right is moderated and mediated by the other civil rights of the Convention. Articles 13 and 17 both deal with issues of information availability and use. General Comment 12 brings enlightenment and guidance to Article 12’s intentions to respect and promote child participation, cooperation, consultation, and agency. Article 12’s general and specific relevance for school psychology have been championed by Lansdown, Jimerson, and Shahroozi (2014) and a well-developed guide to accountability to child participation, piloted in many nations, is available (Lansdown, 2011). Article 13, focused on the right to freedom of expression, adds to the meaning of Article 12 by underlining the right to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds and in all forms. Article 17 deals specifically with the right to access mass media information and material from a diverse national and international sources, especially those aimed at the promotion of social, spiritual, and moral well-being and physical and mental health. It also encourages development of guidelines to protect the child from information and material that might be injurious to well-being. Article 42 could be added to this set of civil rights. As the first of the administrative Articles of the Convention, it strikes an important point of emphasis in regard to the child’s right to access information by stating that efforts must be made to make ‘the principles and provisions of the Convention widely known, by appropriate and active means, to adults and children alike’. Article 14 requires respect for the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. This standard, which is included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is made specific to children in the Convention. It is foundational in establishing the right to move toward autonomy through constructing meaning and making decisions. The further importance of Article 14 has been affirmed by Garbarino’s (1999) conclusion that a child needs psychological, social, and spiritual anchors to assure healthy development and resiliency. Article 15 recognizes the rights of the child to freedom of association and peaceful assembly and has been interpreted by the Committee on the Rights of the Child to be particularly important to participation at the community level and to include opportunities to create and join associations. Article 16 establishes the child’s right to be protected from arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home, or correspondence, and from unlawful attacks on his or her reputation. The Committee on the Rights of the Child has interpreted this right to extend to children placed in institutions for treatment, care, or protection (see Hodgkin & Newell, 1998, for selected excerpts from statements of the Committee on the Rights of the Child).

The inter-relatedness and synergistic implications of these Articles are strong. Information of various types and formats, accessed from a variety of sources, including through association with individuals and groups of persons, provides context and opportunities to construct meaning, which supports values and perspectives, which deserve to be protected, expressed, heard and given weight, resulting in more information being available, and so on.

The Convention applies few qualifiers or limitations to exercise of these rights: Parents and other recognized child care persons have authority to provide appropriate direction and guidance in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child (Articles 5 & 14); the weight given to the child’s views is to be in accordance with the age and maturity of the child (Article 12); the exercise of freedom of expression is not to be in conflict with the rights or reputations of others (Article 13); the rights to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion and to freedom of association must respect the rights and freedoms of others (Articles 14 & 15), and these rights and the right to freedom of expression are to be limited only as necessary to protect public safety, order, health, morals or the freedoms of others (Articles 13 to 15).

The relevance of education and school for the exercise of these rights is recognized repeatedly in associated interpretations and commentary. These rights are essential to evolving capacities to live a satisfying life and function effectively in a free society (Sheldon, Elliot, Kim, & Kasser, 2001). Schools are expected to provide for and facilitate the processing, meaning construction, and application of information and associations in a wide variety of ways. The languages of the child, developmental and cultural, must be respected and expanded to support educational progress and meaningful participation. Values, moral and spiritual development are in various ways and to various degrees influenced by school experience, incidentally and intentionally; interpersonal competency and respect for others and their views and privacy can and should be promoted; critical thinking, problem solving, and choice making are recognized as goals of education; and all of these are essential to effective participation in peaceful conflict resolution and democratic practices. Children can be given opportunities in school to express their views and participate in choices about personal time and space, goals, processes, activities, relationships, environmental conditions, involvement in programs, and physical and mental health interventions. Participation can be fostered and activated through use of individual interviews, focus groups, interest groups, surveys, issue forums, and participatory governance. Psychology has much to offer across these areas.

Work

Article 32 recognizes the child’s right to be protected against economic exploitation, particularly in the forms of work that interfere with the child’s education or work that is hazardous or harmful to the ‘child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development’. This Article, which could have been included in the earlier section on ‘protection’, is primarily concerned with protecting children from work and limiting the conditions of their work. It gives specific attention to the minimum age(s) for employment, regulation of hours and conditions of employment, and to penalties or sanctions to ensure effective enforcement. Until very recently, major interest and advocacy groups have tended to promote the abolition of child labor, particularly its most dangerous forms, and efforts to progressively raise the minimum age for employment (see International Labor Organization Conventions No. 138 and No. 181). Education has been viewed as a necessary condition denied because of child labor, a mechanism to reduce child labor (especially when education is compulsory), and as a means to enhance economic opportunity for the child and society. Leading experts are now questioning the wisdom of completely abolishing child labor because they recognize that some children need to work if they or their families are to survive, that transitional steps combining employment and education may be necessary to make genuine progress, that work under some conditions can facilitate education and development, and that it might be fruitful to integrate education and work that is not dangerous or exploitive (Bourdillon, Levinson, Myers, & White, 2010 [http://www.studioschoolstrust.org]; Boyden, Ling, & Myers 1998; Bourdillon, Levinson, Myers, & White, 2010; Myers, 2001: http://www.studioschoolstrust.org). Meaningful work, work that promotes meeting basic human needs and child learning and development through the acquisition of competencies and contributor status in valued social groups, has also been promoted as a right of the child (Gil, 1991).

The nexus between and integration of work and education provides fertile ground for cooperation among education, psychology, children, families, and communities. Clarification of what ‘meaningful work’ is, its alternative forms, and the most effective integration and proper normative and individual balances to be sought in relationships between education and work all deserve attention.

Leisure, recreation, and culture

Article 31 recognizes the child’s right to rest, leisure, play, and recreational activities and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts. Rest, leisure, and play have significance for physical, psychological, and social development. Involvement in one’s family, ethnic, religious, and general societal culture helps to establish values, identity, belonging, opportunities to enhance self-esteem through applications of competencies and contributions to meaningful causes, and it can give direction to self-actualization. Schools contribute to the amount and quality of these experiences in and beyond the school environment. The Manual on Human Rights Reporting of 1997 (United Nations, 2012d) emphasizes that the right to play and recreation should be taken into account in the framework of education to promote development of the child’s abilities to their fullest potential.

Schools can help establish individual and collective patterns of human values and behaviors that will promote establishment of good practices for leisure, recreation, and cultural experiences throughout life. Psychological knowledge and interventions regarding developmental needs and potentials for sleep and rest, for play and creative activity, and for social involvement and identity can be applied beneficially to school and to educational policies and practices. There appears to be a particularly strong need for related applications of psychology during the present period of trends of reducing non-academic school offerings, increasing time spent in vicarious living through television viewing and computer use, increasing commercial exploitation of children, and deterioration of cultural traditions (see the Declaration of the Child’s Right to Play, International Association for the Child’s Right to Play; http://ipaworld.org/about-us/the-childs-right-to-play/). Related research suggests that leisure and, particularly, play may not be respected or supported well in schools (Hart, Pavlovic, & Zeidner, 2001). GC17 on Article 31 is now available (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/Convention/comments.htm).

Children with disabilities

Article 23 recognizes the rights of a child with physical and/or mental disabilities to enjoy a full and decent life, in conditions that ensure dignity, promote self-reliance and facilitate active participation in the community. The Article requires provision of special care for the child and of assistance to the child and those caring for the child, free of charge whenever possible. Effective access to and receipt of education, training, health care services, rehabilitation services, and preparation for employment and recreation opportunities are specifically identified as requirements of Article 23 to help achieve the fullest possible social integration and individual development. Encouragement is given for the exchange of information from the fields of preventive health and from medical, psychological, and functional treatment of disabled children. The relevant Guidelines for Periodic Reports of the Committee on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1996) have set expectations that children with disabilities are to be treated as rights bearing persons with dignity, that they will be included in programs with other children where appropriate, that their needs, services applied to them, and their progress will be subject to effective evaluation, and that their self-reliance will be promoted. The Committee on the Rights of the Child, in its examination of States parties’ reports on compliance with the Convention, has drawn particular concern to the practices of discrimination against children with disabilities, and has invoked Article 2, requiring that there is to be no discrimination applied to a child on the basis of the child’s disabilities or the disabilities of his parents or legal guardians (Hodgkin & Newell, 1998, p. 301).

Formal education has moved progressively from policies and practices of exclusion or separation of children with disabilities, to inclusive integration according to a ‘least restrictive environment’ standard. The history of progress in these areas and the application of child rights toward improvements have been described by experts (e.g. Saleh, 1999). Psychology in the schools has a long history of providing education and services to children with disabilities directly and indirectly through school staff, programs and systems, and through parents and community agencies. Article 23 provides further support for presently existing trends in schools to treat children with disabilities as persons with dignity. UNICEF’s Innocenti Research Center Digest 13 is dedicated to ‘promoting the rights of children with disabilities’ (http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/documents/children_disability_rights.pdf). A General Comment (GC9) on ‘the rights of children with disabilities’ (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/comments.htm), a UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and an optional protocol and a ‘Handbook for Parliamentarians’ exist to provide further guidance in this area (http://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/toolaction/ipuhb.pdfsiArlid).

Health and rehabilitation

Articles 24, 25, and 39 deal with issues of health and rehabilitation. Article 24, as the primary health Article of the Convention, ‘recognizes the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and facilities for treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health’. While it refers directly only to physical health conditions throughout it subsections, the holistic nature and mediating influences of other Articles (e.g. Article 25) of the Convention and the history of primary health care imperatives upon which this Article rests, justify the conclusion that mental health is to be included (see, as examples, the World Health Organization’s Preamble to its Constitution, 1948, and the Alma Ata Declaration from the 1978 International Conference on Primary Health Care which define health as ‘ a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity’). Article 24 covers health promotion as well as disease prevention and correction, and admits full realization of its standards will have to be achieved progressively. Article 25 requires physical or mental health treatment of the child to be subject to periodic review of all relevant circumstances. Article 39 requires that all appropriate measures be taken ‘to promote physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of a child victim from numerous conditions: Any form of neglect, exploitation, or abuse; torture or any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; or armed conflicts’ and that such efforts ‘shall take place in an environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the child’. Three General Comments of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child deal with health issues: HIV-AIDS (GC3), adolescent health (GC4), and GC15, titled ‘the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest available standard of health’ recently developed for Article 24 and available for review (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/comments.htm).

A wide breadth of issues are embedded in these Articles that do and can benefit from application of the knowledge bases and practices of psychology and education such as: Breast feeding, child immunization, nutrition, hygiene, accidents, HIV/AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, and traditional practices including genital mutilation and early marriage (many of these have been specifically cited in the Committee on the Rights of the Child Guidelines for Periodic Reports, see United Nations, 1996). Effective provision of mental health promotion and therapeutic services, within and beyond the school environment, can benefit from the integration and deliberate application of psychological and educational services in the schools. The schools, with the help of psychologists, have long recognized, though not always effectively applied, periodic reviews of services to children with special needs, embodying processes susceptible to application to a wider range of health conditions. Two additional themes relative to health and rehabilitation needs and services have particular developmental significance and implications for psychology: The views of the child and the child’s progressive movement toward autonomy. Psychology in the schools can contribute to the development and application of the child’s capacities and rights to give or deny informed consent for health treatment in and beyond school. Psychology in the schools can also contribute to the child’s education and capacity to promote his/her own physical and mental fitness and to be a consumer of health services who works as a partner and ultimate decision maker with health specialists providing service to the child (see the relevance of Article 12 above and see the ‘prospective human development model’ described in the last section of this Article).

Parental support and guidance

Article 5 states that respect shall be given to the responsibilities, rights, and duties of parents and/or other persons in legitimate child-care roles to provide appropriate direction and guidance in the child’s exercising of the rights in the Convention. Direction and guidance are to be provided in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child. This Article underlines the Convention’s consistent support for respecting parents as the persons primarily responsible for providing for and guiding the development of their children. The Convention mentions family 16 times, parents 33 times, and gives attention to one or both in 19 of its 41 substantive rights Articles. Parents are the first educators of their children. In situations where good partnerships of mutual respect and teamwork are developed between school personnel and parents, the child’s development and rights can be more effectively supported. Both schools and parents can profit from the knowledge and service of psychology to achieve these good working relationships and to understand and respect the evolving capacities of the child. Miller, Colebrook, and Ellis (2014) set forth essential information and guidance for partnerships among school psychologists, parents and families.

A new social contract for school psychology

Advances in the conceptualization and institutionalization of children’s rights provide impetus for school psychology to formulate and offer a new social contract to those it serves. The contract can include ‘attention to children suspected or found to have disabilities’. ‘But it should go well beyond this with intent to serve each and every child through direct and indirect services, including systems change and capacity building, to design and implement interventions promoting full health and development as well as preventing and correcting problems’ (Hart, 2007, p. 536). The contract should be ‘framed to give high respect and expectations to partnerships between school psychologists and teachers, parents, community leaders and children’ (Hart, 2007, p. 536). The Convention’s aims for education have a natural position at the heart of the proposed social contract, which would be both independent of and have reach beyond school buildings, education organizational structure, traditional service delivery methods and systems, and narrowly framed purposes for development.

Full development of the child as the central focus of the social contract

The Convention requires and many school communities endorse the full healthy holistic development of the child as a major goal of education. School psychologists should be involved in all major aspects of dealing with this goal through establishing meaning, research, and interventions, including measurement and evaluation for accountability.

Full development of the child is very serious business. History informs us that human beings have proven themselves capable of doing nearly everything they have imagined, for good and for evil (Hart, 2010). Full development of the child is a core purpose of the story of life to which school psychology contributes (DeLors, 1999; Hart, 2007). Presently, there is no widely agreed on set of standards or definitions for operationalizing the full development of the child—with the exception of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. School psychology and the school community should extend their focus beyond verbal and quantitative cognitive development and resist recent narrowing to support basic language skills and mathematics and science capacities. The Convention can be a guide to much broader and deeper development through its championing of personality and the physical, mental, social, spiritual, and moral domains (Articles 17, 27, 29, & 32); and achievement and protection of well-being, i.e. flourishing (Preamble; Articles 3, 9, 17, & 40). Justification and a great opportunity exist for school psychologists to assume leadership to inform and guide processes within the school community to achieve understanding and appreciation for a set of developmental domains and goals deserving shared commitment, promotion, and accountability for advances.

School psychology will be wise to incorporate the above-cited domains of the Convention in this endeavor, in the best interests of the child and society. In doing this, particular emphasis might be given to establishing development of personality as the primary psychological construct that embodies most of the valued elements. Under the ‘personality’ umbrella, targeted attention can be given to authentic self and the quintessential human characteristic, existential choice (Hart, 2010, Kierkegaard, 2004/1849); socially responsible autonomy, Piaget’s primary goal for education (Hart, 1991; Kamii, 1991); and to both moral and performance character development, the latter dimension (i.e. grit, self-control, zest, social intelligence, gratitude, optimism, curiosity) found to be at least as important as academic capacities for life success (Tough, 2012). All of these can be derived from and/or are consistent with the Convention’s aspirations.

Full development of children should be nurtured in a manner that respects the unique qualities and potentials of the child and goals of the culture. Toward these ends, school psychology can facilitate many concrete strategies within the school community, such as: Mapping and priority setting for the Convention’s well-being and development components; establishing teamwork among parents, educators and children to promote the child’s full development; framing and acquiring support for the child’ progressive ascendance toward primary stewardship of his/her development; providing oversight programs to identify, promote, and assure respect for the child’s unique pattern of talents and potentials—his/her authentic self; assisting the school community in achieving responsible transformations toward optimum use of technology in framing, tracking and assuring continuous long term support to achieve individual education plans for all children.

A prospective human development model to frame the social contract

A ‘prospective human development model’ offers a promising way to realize the new social contract. It is recommended for application by school psychology in service of the child. Rooted in the prospective medicine movement (Robbins & Hall, 1970; Snyderman & Williams, 2003; Strohecker, 2011), this model is framed to secure and promote ‘healthy and full quality of life, respecting human rights, needs and potentials, … pursued in partnership with the child, encouraging the child to progressively assume the lead through eliciting and applying the child’s evolving executive powers’ (Hart & Glaser, 2011, p. 765). Its application might best be organized in a way that enlists school psychologists as consulting detectives, coaches, educators, and facilitators across the full developmental period of the child to help the child determine, through application of his/her psychological affordances, what course of action should be taken to avoid distortion and corruption and to reach his/her goals for full health and well-being. Under such conditions the school psychologist will serve the best interests of the child and society, short and long term, and become an agent of the child, his/her family, the school, and larger school community. This model embodies the promise to positively transform the roles, strategies, and practices of school psychology toward pro-active and respectful support for the best possibilities for children. As examples: The RTI (response to intervention) ‘multi-tier approach to the early identification and support of students with learning and behavior needs’ for struggling learners would become focused on all children in support of their learning possibilities and desires (see http://www.rtinetwork.org), and the IEP (individualized education plan; http://www.ncld.org/students-disabilities/iep-504-plan/what-is-iep) formulated and employed to systematically guide development of children with disabilities would become the IDP (individual development plan) to guide and promote each child’s full holistic development across infancy, childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. The prospective human development model is feasible and should serve well under conditions of dramatic change in the configurations of schooling.

Conclusions and implications for school psychologists

School psychology and children’s rights have great potential, far from being realized, to serve the best interests of children, their communities, and societies. Most of the nations of the world have assumed obligations to respect the integrity, dignity, and rights of the child through commitment to the UN Convention (treaty) on the Rights of the Child. The Convention embodies the ‘positive ideology’ of the child that has been sorely needed throughout the world to guide related care, treatment, and aspirations. The Convention’s goals will not be adequately achieved solely through government, law, and regulation –– they must become the lived reality of children. The good intentions of school psychology have been limited in purpose, strategy, and application by the field’s lack of a coherent, pervading, deep, and broad conceptualization of children. The human rights of children and the proactive promotion of well-being for the children they champion provide natural and powerful central themes for school psychology, now and particularly in its potential future embodied in a new social contract of enlightened and expanded service. The full potential of the nexus between child rights and school psychology should be forged and achieved to serve children, their communities and societies. The school community should become the model for the application of human rights to achieve the well-being of children in their lived reality. School psychologists can and should provide the critically needed leadership to achieve this goal.

Footnotes

Stuart N. Hart, PhD, is Deputy Director of the International Institute for Child Rights and Development, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, an affiliate of Royal Roads University, and Professor Emeritus, School of Education, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. He is a licensed psychologist, health provider status in Indiana, and a Fellow of the American Psychological Association who has worked in higher education, public and private schools, children’s hospital, correctional institutions, government, and private practice. He has been president of the International School Psychology Association, the National Association of School Psychologists (USA), National Committee for the Rights of the Child (USA), Indiana Psychological Association, and Division of School Psychology of the Indiana Psychological Association. He codirects Child Rights Education for Professionals () and co-chaired the drafting committee for the development of the General Comment 13 ‘The Right of the Child to Freedom from all forms of Violence’ in service to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. He has conducted research, presented, and published extensively on psychological maltreatment of children and children’s rights.

Brannon W. Hart, MS, MEd, is a current doctoral student in school psychology at Indiana State University, Terre Haute, Indiana. Previously he was a behavior therapist for students with autism in Washington DC and Indianapolis, Indiana. He earned a master’s degree in counseling and counselor education at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis in 2009 and a master’s degree is school psychology from Indiana State University in 2013.

References

Bennett

Hart

S. N.

(2001) Respectful school communities. In: Hart

S. N.

Cohen

C. P.

Erickson

M. F.

Flekkoy

(eds) Children’s rights in education, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp. 191–216.

Binggeli

N. J.

Hart

S. N.

Brassard

M. R.

(2001) Psychological maltreatment of children. The APSAC study guides 4, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bourdillon

Levison

Myers

White

(2010) Rights and wrongs of children’s work, New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Boyden

Ling

Myers

(1998) What works for working children, Florence: Innocenti Research Center for Radda Barnen & UNICEF.

Catterall

C. C.

(1979) Defining and promoting children’s psychological rights. School Psychology International 1(1): 6–7; 32.

Catterall

C. D.

(1982) Formulation of the Declaration of the Psychological Rights of the Child. Viewpoints in Teaching and Learning 58(1): 16–22.

DeLors, J. (1999). Education: The treasure within: Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the 21st Century. Paris: UNESCO.

Detrick, S., Doek, J., & Cantwell, N. (1992). The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: A guide to the ‘Travaux Prepatoires’. Dordrecht: Martinus Nujhoff.

Farson

(1974) Birthrights, New York, NY: Penguin.

10.

Fiorvanti

Brassard

M. R.

(2014) Advancing child Protection through respecting children's rights. School Psychology Review.

11.

Garbarino

(1999) Lost boys: Why our sons turn violent and how we can save them, New York, NY: Free Press.

12.

Garbarino

Briggs

(2014) An approach to assessing ‘accountability’ in implementing the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. School Psychology International 35(1): 29–35.

13.

Gil

D. G.

(1991) Children and work: Rights to become creative and productive. School Psychology Review 20(3): 389–400.

14.

Hammarberg

(1997) A school for children with rights, Florence: UNICEF.

15.

Hart

S. N.

(1982) The history of children’s psychological rights. Viewpoints in Teaching and Learning 58(1): 1–15.

16.

Hart

S. N.

(1991) From property to person status: Historical perspective on children’s rights. American Psychologist 46(1): 53–59.

17.

Hart

S. N.

(2007) The Handbook of International School Psychology: A review with implications for the profession’s future. School Psychology International 28(5): 523–539.

18.

Hart

S. N.

(2010) Be true to thyself. In: Bennett

Susan

Pare

Mona

(eds) 20th anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 3rd ed. Ottawa: University of Ottawa, pp. 34–39.

19.

Hart

S. N.

Brassard

M. R.

Davidson

H. A.

Rivelis

Diaz

Binggeli

(2011) Psychological maltreatment. In: Myers

J. E. B.

(eds) The APSAC handbook on child maltreatment, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 125–144.

20.

Hart

S. N.

Glaser

(2011) Psychological maltreatment –– maltreatment of the mind: A catalyst for advancing child protection toward proactive primary prevention and promotion of personal well-being. Child Abuse and Neglect 35: 758–766.

21.

Hart

S. N.

Lee

Wernham

(2011) A new age for child protection –– general comment 13: Why it is important, how it was constructed, and what it intends? Child Abuse and Neglect 35: 970–978.

22.

Hart

S. N.

Pavlovic

(1991) Children’s rights in education: An historical perspective. School Psychology Review 20(3): 345–358.

23.

Hart

S. N.

Pavlovic

Zeidner

(2001) ISPA cross-national children’s rights research project. School Psychology International 22(2): 99–129.

24.

Hart, S. N., & Shriberg, D. (2014). Human rights and social justice for children. In B. K. Nastasi, Z. Franco, & C. Johnson (Eds.), Praeger Handbook of Social Justice and Psychology: Volume 3. Youth and Disciplines in Psychology. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO/Praeger.

25.

Hodgkin

Newell

(1998) Implementation handbook for the Convention on the Rights of the Child, New York, NY: UNICEF.

26.

Holt

(1974) Escape from childhood, New York, NY: E. P. Dutton.

27.

IIRCD (Institute for Child Rights and Development). (2002). Report for the 2nd international conference on children’s rights in education. Victoria: Author.

28.

Kamii

(1984, February) Autonomy: The aim of education envisioned by Piaget. Phi Delta Kappan410–415.

29.

Kamii

(1991) Toward autonomy: The importance of critical thinking and choice making. School Psychology Review 20(3): 382–388.

30.

Kierkegaard

(2004/1849) A sickness unto death: A Christian psychological exposition for edification and awakening by Anti-Climacus, London: Penguin.

31.

Kosher

Jiang

Ben-Arieh

Huebner

(2014) Advances in children’s rights and well-being in schools: Implications for school psychologists. School Psychology Quarterly.

32.

Lansdown

(2011) A framework for monitoring and evaluating children’s participation, London: Author.

33.

Lansdown

Jimerson

Shahroozi

(2014) Children's rights and school psychology: Children's right to participation. Journal of School Psychology.

34.

Lewis

J. E.

(2003) A documentary history of human rights: A record of the events, documents and speeches that shaped our world, New York, NY: Carroll and Graf Publishers.

35.

Miller

Colebrook

Ellis

(2014) Advocating for the rights of the child through family-school collaboration. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation.

36.

Myers

J. E. B.

(2006) Child protection in America: Past, present and future, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

37.

Myers, W. (2001). Appreciating diverse approaches to child labor. Retrieved from www.childrightseducation.org (Issues Forum Section).

38.

Nastasi

Naser

(2014) Child rights as a framework for advancing professional standards for practice, ethics, and professional development in school psychology. School Psychology International 35(1): 36–49.

39.

Power

F. C.

Scott

(2014) Democratic citizenship: Responsible life in a free society. School Psychology International 35(1): 50–66.

40.

Robbins

Hall

(1970) How to practice prospective medicine, Indianapolis, IN: Methodist Hospital of Indiana.

41.

Saleh

(1999) The rights of children with special needs: From rights to obligations and responsibilities. Prospects XXIX(2): 203–216.

42.

Scherer

L. P.

Hart

S. N.

(2001) Reporting on the status of education to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. In: Hart

S. N.

Cohen

C. P.

Erickson

M. F.

Flekkoy

(eds) Children’s rights in Education, London: Jessica Kingsley, pp. 79–97.

43.

Sheldon

K. M.

Elliot

A. J.

Kim

Kasser

(2001) What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80(2): 325–339.

44.

Shriberg

Desai

(2014) Bridging social justice and children's rights to enhance school psychology policy and practice. Psychology in the Schools.

45.

Snyderman

Williams

R. S.

(2003) Prospective medicine: The next health care transformation. Academic Medicine 11: 1079–1084.

46.

Strohecker, J. (2011). Wellness inventory: A brief history of wellness. Retrieved from http://www.mywellnesstest.com/certResFile/BriefHistoryofWellness.pdf.

47.

Tough

(2012) How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character, New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

48.

UNICEF and UNESCO (2007) A human rights based approach to education for all, New York, NY and Paris: Authors.

49.

United Nations (1991). Convention on the Rights of the Child, Committee on the Rights of the Child: General guidelines regarding the form and content of Initial Reports to be submitted by States Parties under Article 44, Paragraph 1 (a) of the Convention, Convention/C/5, adopted on October 1991.

50.

United Nations (1996). Convention on the Rights of the Child, Committee on the Rights of the Child: General guidelines regarding the form and contents of periodic reports to be submitted by States Parties under Article 44, Paragraph 1 (b) of the Convention, Convention/C/58, adopted on 20 November 1996.

51.

United Nations (2010). Treaty-specific guidelines regarding the form and content of periodic reports to be submitted by States parties under Article 44, paragraph 1 (b), of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. CRC/C/58/Rev 2, adopted on 23 November 2010.

52.

United Nations (2012). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/.

53.

United Nations (2012b). Geneva Declaration of the Rights of the Child. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://www.un-documents.net/gdrc1924.htm.

54.

United Nations (2012c). Declaration of the Rights of the Child. Retrieved fromhttp://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/humanrights/resources/child.asp.

55.

United Nations (2012d). The manual of human rights reporting. Retrieved December 8, 2012, from http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/manualhrren.pdf.

56.

United Nations General Assembly (1989) Adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, New York, NY: Author.

57.

Viewpoints in Teaching and Learning (1982) Special edition on the psychological rights of the child 58: 1–1.