Who holds the key to child welfare paramountcy?
A critical analysis of the ‘triangular rights’ decision-making paradigm: child, parent, and state
The triadic, rights-based relationship between child, parent, and state has sparked much socio-legal debate. Judicial rights-balancing exercises have contributed to the shaping of the law and policy frameworks that support child and parental rights but have also influenced sociological understandings of the concepts of parenthood, childhood, and best interests. There is a need however for greater clarity in relation to the meaning and scope of the child welfare paramountcy principle and the remit of parental responsibility: within the UK for example, the Gillick principle - and certain provisions of the Children’s Convention - still draw criticism. This paper seeks to reassess the triadic relationship (child, parent, state) via a ‘keyholder model’ to illustrate its workings and tensions.
Copyright (c) 2020 AMBER POTTS
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License that allows others to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of works in this journal, or to use them for any other lawful purpose in accordance with the licence.