Thursday, November 10, 2016
|
|
9.30 – 10.00
|
Gottfried Schweiger (ZEA, Salzburg): Introduction & Welcome
|
10.00 – 11.15
|
Sridhar Venkatapuram(MSc in Global Health & Social Justice,
London):
How can a right to public/global health
do justice to children?
|
11.15 – 11.30
|
Coffee break
|
11.30 – 12.45
|
Sarah Lázare & Jordi Vallverdú (Universitat
Autònoma of Barcelona): The Hidden
Health Attacks Against Children: The New Debate on Obstetric Violence
|
12.45 – 13.00
|
Coffee break
|
13.00 – 14.15
|
Mar Cabezas (ZEA, Salzburg): Child health and the drip of minor interfamily violence: some conceptual,
ethical, and political challenges.
|
14.15 – 15.30
|
Lunch
|
15.30 – 16.45
|
Garrath Williams (Lancaster University): Children’s health and corporate power(lessness)
|
16.45 – 17.00
|
Coffee Break
|
17.00 – 18.15
|
Gunter Graf (ZEA, Salzburg): Healthy eating between obesity and eating disorders: an ethical
perspective on children and youth
|
20.00
|
Dinner
|
Friday, November 11, 2016
|
|
09.30 – 10.45
|
Elena Syurina (Maastricht University): Potential use of biological stress
measurements for Paediatric public health. Ethical aspects.
|
10.45 – 11.00
|
Coffee Break
|
11.00 – 12.15
|
Eduardo Osuna (CEBES, University of Murcia): Autonomy, Health, and Children as
Vulnerable Patients
|
12.15 – 12.30
|
Coffee break
|
12.30 – 13.45
|
Ana Marcos (UNED, Madrid): Rights of Children and Adolescents from Mental Health
|
13.45
|
Closure- Lunch
|
Ethics and Child Public Health, 10 &11 November 2016
Montag, 24. Oktober 2016
Schedule Ethics and Child Public Health
Donnerstag, 20. Oktober 2016
Ethics and Child Public Health - Madrid 2016
The Center for Ethics and Poverty Research (Salzburg) alongside the Philosophy Institute (CSIC) are glad to have the chance to meet again in Madrid at our second joined workshop. This time we will be discussing on several issues and challenges concerning public health and justice for children on the 10th and 11th of November.
Freitag, 27. November 2015
Montag, 16. November 2015
CfP: Workshop on Political Philosophy and Child Poverty
University of Salzburg, August 24, 2016
There is no registration fee for the workshop but if you want to stay for the main conference on August 25 & 26, 2016, you need to register for it!
Please send your proposal (500 words) to gunter.graf@sbg.ac.at until January 31, 2016. Every speaker will have 25 minutes for presentation followed by 20 minutes for discussion.
This workshop is organized by the Salzburg research group on “Social Justice and Child Poverty”, funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P26480.
More information here: www.uni-salzburg.at/zea/childpoverty
Keynote Speakers: Mario Biggeri (Florence) & Lucinda Platt (LSE)
The aim of this conference is threefold: (1) to discuss how different crises (like the recent economic downturn, political instability, natural disasters or (civil) war) affect child poverty; (2) to reveal the consequences such crises have on children living in poverty and their families as well as to show how they respond; and, finally, (3) to provide suggestions for international, national and local policy designs for the reaction to such crises. We are interested in bringing together empirical and theoretical papers and in discussing the normative and ethical issues attached to child poverty and related policy making.
The conference fee is 150 Euros (75 Euros for students) and covers the conference folder, coffee breaks, two lunches, the reception on Thursday evening, the conference dinner on Friday and a guided city tour.
Organised by the Centre for Ethics and Poverty Research (University of Salzburg) and the Austrian chapter of Academics Stand Against Poverty (ASAP).
Pre-conference Workshop “Child Poverty in Times of Crisis”
The aim of this workshop is to explore child poverty
from a political philosophical perspective. Despite an increase of the
political philosophical literature on poverty, especially
poverty in the global South, the particular
form of child poverty has not gained much attention. Topics include
child poverty as a problem of social and global justice, parental rights
and duties under the circumstances of poverty, the rights of children
living in poverty or responsibilities of different
agents of justice towards children in poverty.
Invited speakers for the workshop:
There is no registration fee for the workshop but if you want to stay for the main conference on August 25 & 26, 2016, you need to register for it!
Please send your proposal (500 words) to gunter.graf@sbg.ac.at until January 31, 2016. Every speaker will have 25 minutes for presentation followed by 20 minutes for discussion.
This workshop is organized by the Salzburg research group on “Social Justice and Child Poverty”, funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P26480.
More information here: www.uni-salzburg.at/zea/childpoverty
About the Conference “Child Poverty in Times of Crisis”
Keynote Speakers: Mario Biggeri (Florence) & Lucinda Platt (LSE)
The aim of this conference is threefold: (1) to discuss how different crises (like the recent economic downturn, political instability, natural disasters or (civil) war) affect child poverty; (2) to reveal the consequences such crises have on children living in poverty and their families as well as to show how they respond; and, finally, (3) to provide suggestions for international, national and local policy designs for the reaction to such crises. We are interested in bringing together empirical and theoretical papers and in discussing the normative and ethical issues attached to child poverty and related policy making.
The conference fee is 150 Euros (75 Euros for students) and covers the conference folder, coffee breaks, two lunches, the reception on Thursday evening, the conference dinner on Friday and a guided city tour.
Organised by the Centre for Ethics and Poverty Research (University of Salzburg) and the Austrian chapter of Academics Stand Against Poverty (ASAP).
Conference homepage: www.uni-salzburg.at/childpoverty2016
Dienstag, 15. September 2015
Child Health and Justice
Child Health and Justice
Research Workshop, October 15 & 16,
2015
Funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF):
P26480
In
cooperation with the JuriLog Group of the
Institute for Philosophy of the Spanish
National Research Council (CSIC)
Project KONTUZ!-2 (MINECO FFI2014-53926-R)
Thursday, October 15, 2015
|
|
9.30 – 10.00
|
Txetxu Ausín and Gottfried Schweiger: Introduction & Welcome
|
10.00 – 11.15
|
|
11.15 – 11.30
|
Coffee break
|
11.30 – 12.45
|
Sridhar Venkatapuram: Health Equity among Children, and the Case of Vaccinations
|
12.45 – 13.00
|
Coffee break
|
13.00 – 14.15
|
Bill Gardner: Children´s
Differential Susceptibility to Treatments: Implications for Justice
|
14.15 – 15.30
|
Lunch
|
15.30 – 16.45
|
Rosana Triviño: Girls sexuality, reprodcutive health, and rights
|
16.45 – 17.00
|
Coffee Break
|
17.00 – 18.15
|
Carlos Pitillas: Psychological
Effects of Extreme Poverty in Immigrant Children in the Settlement “El
Gallinero” (Madrid)
|
20.00
|
Dinner
|
Friday, October 16, 2015
|
|
09.30 – 10.45
|
Sepideh Yousefzadeh: Child Growth Monitoring: What lies Beneath the Weights and Height?
|
10.45 – 11.00
|
Coffee Break
|
11.00 – 12.15
|
Gunter Graf and Mar Cabezas: Children´s Bodily Integrity, Poverty and Obesity
|
12.15 – 12.30
|
Coffee break
|
12.30 – 13.30
|
Round table: Networking on research and
policy making on childhood and poverty: Gabriel González-Bueno (Unicef), Txetxu Ausin (ASAP)
and Gottfried Schweiger (ZEA)
|
13.30
|
Closure- Lunch
|
Dienstag, 1. September 2015
Extended Deadline Call for Papers
Child Health and
Justice
Call
for Papers for a Special Issue of Dilemata. Journal of Applied ethics
Guest editors: Mar Cabezas & Gottfried
Schweiger (University of Salzburg)
Justice for children and during
childhood and the particular political, social and moral status of children has
long been a neglected issue in ethics, social and political philosophy. The
application of general, adult-oriented theories of justice to children can be
regarded as particularly problematic. Philosophers have only recently begun to
explore what it means to consider children as equals, what goods are especially
valuable to them, and what are the obligations of justice different agents have
towards children.
This special issue aims especially
to combine different disciplinary perspectives and to explore how they can
contribute to a better understanding of the normative foundations that are
needed to improve –both, physical and mental- health during childhood in
general and especially for disadvantaged children.
Interdisciplinary research and
contributions from other disciplines (e.g. public health, economics, psychology,
sociology, law, or education studies) are welcome as long as they also have a clear
connection to the normative questions at hand.
The goal of this Special Issue is to
bring together papers to discuss the following areas of concern:
-The
intersection of health and poverty during childhood and its effects on the
future life course. It is well-studied that health is to a large part
socially determined and that the socio-economic position influences heavily the
health status of both children and adults. Childhood poverty translates into
health problems during childhood as well as in later life. This poses a wide
range of ethical and justice-related problems that are still underexplored. For
example the conviction that health is to large part a life-style choice is
highly problematic for children and also for adults given the knowledge about
the pathways from childhood to adult health. Theories that want to clarify what
we owe each other as a matter of justice have to consider this knowledge more
carefully.
-Conceptualizations
of health of children, especially also the interrelation of such concepts as
mental health and (subjective) well-being. There is still no consensus how
health should be defined and what concepts of it are better fit to guide policy
and action. It has also been seldom questioned if health can or should be
differently defined for adults and children. Furthermore most defini6tions of
health focus still on physical health while mental and emotional health is
still widely undervalued. Childhood is a critical phase both for physical and
mental health and the development for such crucial features as self-confidence
and self-trust.
-The distribution and application of responsibilities to ensure health
during childhood.
If health is not an innate feature of children but to a large extent shaped by
the environment, the social position and the actions of other persons and
institutions, than this implies that different agents can and should be
distinguished that share a certain amount of responsibility in respect to
children’s health. In most discourses two agents are highlighted, namely the
parents and the state and its health care institutions. But besides them other
important agents are involved, for example the food industry or pharmaceutical
companies.
-The access to health as a matter of children’s rights. Children’s rights and also the
right of health have been widely discussed, in particular in the context of the
Declaration of the Rights of the Child. How can such a right be justified and
is there a relation between children’s rights and justice for children in that
respect? Does the framework of (universal) children’s rights offer a fit
framework to guide health policies aimed at children? Also, the relationship
between children’s rights to health and parental rights has to be discussed.
Submission and Schedule
* If you are interested in
submitting a paper, please, send us first an abstract with your proposal.
Abstracts should be no longer than 300 words. The deadline for submitting your
abstract is 20th September 2015.
* Once your abstract is selected,
you could prepare your manuscript according to the following guidelines:
-Accepted languages: English and Spanish.
-Article length: 6000-7000 words.
-Text format: singled-space; 12 point font; underlining should be avoided
(italic is preferred, with the exception of URL addresses); pictures, figures
and tables should be inserted within the text rather than at the end of the
document.
-All manuscripts must be submitted
in electronic format by e-mail. They are to be prepared for anonymous review
and sent as e-mail attachments (.doc, .docx, or .rtf files) to Mar Cabezas (maria.cabezas@sbg.ac.at).
-The deadline for submissions is January 25th 2016 and the
Special Issue will be published in May 2016.
-Heading: Title
of article, name of author, work center, university of origin, etc. Postal
address and email address. Abstract of the article, with a maximum of 150 words
in Spanish and English (for papers written in Spanish). Keywords of the
contents of the article in Spanish and English (for papers written in Spanish).
-Bibliography:
at the end of the work in alphabetical order. Only include publications that
have been used and are cited specifically in the text. Based on the ISO
690:1987, take the following form: surname of author, author's name (both in
lowercase letters), year of publication in parentheses, colon, book title in
lowercase italics, place of publishing and editorial.
-References:
The text of the article references to other works will be made indicating the
author's surname and year of publication (an, if it is the case, the exact page
where the quote is a paraphrase), separated by a comma, in parentheses
(Gewirth, 2003, 20). If a reference contains a number of authors, cited one
after the other separated by a semicolon. If you include several works by the same
author published in the same year, distinguish them with letters (Gewirth,
2003a, 2003b).
The quotations should be in inverted
commas, noting in parentheses below —no-footer— the author's surname, year of
publication and page (Toulmin, 1999, 545-546). If the appointment is longer
than five lines will be presented in the form of bleeding.
-Footnotes: The
text notes and calls are numbered in succession and are situated below.
-Tables and graphs should be accompanied by its corresponding title
and legend and numbered sequentially. The graphics may be submitted computer
generated. Photographs may be in electronic form.
DILEMATA is
a peer-reviewed quarterly e-journal centered on what is known today as
'practical ethics', 'ethics in action', or 'philosophy and public affairs' by
the Institute of Philosophy at the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC).
More information about Dilemata
can be found here: http://www.dilemata.net/revista/index.php/dilemata/about
Mittwoch, 26. August 2015
Abstracts Child Health and
Justice
Rosario Carmona: The right of the child to enjoy the highest standard
attainable of health in situations of poverty
or economic crisis: Analysis under the Convention on the Rights of the
Child
The binding legal nature of the
Convention on the Rights of the Child, its almost universal ratification and
the general acceptance of its guiding principles explain and justify the
importance of this treaty on all actions concerning the child.
In this case, our work will
focus on a specific issue addressed by the Convention - the children's health -
and the impact on it of some factors like poverty, the global economic
situation or others financial structural determinants.
We will outline some general concepts
to determine the extent of such rights; we will emphasize the importance of
approaching children's health from the perspective of children's rights; and
will specify the scope of the obligations of States to enforce that right.
So, we will find a close link between the concept of health established by the
WHO (“state of complete physical, mental and social well-being”) and the
right of children to enjoy the "highest attainable standard of health"
(Article 24 of the Convention); the indivisibility and interdependence of
children´s rights may us explain the indispensability of the right to health
for the enjoyment of all other rights enshrined in the Convention; and the obligation of
States parties to the Convention to enforce this right allow us to interpret
its commitment to "undertake ... measures to the maximum extent of
available resources" (Article 4).
The doctrine of the Committee on the Rights of the Child
- control mechanism and legitimate interpretation of the Convention - will be
critical to the analysis of these issues, especially its General Comments and
Concluding Observations on the reports of States Parties to the Convention,
primarily in the years since the start of the global economic crisis.
Sridhar Venkatapuram: Health equity
among children, and the case of vaccinations
There is a recognizable effort toward making an argument for the right of
every infant/child for health and wellbeing. This language of rights, however,
has been downplayed over the last decade in global health, and in child health
programmes. This, I would argue, is largely due to the larges funders of global
health being dismissive of the language and concepts of rights, and human
rights more broadly. Instead, like in
public health generally, global health funders are largely maximizers; they
seek to maximize the outcomes such as health outcomes given certain amount of
resources such as time, personnel, and finances.
For maximizers working to improve child health, there is thought to be a
clear trade-off between maximizing versus recognizing equal rights, or
prioritizing those that are worst off. In this paper, I will aim to work
through why a maximizing approach to child health, or not being concerned about
equity at all, is unjust. And, I will try to work through different
argumentative strategies for ensuring that there is priority given to the worst
off, or perhaps, universal access. The case of vaccinations, particularly in
India, will be used as the case study. It is a situation where the growing
middle classes and the elite are vaccinating their children, while there is not
a strong public commitment to ensure access to the worst off, or a demand for
vaccinations from the poorest parts of society.
The paper aims to show why equity or priority of the worst off, has to
be a central part of justice for children.
Bill Gardner: Children’s Differential Susceptibility to Treatments: Implications for
Justice
The child developmentalist Jay Belsky and his colleagues have argued for
the “differential susceptibility hypothesis” (DSH). The DSH generalizes from
many studies of how children with different genotypes develop differently in
response to environmental stresses or psychosocial interventions. The DSH says
that there is genetic variation in children’s resilience. That is, genetic factors predispose some children to be
highly responsive to interventions and other children to be less responsive.
Belsky argues that if the DSH is confirmed, it supports (what I call) the
Differential Susceptibility Policy (DSP). The DSP says that to implement a
psychosocial (or, by extension, medical) treatment for which the DSH is true,
we should first genotype children. We should then preferentially target
interventions to the children who have genes predisposing them to be most
sensitive to the interventions. By allocating treatments to the children who
are most responsive to treatment, the DSP achieves the most efficient use of
scarce treatment resources, and is therefore welfare maximizing.
Let’s stipulate that the DSH is true in the sense that genes predispose
some children to have reduced -- but not zero -- responsiveness to treatment
interventions. I argue that the truth of the DSH does not require us to follow
the DSP. I raise three concerns about the DSP.
First, genetic screening for resilience may itself have adverse effects.
It’s possible that children who are less responsive to interventions are
nevertheless sensitive to social expectations about their responsiveness to
treatment. Perhaps being labeled as genetically unresponsive to treatment would
make the treatment even less effective. Because of this and other unanticipated
adverse consequences, we cannot know whether the DSP works from the DSH alone:
we must test the DSP directly.
Second, the evidence supporting the DSH is not sufficient to show that
the DSP is welfare maximizing. Whether the DSP is welfare maximizing depends on
how genetic variation conditions the distributions of the lifetime welfare outcomes of an intervention. These lifetime
outcomes are usually hard to measure. For example, the benefits of high quality
preschool have only become apparent by following participants over decades. The
lifetime welfare outcomes of preventing a highly adverse developmental trajectory
-- e.g., a conduct disordered child who becomes a career criminal -- might be
very large. They might be so high that it would be efficient to expend
substantial resources to achieve them, including investing resources in
children who are significantly less responsive to interventions than their
peers. When the shape of the lifetime welfare outcome distributions is unknown
– the standard case -- the efficiency of the DSP will be unknown. This weakens
the DSP case for denying a genetically disadvantaged child access to an
intervention.
Third, the DSP may lead to unjust treatment of less responsive children.
The DSP appeals to norms of efficiency and welfare maximization. However, an
exclusive focus on efficiency and welfare maximization is inconsistent with
other principles embraced by liberal democracies. The norm of fair equality of
opportunity means that we should help children achieve developmental
trajectories that give children the capabilities to be self-sufficient adults.
Achieving these developmental outcomes may require that society spend more to
help the less responsive children achieve sufficient capabilities, rather than
concentrating resources on the most responsive children. I conclude by
considering how child policy makers might seek to balance concerns of
efficiency stressed by the DSP with concerns about fairness and democratic
equality.
In summary, I argue that the truth of the DSH is not sufficient to show
that the DSP would actually maximize welfare (concerns 1 and 2). Even if those
concerns can be met, the norms of efficiency and welfare maximization need to
be balanced with the egalitarian commitments of liberal polities (concern 3).
Carlos Pitillas: Psychological effects of extreme poverty in immigrant children in the
settlement “El Gallinero” (Madrid)
Among realities being
faced by immigrant youngsters, extreme poverty is probably the one that most
strongly impacts upon their wellbeing and mental health. With the present
study, we aim to understand psychological effects of such poverty among
children and adolescents who live in “El Gallinero”, a shack settlement located
outside the city of Madrid. These youngsters, who belong to Romanian families
of gipsy ethnicity, represent a case of poverty within big First World cities.
To our
knowledge, this is the first study where children from the aforementioned
context directly inform about their experience. Participants’ representations
of themselves, their way of life, their future aspirations, their perception of
opportunities, etc, were gathered in discussion groups and interviews.
Additionally, using a symbolic play assessment procedure, indicators of a
posttraumatic process were explored.
The core results
of our study suggest that: 1. These youngsters are capable of constructing a
complex view of themselves and their life conditions. 2. They aspire to forms
of living that coincide with a Western, normalized, lifestyle. 3. There exists
an intergenerational tension, regarding such aspirations. 4. A significant
number of young children seem to suffer from a posttraumatic process.
These results
will be described in detail, and discussed in light of the public policies that
have been displayed with respect to this settlement. They will also be
discussed within a wider framework of recommendations for intervention.
Sepideh Yousefzadeh: Child Growth Monitoring: What lies Beneath the Weights and Height?
Growth charts
for measuring and monitoring children’s healthy growth were introduced during
the 60s, when the total number of hungry people was extremely high[1]. Ever since, growth charts have been an important
tool to measure and monitor children’s growth globally. Between 1970 and 2000,
in the developing world, the proportion of children affected by malnutrition
decreased by 20%[2]. Nevertheless, in the 90s, still 50% of all deaths
among children were attributed to malnutrition[3]. Therefore, some scholars initiated two interrelated
discourses about the global approach in addressing child growth and malnutrition[4]. Some focused on inequalities and the fact that in
examining child malnutrition the focus cannot merely be on a country’s average
achievements in reducing malnutrition. As such, disaggregated data needs to be
analyzed in order to design local policies to reach to children with higher
risk of growth faltering. In the meantime, some other scholars discussed the
root causes of growth faltering. They argued that causes of growth faltering
often cut across different dimensions of children’s being, whereby, nutritional
input is only one of those causes. Therefore a holistic approach to take into
account different dimensions and causes of growth faltering is required in
order to suggest other inputs – next to nutritional inputs- and address
children’s growth more effectively.
Given the above
mentioned background, the importance of designing approaches that cut across
different dimensions of child growth (i.e. multidimensional), address the root
causes of growth faltering that are multi-sectoral, and at the same time focus
on inequalities has been acknowledged for more than two decades. Nevertheless,
today, despite the increasing trend in the field of ‘multidimensional
measurement’ in various studies concerning children (poverty, deprivation and
wellbeing), child growth has received the least attention.
This paper aims
to propose a framework for multidimensional child growth. It combines
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model to human development with Amartya Sen’s
Capability Approach in order to propose the framework. The Capability Approach
is applied in order to: a) reflect on the importance of contexts that shape and
contribute to children’s growth, b) define growth as a multidimensional
concept, and c) reflect on the agency and freedom of choice in achieving
optimum growth. Therefore the Capability Approach provides insights into
different capabilities that are required in order for children to have a
healthy growth.
The
bioecological model on the other hand provide more nuances of different levels factors
that affect children’s growth (household and society).
The paper uses
DHS India to apply and implement the proposed multidimensional-multilevel tool.
By doing so, various variables are introduced and analyzed as entitlements,
conversion factors, and capability sets. Eventually, children’s functioning as
‘healthy growth’ is assessed not only by assessing their weight and height, but
also by analyzing sets of capabilities that are required for their healthy
growth.
[4] Pinstrup-Adersen 1993; Wagstaff, Watanabe
1999; Larrea, Freire 2002; de Poel, Hosseinpoor et al. 2008
So, we will find a close link between the concept of health established by the WHO (“state of complete physical, mental and social well-being”) and the right of children to enjoy the "highest attainable standard of health" (Article 24 of the Convention); the indivisibility and interdependence of children´s rights may us explain the indispensability of the right to health for the enjoyment of all other rights enshrined in the Convention; and the obligation of States parties to the Convention to enforce this right allow us to interpret its commitment to "undertake ... measures to the maximum extent of available resources" (Article 4).
The doctrine of the Committee on the Rights of the Child - control mechanism and legitimate interpretation of the Convention - will be critical to the analysis of these issues, especially its General Comments and Concluding Observations on the reports of States Parties to the Convention, primarily in the years since the start of the global economic crisis.
[4] Pinstrup-Adersen 1993; Wagstaff, Watanabe
1999; Larrea, Freire 2002; de Poel, Hosseinpoor et al. 2008
Abonnieren
Posts (Atom)