Could child labor ever be acceptable if it's done consentually?
Could child labor ever be acceptable if it's done consentually?
While child labor is viewed negatively, apparently child labor and child slavery aren't the same thing, and child labor though it could still be exploitative/cruel in other ways, can be done voluntarily by the child, and with fair treatment/compensation/etc.
I suppose you could make the argument that any child labor opens itself up to problems, but could it be done responsibly? And if not, then at what age do we draw the line of labor being not ok regardless of consent?
You're viewing a single thread.
Nope. Children are not able to provide informed consent and thus cannot enter into contracts to sell their labor. Beyond that, there is a wealth of data demonstrating negative outcomes related to child labor, including educational underperformance, increased incidence of poverty, abuse, and crime, as well as the potential of workplace injuries to cause permanent developmental impairment.
There is no such thing as ethical child labor.
I tend to agree, but what about making a child do chores in a family household? Most children don't want to do it and some don't get anything in return, the tasks can sometimes be grueling. Would that always be unethical, or only when taken to an excessive degree that severely impacts the child?
Chores are different in that the purpose is training them to be self sufficient adults. Once it deviates from that purpose, it becomes abusive.
Permanently Deleted
This is likely related to why kids can work in a family owned business to various extents. At least in the US. Not sure about elsewhere.
The problem is that once you make it available for anybody, it becomes a societal pressure and children won't be given a choice since they can't make their own decisions for what they do. Hell, how many of us were 'forced' to get a summer job as a teenager by our parents?
In Germany children are obligated to help their parents in the household as long as they live with them. This extends to family business. By law the children have no right to be compensated, since they are already compensated by the parents feeding and housing them. Of course, this doesn't mean parents can just slave their children, there are plenty of health and security laws and what's generally reasonable for a child of varous ages to do.
So no family sweat shop. but the bottom line is: in Germany kids are obligated to help out the household they live with.
Yeah, it's essentially similar in the US. I don't know if kids are legally obligated to do chores, but they can work in certain family businesses without monetary compensation. I just don't think it should be opened up to the point where you can hire any child. But in any case, pretty sure this is a troll post as their first example was cobalt mining. I mean, I guess there's a small chance it's not a troll, but very slim.
Oh, for sure. The exception to family businesses is probably both in Germany and the US rooted in the time the laws were made, where it would've been devastating to not allow families to include their children in the family business. And ultimately, there are probably plenty of laws in both countries that would check in on abuse.
It isn't commercial labor when an adult does their own chores (I think), as it's more related to the people in a household maintaining their own home. It likely wouldn't be labor for a child for the same reasons, though I'm not sure.
But it could start to look like labor when it's something that produces commercial value, for example, it's more like a 'chore' to water the vegetable garden in the backyard, but it's more like 'labor' to tend to 20 acres of farmland.
Excessive chores, though, could be prevented under child abuse law rather than child labor law, depending on how it's enforced. Doing all the household work voluntarily for no reason other than it's fun? Almost certainly legal. No video games until you clean the dishes? Probably legal. No food until you sweep, mop, dust, and shine every surface in the house? Probably abuse.
And I mean, I would argue that household chores can be viewed as education. After all, at some point the children have to care for their own household and as such are good to learn routine cleaning, how to do dishes, how to shop and cook, how to crawl into a tiny tunnel to mine for gold and how to keep the garden tidy.
There are some people who are adults who are kinda clueless about some basic things and I think it would've been a good part of education to have them make household chores from childhood onwards.
Of course, this needs to be reasonable and age appropriate. So, I agree with the commercial aspect of it.
Chores are largely part of childhood education. Humans need to be able to do things that they may not find fun to both to survive as functional adults and function as a part of society. They also help to teach responsibility and contribution to larger things than themselves, whether a family unit or society at large.
Well, let me play devil's advocate.
- You don't need a two-way binding contract to form a labor relationship. You could have a relationship where an employer offers a child some terms, and the child can work whenever they want, leave whenever they want, and get paid for the time they work, or for their output, or something.
- Does the labor cause the poverty, abuse, and crime? I'd imagine that the poverty causes the labor, and the poverty also causes the crime. Abuse might also cause the labor, as parents could force their kids to work, but you could create systems at certified child employers to interview Children and see how their home lives are going. The children might also be using work as an escape—either a temporary one, or a way to save up money to move out as soon as possible.
- Generally, when people talk about the age of meaningful consent, there's a clear line at or near the age of majority. Where's the line where you can meaningfully consent to labor? Does it depend on the job? Sure, five year olds shouldn't be allowed to work at all, but what about a fourteen year old who really wants to be a camp counselor during the summer? I worked at a park when I was 16, I mostly sat around all day. I read three books (the ones I had to read for school and one more), I went for a walk every day, I got fresh air, I talked to people. Surely we can agree that that was fine.
- We should definitely talk about the types of job. No kid should be a factory worker or an accountant or a dentist. But working in a park, being a camp counselor, babysitting... There are many traditional jobs that apply to children with no risk of physical injury, jobs that don't conflict with schoolwork, etc. Do those studies address each form of labor?
Oh yeah, no way that would ever get abused or exploited 🙄.
Well, let me play devil's advocate.
Really, there's no need. It's already been definitively proven to be harmful both to children and society.
You don't need a two-way binding contract to form a labor relationship. You could have a relationship where an employer offers a child some terms, and the child can work whenever they want, leave whenever they want, and get paid for the time they work, or for their output, or something.
No, you really do. The power differential is far too great to be able to rely on "they can leave whenever they want". Adults have significant physical, social, cognitive, financial, and legal ability that can be easily exercised to coerce those who are still developing, even unintentionally.
Does the labor cause the poverty, abuse, and crime? I'd imagine that the poverty causes the labor, and the poverty also causes the crime.
Yes, it is casually connected. Child labor causes time that would spent learning to instead be spent related to labor and recovering from labor. This in turn causes reduced academic performance, increasing the likelihood of poverty, which in turn causes increase in criminal behavior.
Abuse might also cause the labor, as parents could force their kids to work, but you could create systems at certified child employers to interview Children and see how their home lives are going. The children might also be using work as an escape—either a temporary one, or a way to save up money to move out as soon as possible.
That is the role for not-for-profit enterprises dedicated to child welfare, not those looking to exploit children for personal gain. Abuse is also endemic in most areas of current and historical child labor.
Generally, when people talk about the age of meaningful consent, there's a clear line at or near the age of majority. Where's the line where you can meaningfully consent to labor? Does it depend on the job? Sure, five year olds shouldn't be allowed to work at all, but what about a fourteen year old who really wants to be a camp counselor during the summer? I worked at a park when I was 16, I mostly sat around all day. I read three books (the ones I had to read for school and one more), I went for a walk every day, I got fresh air, I talked to people. Surely we can agree that that was fine.
Participating in education with a nonprofit organization with increased oversight and not having profit motive to exploit children when also outside of the usual academic year? Yup. That seems reasonable and a good way to allow them to learn responsibility and contribution to society in a safe environment.
We should definitely talk about the types of job. No kid should be a factory worker or an accountant or a dentist. But working in a park, being a camp counselor, babysitting... There are many traditional jobs that apply to children with no risk of physical injury, jobs that don't conflict with schoolwork, etc. Do those studies address each form of labor?
Many of the "jobs" that children can participate in without harm are better lines at through the lens of education. They have to be strictly examined to ensure that they are not setup for exploitation and allowing any for-profit activity significantly increases this risk. Arguably, some traditional jobs such as childcare should only be acceptable if matching the going rate for adult childcare workers as, while useful in learning child-rearing skills that may be needed as an adult, it is used to suppress wages of those who do so vocationally.
Yes, it is casually connected. Child labor causes time that would spent learning to instead be spent related to labor and recovering from labor. This in turn causes reduced academic performance, increasing the likelihood of poverty, which in turn causes increase in criminal behavior.
Ah, you meant in the long run, yeah, fair.
I agree that labor by minors is should only be allowed in very specific cases and highly regulated. I'm not sure if I'd limit entirely to non-profit organizations, or entirely to the summer, or whatever, but yeah, it's not something to take lightly.
Growing up in suburbia, the labor we did have wasn't a problem... Is the general regulatory scheme around child labor in the US deeply problematic in some way I don't know about? Are there a lot of states that are way too permissive?