Human Rights

Author(s):  
Joseph M. Wronka

At the heart of social work, human rights are a set of interdependent guiding principles having implications for meta-macro (global), macro (whole population), mezzo (at risk), micro (clinical), meta-micro (everyday life), and research interventions to eradicate social malaises and promote well-being. They can be best understood vis-à-vis the UN Human Rights Triptych. This consists of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, increasingly referred to as customary international law on the center panel; the guiding principles, declarations, and conventions following it, on the right panel—like the conventions on the Rights of the Child (CRC), Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), and Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW); and implementation mechanisms, on the left panel—like the filing of country reports on compliance to conventions, the Universal Periodic Review, thematic and country reports by special rapporteurs, and world conferences. Briefly, this powerful idea, which emerged from the ashes of World War II, emphasizes five crucial notions: human dignity; non-discrimination; civil and political rights; economic, social, and cultural rights; and solidarity rights. Whereas this article emphasizes issues pertaining to the United States, it touches upon other countries as appropriate, calling for a global vision in the hopes that every person, everywhere, will have their human rights realized. Only chosen values endure. The challenge, through open discussion and debate, is the creation of a human rights culture, which is a lived awareness of these principles in one's mind, heart, and body, integrated dragged into our everyday lives. Doing so will require vision, courage, hope, humility, and everlasting love, as the indigenous spiritual leader Crazy Horse reminds us.

1977 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence J. LeBlanc

The human rights proclaimed and affirmed in the various international declarations, conventions, and covenants adopted since World War II fall into two broad categories: civil and political; and economic, social, and cultural. The former includes the traditional rights of man, such as the rights to life and liberty; the latter includes such rights as the right to work, to social security, and to the preservation of one's health and well-being.International agreement in principle on most civil and political rights as human rights has been relatively easy to achieve; disagreement has occurred—and is likely to continue to occur-primarily over their precise meaning. Virtually everyone endorses, for example, a right to life; not everyone agrees, however, that capital punishment or abortion must therefore be prohibited by law.


Author(s):  
Audrey R. Chapman

The right to health and health services is generally framed as the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Like other human rights, the right to health confers to all people specific entitlements and imposes duties on governments to protect and promote them. It reflects a broadened sense of governmental responsibility for the welfare of its citizens and a more inclusive understanding of human rights. All countries, including the United States, have ratified at least one binding human rights convention that includes a provision on the right to health. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations more than six decades ago, has given rise to a series of international human rights instruments that legally obligate states to implement their provisions. The two most important of these are the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Despite substantial progress, a number of issues still need to be addressed for the realization of the right to health, such as the lack of political commitment on the part of many states with regard to implementation and the weakness of the international human rights system. Furthermore, many states which have ratified international or regional human rights instruments that recognize a right to health or have relevant constitutional provisions still do not invest the necessary resources or apply human rights standards to the framing of health policies.


Author(s):  
Andrew Clapham

‘Human rights’ covers not only civil and political rights such as freedom from torture, slavery, and arbitrary detention, but also economic, social, and cultural rights. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for their health and well-being and the right to security. ‘Food, education, health, housing, and work’ considers these rights in turn, examining their place in a wider view of human rights, and the appropriate mechanisms for their enforcement. A main concern is that economic and social policy is best determined by policy makers who are democratically accountable, and not by unelected judges with no specialized knowledge of how to prioritize the distribution of limited resources.


2020 ◽  
pp. 174387212094451
Author(s):  
James R. May ◽  
Erin Daly

The concept of human dignity means, quite simply, that every person has inherent equal worth. This incontrovertible but profound concept is derived from the body of dignity law that has developed since the end of World War II at the international, regional, national, and subnational levels, where dignity has become the central axis around which law rotates. Both the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights confirm the foundational place of the recognition of human dignity in the building of the new postwar world order. Advancing human dignity also is a central premise of the binding International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and virtually all subsequent instruments addressing human well-being. The right to dignity is guaranteed by the national constitutions of more than 160 countries. Further, courts around the globe have applied the right to dignity thousands of times in cases involving issues that matter everyday to everyday people, including involving poverty, employment, marriage, adoption, incarceration, education, safety, health, discrimination, immigration, and police brutality, and many more. The pandemic wrought by Covid-19 has tested the boundaries of dignity’s role under the of law. Millions are infected. Hundreds of thousands have died. Nations have closed their borders. People are quarantined, desparate, and desparing, leading to social and economic dislocation not seen since the Great Depression. This article highlights the normative and legal dimensions of dignity, and how taking account of dignity under law can improve outcomes during the pandemic. It theorizes that, while not a cure, recognizing dignity under law can be therapeutic in these troubling times.


Sociology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Kivisto

Conservatism refers to one of the constituent political positions found in all contemporary democracies. It can be construed as a philosophy, an ideology, a political party, a movement, a disposition, a mode of discourse, performance style, and an emotional relationship to the political. Since the birth of modern democracies in the aftermath of the French Revolution, it has become commonplace to describe the range of political options available to the citizenry as occupying a spectrum from left to right, with a range of alternatives between the extreme poles, including a centrist position in the middle that straddles the divide. The left was associated with promoting challenges to established authorities and existing hierarchies, along with calls for increased economic equality and expanded social and political rights to all citizens, including the heretofore marginalized. This contrasts with the right, which was defined as defending inequalities and differential entitlements, concentrating matters involving rights around preserving property rights, shoring up public and social order, and promoting traditional values and conventional social relations. In this context, liberalism became a mark of political identity associated with the left, as did socialism, while conservatism, broadly construed, represented the right. This framing of politics also includes the possibility of underminings by extremism on both the left and right. For the former, the main threat since the Russian Revolution has been posed by revolutionary communism, while right-wing extremism has manifested itself in reactionary movements, including fascism and illiberal populism. Since liberalism and conservatism must be understood in relational terms, the spatial and temporal settings for the politics of opposition will vary considerably. It is impossible to do justice to the vast literature on conservatism in a bibliography such as this. What follows is a more delimited, and thus manageable examination of work on conservatism. First, it focuses on conservatism in the United States, and not elsewhere. Second, it is chiefly concerned with conservatism since the end of World War II. Third, it concentrates on the study of conservatism by sociologists and those working in cognate disciplines; while not all the authors are card-carrying sociologists, their works reflect a sociological character, although the exception to this third point is the overview section, which presents key readings by advocates of conservatism, and thus offers insider depictions of the meaning of conservatism. Fourth, this article does not concentrate solely on extremist right-wing movements; rather, in surveying the relevant literature on American conservatism broadly construed, it points to a growing consensus that the radical right wing has pushed mainstream conservatism increasingly further to the right.


2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Lykes ◽  
Erin McDonald ◽  
Cesar Boc

As the number of immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically in recent decades, so has the number of human rights violations against immigrants in the form of arrests without warrants, detention and deportation of parents without consideration of the well-being of their children, and incarceration without bail or the right to a public attorney. The Post-Deportation Human Rights Project (PDHRP) at Boston College was developed to investigate and respond to the legal and psychological effects of deportation policies on migrants living in or deported from the United States. This unique multidisciplinary project involves lawyers, social science faculty, and graduate students—all of whom are bilingual, one of whom is trilingual, and many of whom are bicultural—working together in partnership with local immigrant organizations to address the psychosocial impact of deportation on Latino and Maya families and communities. Our work includes psycho-educational and rights education workshops with immigrant parents and their children in southern New England as well as a cross-national project based in the U.S. and Guatemala supporting transnational families through participatory research, educational workshops, and legal resources.


2016 ◽  
pp. 1147-1165
Author(s):  
Bogusław Sygit ◽  
Damian Wąsik

The aim of this chapter is describing of the influence of universal human rights and civil liberties on the formation of standards for hospital care. The authors present definition of the right to life and the right to health. Moreover in the section it is discussed modern standards of hospital treatment under the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality. The authors discuss in detail about selected examples realization of human rights in the treatment of hospital and forms of their violation. During the presentation of these issues, the authors analyze a provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and use a number of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights issued in matters concerning human rights abuses in the course of treatment and hospitalization.


2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-31
Author(s):  
John Young

As anthropologists we are often preoccupied with our own circumscribed studies of local communities. Only during World War II did we embrace the global dimensions and importance of cultural differences. Many Western anthropologists who have recently, and as a matter of conscience, become concerned with globalization have abandoned the concept of culture as an organizing principle, perhaps in part because they confuse cultural relativism with moral relativism, and perhaps because it is fashionable to denounce their forebears. As professionals I think we must deal with the cultural dimensions of a problem first before making moral judgements. I remain convinced that the concept of culture is a useful tool for understanding and shaping macro-level political understanding and dialogue, in somewhat the same way as Ruth Benedict and others demonstrated more than half a century ago. American policy failures in the international arena, of which the war in Afghanistan is one result, are related to arrogance (ethnocentrism) which breeds ignorance of other cultures and a lack of comparative perspective on American culture as well. Human rights is one issue where the United States is blindly pushing its own agenda to its own detriment.


Law Review ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 169
Author(s):  
Fransiska Ayulistya Susanto

<p><em>Refugee problems become global problems not only for destination country but also for the transit or non-parties country on Status of Refugees Convention 1951. The problem arises when the transit or non-parties country ignore the existence of the refugees in their territory consequently, many refugees could only depend on their protection under UNHCR help. Even if, the territorial state is not the party of 1951 convention, however, they still have responsibility under another Human Rights Convention to give protection to the refugees. Therefore, how far the refugees shall be protected under the transit territory? This article will have analyzed minimum protection under Human Rights instruments and Customary International Law that could give to the refugees. Under the International Covenant on Civil and political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, International Convention on The Rights of the Child and Customary International Law, the state territory shall give protection without any discrimination to the refugees, even if they are not the party of 1951 convention. Even though, the protection that refugees get from transit state slightly different than protection from state parties, however, they shall get to be protected.</em></p><p><strong>Bahasa Indonesia Abstrak: </strong>Masalah pengungsi sudah menjadi permasalahan global yang tidak hanya berpengaruh terhadap negara tujuan saja, namun juga pada negara transit atau negara yang bukan merupakan negara anggota Konvensi Status Pengungsi 1951. Masalah timbul saat negara-negara transit atau negara non-anggota mengabaikan keberadaan pengungsi di teritori negara mereka, sehingga banyak pengungsi yang hanya menyandarkan nasibnya di tangan bantuan UNHCR. Meskipun negara teritorial bukan merupakan negara anggota Konvensi Status Pengungsi 1951, namun mereka seharusnya tetap memberikan perlindungan kepada pengungsi. Pertanyaannya, seberapa jauh negara harus memberikan perlindungan kepada pengungsi? Artikel ini akan menganalisis perlindungan minimal di bawah Hak Asasi Manusia yang harus diberikan negara non-anggota kepada pengungsi yang ada di wilayahnya. Menurut Konvenan tentang Hak-Hak Sipil dan Politik, Konvenan Hak-Hak Ekonomi, Sosial dan Budaya, serta Konvensi Perlindungan Anak dan juga hukum kebiasaan internasional, negara teritorial haruslah memberikan perlindungan tanpa diskriminasi kepada pengungsi, meskipun negara teritorial tidak menjadi para pihak dari Konvensi Status Pengungsi 1951. Meskipun perlindungan yang diberikan kepada pengungsi oleh negara transit sedikit berbeda jika dibandingkan perlindungan dari negara anggota konvensi, mereka tetap harus mendapatkan perlindungan.</p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane F Frey

<p>The existence of a right to strike under international law has been challenged by the International Organization of Employers since the late 1980s. The employer group claims that no such right exists under international law and has been moving to undermine recognition of the right at the International Labour Organisation (ILO). This article examines the right to strike in international human rights law. It considers specifically the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and finds that the right to strike exists in both of these treaties. Further, the article demonstrates that while the ILO employers group may challenge the existence of the right to strike, its government members have overwhelmingly ratified international human rights treaties contradicting the employer group's position that there is no such right.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document