Locke and the Rights of Children
Locke firmly denies Filmer's theory that it is morally
permissible for parents to treat their children however they please:
"They who allege the Practice of Mankind, for exposing or selling
their Children, as a Proof of their Power over them, are with Sir Rob.
happy Arguers, and cannot but recommend their Opinion by founding it
on the most shameful Action, and most unnatural Murder, humane Nature
is capable of." (First Treatise, sec.56) Rather, Locke argues that
children have the same moral rights as any other person, though the
child's inadequate mental faculties make it permissible for his
parents to rule over him to a limited degree. "Thus we are born Free,
as we are born Rational; not that we have actually the Exercise of
either: Age that brings one, brings with it the other too." (Second
Treatise, sec.61) On top of this, he affirms a positive
,
non-contractual duty of parents to provide for their offspring: "But
to supply the Defects of this imperfect State, till the Improvement of
Growth and Age hath removed them, Adam and Eve, and after them all
Parents were, by the Law of Nature, under an obligation to preserve,
nourish, and educate the Children, they had begotten." (Second
Treatise, sec.56) Apparently, then, Locke believes that parents may
overrule bad choices that their children might make, including
self-regarding actions. Leaving aside Locke's duty of self-
preservation, his theory permits adults to do as they wish with their
own bodies. But this is not the case for children, because their lack
of reason prevents them from making sensible choices. To permit a
willful child from t ...