"Children served as a means to an end"

Germany still has some catching up to do when it comes to dealing with children, according to the “Initiative Familien”. Children and young people should actually have priority in all decisions. The association is now making a proposal for this: similar to the climate reservation, a so-called child reservation is needed. WELT spoke to board member Heike Riedmann from Cologne about the project. Riedmann is a social worker and mother of two children.

WORLD: With the "Initiative Families" you are planning an offensive on children's rights and want to introduce the "children's reservation". What can that mean?

Heike Riedmann: Our initiative emerged from the Corona crisis, when we realized that problems for children had become significantly worse. Children often come last. We want all decisions to be checked for their impact on children and young people, so that they can grow up in a good environment, under healthy conditions. To this end, we want to establish a child retention policy at federal and state level. It is about counteracting the structural disadvantages of children and young people. The reservation of children should give priority to their interests at all political levels, in all decisions and legislative projects.

WORLD: Would this be a legal obligation to take children's rights into account?

Riedmann: The child proviso should work in the same way as the climate proviso. It is about a self-commitment that ensures the rights of children and young people, i.e.: What concrete effects does a decision have on all areas of children’s and young people’s lives? Our goal is to form committees that look at legislative projects or political decisions and then make recommendations for action. For example: Does the decision affect the compatibility of family and work? What are the health effects on children and young people? What does this mean for the educational success of children and young people?

WORLD: The energy crisis followed the Corona crisis. What impact does this have on children?

Riedmann: You can see the challenges families are faced with, for example, by looking at the rising inflation rate. It is at the expense of the children when parents have less money at their disposal. In addition, there is, for example, the debate as to whether children should be given worse food because the food funds for schools and day-care centers are no longer sufficient to guarantee the quality. Or that swimming pools should be heated less, partially closed, so that swimming lessons for children are at risk. The fact that toilets don't work for more than a year, as in some schools, is something you could not imagine in companies.

WORLD: It's not like nothing is done for families. Child benefit has been increased, there are Corona catch-up programs in education and the right to all-day places in elementary schools. Is this the wrong way?

Riedmann: No, but it's what I call baby steps. They are impulses and good approaches, but some of them are not thought through to the end. Child benefit has been increased, but inflation is rising, and it does not apply to single parents because it is counted against the advance maintenance payment. The all-day entitlement is a good idea, but we will not be able to maintain the legal entitlement at all until 2026 because there is a lack of skilled workers to implement it. We want the bodies at state and federal level to deal with the effects on children. This includes working out proposals and also various scenarios that take effect if goals are not achieved.

WORLD: How should these bodies be composed so that there are no political scuffles?

Riedmann: Committees should be linked directly to political events and have interdisciplinary staff. With doctors, educators, educationalists, parents, young people, but also with economists. The youth check at federal level, which looks at legislative projects and makes suggestions, is a good approach. But we would like to see more commitment.

WORLD: The long-standing and then failed SPD project to enshrine children's rights in the Basic Law was criticized, among other things, because it would increase the state's influence on families. How do you feel about this?

Riedmann: We don't think it's very likely that writing children's rights into the Basic Law will suffice and then everything will change. And the human rights in the Basic Law include children. In our opinion, approaches are needed on other levels that improve everyday life and the living conditions of children. This is only possible if decisions are also looked at and evaluated from an interdisciplinary perspective.

WORLD: What is the advantage of a child reservation in contrast to the children's rights in the Basic Law?

Riedmann: Germany was one of the first countries to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. How little that means in practice, however, we saw in the Corona crisis. Children were not included in all considerations, families had no lobby. We tested children for a long time and made them wear masks to protect older people. Children have served as a means to an end in this regard. For the future, it is important that the interests of children and young people are given priority in all decisions.

WORLD: What is going wrong in Germany when dealing with children?

Riedmann: In Scandinavian countries, it is part of the situation that both parents can pick up their children from the day care center earlier, and that investments are made in education. In the Netherlands, on the other hand, the educational mandate is a matter of course for the state to provide free education. It is, so to speak, a government mandate to invest in children and young people. We can still learn a lot from a European comparison. The principle that all children should receive a good education regardless of their origin exists in Germany, but is not implemented. There is still a long way to go until children are noticed and taken into account.