The book, Destiny, was dedicated to all the children of the present and the future. The parting words of the Summary Acknowledgements and Thoughts chapter referred to our legacy to future children as our highest goal. Why, then, should it be necessary to provide discourse about the rights of children? Is it not obvious that Destiny values them very highly?

It turns out that it is indeed essential to discuss the rights of children, for our understanding of children, the meaning of children within our lives, their role in society and our obligations to them are not commonly agreed upon. Our heterogeneous views about the world of children produce much conflict in "adult" discussions and actions regarding children. I will now provide background, discussion, problem identification, solutions and conclusions about the Destiny ideology positions regarding children and childhood.

We typically start with the biological consideration. We all start life as children, and we make children to continue the existence of the human race. At a personal level, we pass on our genes, some of our knowledge and our values by means of the reproduction process and the early training years of our children. If we are well motivated as parents, we attempt to make the childhood years of our offspring enjoyable as well as meaningful. If we show them love by holding and nurturing them emotionally and by including them in our activities, and by protecting them from harm, they grow from infancy as confident contributors. They are limited only by their inherited aptitudes and the external environment.

It is commonly understood that society as a whole must protect children from danger and help prepare children for their adult years. The protection process is relatively well understood, for our children, like us, need physical security and readily available goods and services. Moreover, like us, they sometimes need to be protected from their own errors of judgment. The preparation process to help them achieve adulthood in a physically and emotionally healthy and knowledgeable condition is where we encounter the most divergent opinions on the part of parents and children.

We lose influence as parents in inverse relation to the amount of interactive time we spend with our very young children. This means we can ignore them from infancy and have little or no influence. Alternatively, we can overwhelm them by interrupting the natural learning process of play by commanding their time or attention in the pursuit of our wants and needs. We can expose them to things and other people to help their development, or we can imprison them socially, emotionally and intellectually, as our vassals.

Perhaps the most troublesome consideration is that we do what we do from our beliefs and our individual capabilities and understandings, and not necessarily from valid knowledge. Children are so important to our future, as well as their own, that society as a whole takes responsibility for their wellbeing. That means our presumption of individual right to control the lives of our children, and their experiences, is circumstantially denied based on the assumption of superior knowledge, and therefore rights, of our societal institutions. Also, we do recognize that our personal influence must be limited in circumstances like school time, for we work and cannot be physically present to assure the protection and development and good behavior of our children.

We see further evidence of denial of parental privilege in the civil and criminal laws and family courts that exist today in the USA. This means that institutional perception of value or goodness in parenting can and sometimes does override the assumed rights of a parent. We are all too aware that some parents do not provide an adequate environment for their child or children, and our humanitarian intent towards all children causes us to hope that our legal processes will contain or eliminate the damage done to the children and replace it with opportunity, without threatening our rights.

Now, you may be thinking, what is the point? Are not the discussed items obvious to all of us? No, they are not. Moreover, discussion to this point is simply commonly, but not completely, understood background from which to identify problems and opportunities regarding our children and their rights, as well as our own. We will now embark on the typical Destiny approach of providing direction for change.

First, you will recall the passages in the Responsibilities of Educators chapter, which unilaterally required the freedom of educators to build or rebuild the motivations and values of any young children who are not receptive to education or good social behaviors. That position was necessary because parents are not consistently dependable in developing children from infancy to school age or later. In a worst case scenario, a young child will become a member of a school that includes housing facilities, and will not live with the parent(s). Failure to respect the rights of a new child, as evidenced by failure to nurture or to train that child, will result in loss of parental rights to keep the child, but not financial responsibility. This means a financial penalty will be assessed on the parents if their child or children must use the housing facilities. It also implies that the earlier right to become a parent will be linked to financial responsibility.

There is an obvious analogue in the use of special schools by the wealthy when they have troublesome children and choose not to be involved. The wealthy have historically made high use of private schools for that purpose, and, in general, to be free from some of the responsibilities of parenting.

In the name of fairness, if parents lose the right to have their child live with them, then there must be an every two year review process regarding the parents and the children to determine if reasonable behaviors and conditions have been restored in the child and in the parental home. It is easy to understand that the parents, not just the child, would have to re-qualify to restore the nuclear family. It is also quite apparent that the loss of rights for one child could endanger those same rights if there is a second child or a desire to have a second child.

These provisions may seem cruel, but overall they are not. No parent has the right to inflict a troublesome child on society. The other children's rights are being violated when that happens, and those rights certainly supercede the rights of an individual child to behave uncontrollably and the rights of the parents who allow that to happen.

The pendulum swings in USA society regarding children's rights and parents rights are enough to make a person dizzy. Children do not have the right to make the decisions about where they will spend their time or necessarily what they will do with their time between birth and school age. Children do not have the right to ignore or violate parental directions or the later directions of their teachers. Parents must have the right to use force to gain compliance, provided that the force consists of graded levels of punishment combined with positive reinforcement, designated by a Psychology Task Force and supported by the federal government to help the parents when they request help, at no charge. Direct physical punishment will not be permitted; however, the parent can request temporary, alternate living facilities for an unruly child at no cost. The training facilities will have the right to rework the child as necessary, and every incentive to do so, for they will be measured and compensated by the number and success of their "graduates."

Children are not miniature adults. Their decision processes can be no better than the combined effect of their aptitudes and experiences. They must earn the right to make their own decisions, each step of the way as they progress from birth to adulthood. There is no specific age at which a child can achieve that right. It is based purely on performance, knowledge and demonstrated good judgment. This includes such activities as driving a car, which has historically been limited only by age and general physical and mental health.

If you love your child, then the less attractive parts of the Destiny ideology regarding rights of children will not offend you or trouble you. You will recognize the essentiality of responsibility.