Return to Defining Terrorism Then and Now

Return to Course Materials

Return to Project Three

The term "child" has been defined and redefined for centuries as contexts change: 

During the nineteenth-century, Great Britain and the United States began passing legislation to protect children working in the mines and factories spawned by the Industrial Revolution. However, in order to pass child_labor laws, legislators and activists had to define the term "child": 

• Child Labor Laws: http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/child-labor-nineteenth-century-literature
• A (very) brief history of child labor in the US: Child Labor Law History .pdf  
• Definition of "Child Labor": http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/tuttle.labor.child.britain  

Laws regarding Children's Rights (such as the Child Labor Laws passed in the nineteenth-century) continue to change as contexts change:  

• Recent Children's Rights Laws: http://www.loc.gov/law/help/child-rights/uk.php

Child, Embryo, and Divorce Laws: 

Consider the 2003 Embryo Imbroglio in the UK.

Two infertile couples separately conceive several embryos in a test tube and then freeze the fertilized embryos for future use. Both couples then divorces and disagrees about the disposition of the embryos (in both situations, the women wish to use them to conceive a child with another, whereas the men want them destroyed).

Technically, this is a proposal issue: what action should be taken regarding this controversy?

However, all proposals are built on evaluations and this situation in particular begs to be analyzed by definitional stasis (perhaps via resemblance as well as cause/consequencestases):

Resemblance

Are the embryos “persons,” in which case they should be “fought” over much like a child in a custody hearing?

Or, are the embryos property, therefore suggesting that the couple should split them equally in accordance with standard property settlements?

Either point can be argued using standard Definitional and/or Categorical strategies, such as criteria-match.

Issue: In a divorce proceeding, is a frozen embryo a “person” rather than “property”?

Criteria: What criteria must be met for something to be a “person”?

Match: Does a frozen embryo meet these criteria?

Cause-Consequence

Specifically, if the ex-wives are allowed to carry and deliver these children, will the ex-husbands be liable for child support?

Generally, will the result of this ruling alter abortion laws? Laws regulating technologically-aided procreation?

Another test case: Calvin Klein and the Definition of (Child) Pornography

The clothing company Calvin Klein has recently come under criticism for its so-called "Threesome" advertising campaign. Images such as the above (and related commercials) have already been banned from appearances in the US. This is only the most recent in a series of controversial marketing strategies by CK; previously the company was widely criticized for advertisements featuring images of (very thin) model Kate Moss and, more recently, commercials and print pieces with nude photos of actress Eva Mendes. 

However, one of the reasons the "threesome campaign" the all of these pale in comparision to a mid-nineties ad campaign featuring underage models (and models that "looked" underage) in various states of undress. Concerns over this campaign went as far as to prompt an FBI investigation into whether the CK ads violated laws against child pornography.

Even more difficult test cases:

As they often do, bathtime photos end in tragedy

Pornographers/Victims face "Sexting" charges

Verdict Rendered: "virtual child pornography"