John Moore Jr.: \u3ci\u3eMoore v. City of East Cleveland\u3c/i\u3e and Children’s Constitutional Arguments

This Article is divided into three parts. First, I retell the story of Moore from John Jr.’s perspective and frame his potential claims. Second, I explore constitutional arguments under existing doctrine, using contemporary equal protection and substantive due process analyses. Finally, I suggest how a children’s rights perspective might be even more persuasive as a strategy for John Jr. as well as for achieving opportunity and equality on behalf of contemporary children living amid and affected by structural inequalities that impact their developmental capacity

Expanding the Frame: Using Masculinities Analyses to Challenge Gender and Race Hierarchy

Kimberly Bailey’s fascinating article, Male Same-Sex “Horseplay”: The Epicenter of Sexual Harassment? seeks to expose and to further analyze harassment of women by paying attention to the patterns and meaning of male-male harassment between straight men. By the sophisticated use of masculinities theory and research, she seeks to expand not only the boundaries of male-male harassment but also the linkages between male-male and male-female harassment. Sexualharassment doctrine as constructed thus far excludes certain conduct as not discriminatory. As Professor Bailey notes, in Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc., the Court stated that it was not creating a “general civility code.” Professor Bailey seeks to carve out some male on male “horseplay” as discrimination that should be actionable under sexual harassment theory rather than tolerated or understood as nondiscriminatory. More broadly, Professor Bailey suggests male on male harassment is central to all sexual harassment

Unfinished Equality: The Case of Black Boys

Vulnerabilities and identities theories have an interdependent and symbiotic relationship that is critical to achieve social justice. Vulnerabilities analysis demands the state to explain and correct structural inequalities, while identities theories call for constructs and stereotypes to be confronted, challenged, and transformed in order to achieve justice and equality. An example of the value of both theoretical perspectives is in challenging, uncovering, and demanding action to end the subordination of black boys. Analyzing the situation of black boys, from birth to age eighteen, and the interaction they have with individuals, institutional structures, and culture leads to a conclusion that identity matters, and is not only explanatory of the problem, but is also essential to the solution; it is critical to black boys

Book Review: Parental Guidance, State Responsibility and Evolving Capacities: Article 5 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

The latest book from the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Implementation Project focuses on Article 5 of the convention, which provides: States Parties shall respect the responsibilities, rights and duties of parents or, where applicable, the members of the extended family or community as provided for by local custom, legal guardians or other persons legally responsible for the child, to provide, in a manner consistent with the evolving capacities of the child, appropriate direction and guidance in the exercise by the child of the rights recognized in the present Convention

Parentage at Birth: Birthfathers and Social Fatherhood

Deciding who should be a child\u27s legal parents at birth seems a simple task. Instinctively, the answer is the child\u27s biological mother and father. Historically, the answer would have been different depending on whether the child was born within a marriage or not; marriage trumped biology, at least with respect to fathers. A husband was generally presumed to be the father of a child born to his wife, even if there was no genetic connection. A number of changes have moved parentage away from the marital/genetic/patriarchal model that valued the marital family above genes or social fatherhood. Modern principles of parentage center on children\u27s well-being and social benefit. The question raised by our changed context is how we should define parentage consistent with those principles. This article focuses on parentage by looking exclusively at fathers

Women\u27s, Men\u27s and Children\u27s Equalities: Some Reflections and Uncertainties

One of the most striking ideas that Edward J. McCaffery suggests in Taxing Women is that equality, of the right sort, must be thought of in gendered terms. We must relinquish the idea that we can find or declare some neutral principle that will achieve the goal of equality, particularly with respect to the relationship between work and family, because the social context makes it impossible. Rather, we need to devise gender-specific strategies to achieve equality, even if they are couched in gender-neutral language. In my recent work examining single parent families, I have come to much the same conclusion: meaningful support for single parents, albeit extremely unlikely in the present political climate, requires separate consideration of the needs of single mothers and single fathers. The dominant patterns of work and family for single mothers and fathers are remarkably distinct; thus, their greatest needs are quite different. Single mothers most need economic support for nurturing, while single fathers most need cultural support for a reconstructed notion of fatherhood. McCaffery similarly argues that in order to achieve work-family equality, married women need to have their wage work taxed less, while married men need to have their wage work taxed more. This essay discusses some of the equality issues generated by McCaffery\u27s revolutionary yet modest gender-specific proposal for tax reform. In addition to considering some potential consequences for women and men, I also briefly consider the perspective of children. The essay proceeds in the following manner: Part I concentrates on McCaffery\u27s proposal to eliminate gender bias in the tax structure by taxing women less so that it is in accord with widely accepted notions of formal equality. Part II focuses on McCaffery’s argument that we should tax men more, precisely on account of their insistence on working as they always have and precisely until their behavior, in the aggregate, becomes as variable and susceptible to social and other pressures as women\u27s behavior is.” Part III discusses children’s equality and how the removal of gender bias and redistribution of workforce responsibility is presumed to be to children’s benefit. Finally, Professor Dowd concludes by recommending society takes a look at McCaffery\u27s proposal from the perspectives of women\u27s, men\u27s and children\u27s equality and consider how that complicates the analysis further by considering the separate interests of inherently connected groups

Liberty vs. Equality: In Defense of Privileged White Males

In this book review, Professor Dowd reviews Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws, by Richard A. Epstein (1992). First, Professor Dowd sets forth the thesis and arguments of Epstein’s book and explores her general criticisms in more detail. Next, she explores Epstein’s core argument pitting liberty against equality from two perspectives: that of the privileged white male and that of minorities and women. Finally, Professor Dowd argues that Epstein’s position cannot be viewed as an argument that most minorities or women would make, as it fails to take account of their stories

Race, Gender, and Work/Family Policy

Family leave is not an end in itself, but rather is part of a much bigger picture: work/family policy. The goal of work/family policy is to achieve a good society by supporting families. Ideally, families enable children to develop to their fullest capacity and to contribute to their communities and society. Public rhetoric in the United States has always strongly supported families. Our policies, however, have not. In the area of work/family policy, the United States continues to lag behind every other advanced industrialized country, as well as many developing countries, in the degree to which we provide affirmative support for families. Limited family leave and child-care support are halting steps toward a policy that affirmatively supports families. In this Article, Professor Dowd argues that our work/family policy must be race and gender conscious in order to affirmatively structure law and policy to achieve egalitarian goals. Professor Dowd contends that in structuring work/family policy, we must address whether any suggested policy promotes the equality and well-being of all children and families. Race is the central issue that must be addressed within the presumed gender focus of work/family issues. In the context of ongoing racial inequality, advocates for work/family policy must commit to real equality among children by fostering and supporting all families. In the context of ongoing gender inequality in wage work and caregiving roles, advocates must envision deracialized gender equality and design policies to achieve it. The Article proceeds in the following manner: Part I briefly outlines the nature of work/family conflicts and describes the core components of a comprehensive work/family policy. Part II contends that putting race at the center of gender analysis exposes critical issues for work/family policy. Part III argues that the primary gender issue of work/family policy is envisioning an egalitarian model of families as the basis for structuring policy. Finally, Professor Dowd concludes that a comprehensive work/family policy framed around principles of race and gender equality, understood as interdependent with other equality efforts, is essential in order to make real our promise to our children that they are equal