While child labor is viewed negatively, apparently child labor and child slavery aren’t the same thing, and child labor though it could still be exploitative/cruel in other ways, can be done voluntarily by the child, and with fair treatment/compensation/etc.
I suppose you could make the argument that any child labor opens itself up to problems, but could it be done responsibly? And if not, then at what age do we draw the line of labor being not ok regardless of consent?
And yet kids are given gender-affirming care without parental consent, meaning only the medical practitioner is giving consent for the treatment. How do we square that with the wider discussion of the ethics of childhood consent and labor?
This is about child labor, and I feel that getting drug into a discussion about gender affirming care is a distraction from the main point. If you were honestly seeking my opinion and not trying to derail the conversation, then I will just state briefly that one is considered a medical correction that is intended to improve the person’s life, and the other is work, which by its very design is meant to be exploitative.
No, I’m being 100% serious. Why can’t we, as a society, be consistent around the concept of childhood consent? Either they’re adults capable of consent, or they’re children who require a parent or guardian to give consent for them. I don’t understand how anything can be a gray area.