NationStates

To the Honorable World Assembly:
Concerned that Governments are not doing enough to find missing children who are at the risk of being kidnapped or injured by another party.
Acknowledges the emotional stress of parents, guardians, and family members.
Notes that some missing children are never found.
Therefore Mandates
I. The Definition of a Missing Child shall be considered a child who is “any person under the age of majority whose whereabouts are unknown.”
II. The definition of a runaway youth shall be considered as “a individual who is less than the age of majority and who absents himself or herself from home or a place of legal residence without the permission of a parent or legal guardian.”
III. The definition of a abducted child shall be considered “the unauthorized removal of a child from the custody of the child's natural parents or legally appointed guardian(s) by a outside force.” If the child is in danger, the police can use Clause 10 of this act to protect the child of interest.
IV. The Investigation should be aided by international forces if it is suspected the child/and abductor has entered another country and is in danger of being harmed or killed.
V. A budget should be set aside for the search and technology aiding for the search of missing children by the WA
VI. If the child returns home of her or his own free will,the case shall be considered a closed case and no one shall investigate the disappearance.
VII. The Global Children’s Safety Comittee shall be formed to investigate abusive homes in the case of well known runaways and to retrieve children from abductors.
VIII. If the child’s return home is forced, the nation’s Children Protective Services shall investigate the reason for the child running away.
IX. The child’s case shall be brought to The Global Children’s Safety Comittee when the child has been missing for 1 month or more and it’s suspected the child ran away or was abducted.
X. The Police May use just force and to remove the child from the child’s own home if the child is in danger.

“It is currently forbidden, by reason of contradicting with existing legislation, to set specific age limits for legislation. Thus, you should change clauses I and II to include language such as ‘age of majority’ or something similar.”

Revised! Thank you!
To the Honorable World Assembly:
Concerned that Governments are not doing enough to find missing children who are at the risk of being kidnapped or injured by another party.
Acknowledges the emotional stress of parents, guardians, and family members.
Notes that missing some children are never found.
Therefore Mandates
I. The Definition of a Missing Child shall be considered a child who is “any person under the age of Majority whose whereabouts are unknown.”
II. The definition of a runaway youth shall be considered as “a individual who is less than the age of Majority and who absents himself or herself from home or a place of legal residence without the permission of a parent or legal guardian.”
III. The definition of a abducted child shall be considered “the unauthorized removal of a child from the custody of the child's natural parents or legally appointed guardian(s).“
IV. The Investigation shall be aided by international forces if it is suspected the child/and abductor has entered another country
V. A budget should be set aside for the search and technology aiding for the search of missing children by the WA
VI. If the child returns home of her or his own free will,the case shall be considered a closed case and no one shall investigate the disappearance.
VII. The Global Children’s Safety Comittee shall be formed to investigate abusive homes in the case of well known runaways and to retrieve children from abductors.
VIII. If the child’s return home is forced, the nation’s Children Protective Services shall investigate the reason for the child running away.

OOC: Put the newest draft into the first post. People won't search for it in elsewhere in the thread. Spoiler the old draft. Also, do you know how to use list code?

As for the idea and contents, I don't think it's right to use WA money on a kid who gets grounded but sneaks out of the house to play with the neighbour's kids...

Also, what counts as "authorized" for clause III? Authorized by whom? If the parents, then police/child services couldn't remove a child from a dangerous situation. If the authorities, then a parent couldn't take a child to pizza without official permission. If both, then see the above about removing a child from a dangerous situation.

“Clause IV seems to contradict GA resolution 2, because that resolution bans the WA from ratifying, commanding or organising military or police forces, which is what I imagine should be the types of international force you are prescribing. Also, this proposals seems rather drastic when you haven’t specified a time frame, for example a child who has been missing for three minutes probably doesn’t deserve the WA’s attention.”

Alright. Thank you both! I tried to fix it to fit, but if you have any Ideas about clause IV, let me know.

OOC post.

A quick ripping-upper, too tired to look up links for everything.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:To the Honorable World Assembly:

No, bad proposal, no cookie. You're not writing a letter to the WA, you're speaking as the WA. So just start with "The World Assembly" and you're good.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:Concerned that Governments are not doing enough to find missing children who are at the risk of being kidnapped or injured by another party.

Why is "governments" randomly capitalized? And are you talking about kids who have gone missing on their own and then are in danger of getting kidnapped or injured? Because that sentence doesn't make much sense. Also, given all the other resolutions concerning children and missing persons and kidnappings and human trafficking, I don't really see how or why this whole thing is necessary. So beef up your preamble, which is the bit of the proposal where you try to convince people that there's something that needs the blunt instrument of a WA resolution to bludgeon to death.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:Acknowledges the emotional stress of parents, guardians, and family members.

But not the children???

The Federation of Spokane wrote:Notes that some missing children are never found.

More of them will never be found, if following the current mandates of the draft...

The Federation of Spokane wrote:Therefore Mandates

Don't do that. It makes everything messy. Have every mandate use its own word (definitions should really use "defines", and not your convoluted "mandates the definition of a missing child shall be considered", which I'm sure breaks more than one grammar rule), and replace this just "Hereby" or, if you absolutely must, "Therefore", though I'm not sure if there's any real difference between the two.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:I. The Definition of a Missing Child shall be considered a child who is “any person under the age of majority whose whereabouts are unknown.”

Unknown by whom? The child? The parents? The neighbour? The authorities?

The Federation of Spokane wrote:II. The definition of a runaway youth shall be considered as “a individual who is less than the age of majority and who absents himself or herself from home or a place of legal residence without the permission of a parent or legal guardian.”

...using the wording "himself or herself" is unnecessary, just use a gender-neutral "theirself" (or whatever the approved form of the word is, ask Kenmoria, he knows grammar). That'll dodge the whole "more than two genders" issue as well.

Also, I reiterate that a kid going out to play with the neighbour's kids without parental permission ("no going out to play until you do your homework") should not count as a missing child/runaway youth/whatever this proposal is about!

The Federation of Spokane wrote:III. The definition of a abducted child shall be considered “the unauthorized removal of a child from the custody of the child's natural parents or legally appointed guardian(s) by a outside force.” If the child is in danger, the police can use Clause 10 of this act to protect the child of interest.

"Natural parents or legally appointed guardians" only? Not adoptive parents? Just say "parents" and leave naturality out of it. Also, you're defining an abducted child as the unauthorized removal of a child. You need to work on your wording. A lot.

Oh and I think the child abuse ban resolution would give the right to more people than just the police. As would common sense. Firefighters are not police. A random passerby running to help the kid out of a burning house is not police. An after-earthquake search and rescue party is rarely police. Yet all these people should have the right to remove the child from their home, without the permission from the parents (who might be dead), if it's dangerous for them to stay there.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:IV. The Investigation should be aided by international forces if it is suspected the child/and abductor has entered another country and is in danger of being harmed or killed.

...international forces should help if the abductor is in danger of being harmed or killed?

Also, what international forces? You can't create such, without contradicting an existing resolution. And not specifying a WA nation as the nation that's been entered, would appear to make this have an effect on non-WA nations, which you can't do. Why is this clause even necessary? Just encourage member nations to work with one another to find missing/abducted children. That way you bypass all the difficulty.

Oh and "should" doesn't do anything but create some wishful thinking.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:V. A budget should be set aside for the search and technology aiding for the search of missing children by the WA

Why? Especially given the bad definitions. And wouldn't children who are missing inside a nation's borders be the problem of that nation?

The Federation of Spokane wrote:VI. If the child returns home of her or his own free will,the case shall be considered a closed case and no one shall investigate the disappearance.

Even if the child was kidnapped by some deranged individual, but escaped and managed to make it back home??? The kidnapper can't be prosecuted???

The Federation of Spokane wrote:VII. The Global Children’s Safety Comittee shall be formed to investigate abusive homes in the case of well known runaways and to retrieve children from abductors.

What the fuck is a global anything going to have to do with "abusive homes"? And what you said above about the kid returning home of their own free will, would mean that you can't do shit about any abductor afterwards. Or abusive homes for that matter. "No one shall investigate the disappearance", the above clause says.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:VIII. If the child’s return home is forced, the nation’s Children Protective Services shall investigate the reason for the child running away.

...if you want there to be "Children Protective Services" (whatever that might be), you need to establish that. And I can't really imagine a way for a child's return home to be forced, unless the child doesn't want to go back to abusive parents and whatnot, in which case they really shouldn't be made to go back.

This also flies in the face of common sense, if you consider the "kid skipping homework to go out to play" scenario; if one of their parents catches them outside, and commands them back inside (thus against the child's will) to do their homework, why should child services be involved?

The Federation of Spokane wrote:IX. The child’s case shall be brought to The Global Children’s Safety Comittee when the child has been missing for 1 month or more and it’s suspected the child ran away or was abducted.

...ah, so after practically all hope's gone. That makes the committee entirely useless.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:X. The Police May use just force and to remove the child from the child’s own home if the child is in danger.

Why does this need to be said?

Araraukar wrote:OOC post.

A quick ripping-upper, too tired to look up links for everything.

The Federation of Spokane wrote:To the Honorable World Assembly:

No, bad proposal, no cookie. You're not writing a letter to the WA, you're speaking as the WA. So just start with "The World Assembly" and you're good.

Try "The moste noble and illustrious Worlds Assembly;"

What resolution is this a replacement for, and where is the repeal of that resolution?

Wallenburg wrote:What resolution is this a replacement for, and where is the repeal of that resolution?

(OOC: I assume the Missing Minor’s Act, GA #131, was the original resolution. GA #133 was the repeal of that. On a related note, while searching for those two pieces of legislation, I found the Missing Individuals Act, GA #151, which covers a very similar concept and duplicates some of the clauses contained here.)