NHS and Human Rights?

I have one week left of my internship down here in New Orleans--my internship funded by the University of Chicago Human Rights Department. The who? The Human Rights Department. Does that mean I should maybe take some time to actually think about Human Rights while I'm here? Why yes, I believe it does!

There is no question that the work NHS does is human rights work--making homeownership more affordable and available, teaching useful financial skills to help people better manage their own money, working to prevent contractor fraud, giving space for community members to come together and grow and support initiatives that will improve their quality of life--but rights doctrine does not actually appear in its stated mission, goals, or values. Around the office I have heard people talk about wanting to help others, to make things better and to revitalize the community, but I have not heard these desires put into a human rights framework.

And yet it is Human Righst work. The UDHR states that: "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood...." (Article 25). In the Covenant on Cultural, Social and Economic Rights, "The States Parties ... recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions...." (Article 11). NHS works to make homeownership a viable housing option, thereby stabilizing communities and increasing the entire neighborhood's standard of living.

The UN-HABITAT agenda further commits the UN and partner nations to "the full and progressive realization of the right to adequate housing.... We recognize an obligation by Governments to enable people to obtain shelter and to protect and improve dwellings and neighbourhoods. We commit ourselves to the goal of improving living ... conditions on an equitable and sustainable basis, so that everyone will have adequate shelter that is healthy, safe, secure, accessible and affordable" (Habitat Agenda, paras 39 and 40). While what NHS does isn't about the "full and progressive realization" of housing rights, they do use government funds to protect and improve neighborhoods.

For even more international agreement on why housing is a human right, go here (the People's Movement for Human Rights Education) or check out the UN-HABITAT website ("Promoting sustainable urban development and adequate shelter for all").

The question I am asking myself now is whether NHS could do more to promote human rights by actively engaging in the human rights language and doctrines that it currently does not employ. Looked at through a lens of human rights, does the organization become more or less effective? Was I wrong to just accept that NHS is furthering human rights whether they know it or not and leave it at that, or should I have been more critical? Or was it good that I have practically ignored rights doctrine this summer, since sometimes it just gets in the way?

Rights doctrine is complicated--as a lens, it breaks down things into rights and non-rights and different kinds of rights and sometimes asks us to prioritize. This could be useful, but could also confuse us and lead us away from what we already know is just good, a positive, something the community needs to succeed whether its a right or not. When I told a coworker I was minoring in Human Rights, she remarked that it was kind of funny how human rights have become a profession now, instead of just something Human and Right for everybody.

The topic of Rights and NHS is something that I wish I had delved into earlier in the summer, but is maybe something I can think more about in my coursework next quarter.