نگاهی تطبیقی بر حق بر حریم خصوصی کودکان در پرتو «شیرنتینگ»

Children’s privacy in the digital age faces challenges arising from rapid technological advances, the pervasive use of social media, and the growing commercialisation of online spaces. The right to privacy, long recognised as a fundamental human right, has been significantly reshaped in recent decades as digital technologies have transformed how personal information is created, shared, and monetised. These transformations are particularly consequential for children, who constitute a vulnerable group lacking full legal capacity and the ability to make independent decisions. As a result, protecting children’s privacy requires heightened scrutiny and safeguards, with parents and families bearing primary responsibility for preserving this right. Yet, paradoxically, it is often parental conduct itself that poses the greatest threat to children’s digital privacy.



One of the most prominent manifestations of this crisis is the phenomenon known as “sharenting,” a practice in which parents widely share images, videos, and personal data about their underage children on social media platforms. Frequently motivated by financial incentives, social recognition, or online visibility, sharenting has become embedded in influencer culture and platform-based economies that reward visibility and engagement. In this context, children may be exposed to global audiences long before they can grasp the implications of digital permanence, surveillance, or reputational harm. Without meaningful consent or awareness, they are often transformed into instruments of content production and, in some cases, sources of income for their parents. This raises a fundamental legal and ethical question: does the child possess an independent right to control their digital footprint, or is this right entirely subsumed under parental authority and representation?



Historically, children’s right to privacy lacked a distinct and autonomous legal status. Before the early twenty-first century, this right was largely inferred through general principles rather than expressly articulated legal norms. However, evolving international human rights standards have progressively recognised children as independent rights-holders in this domain. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights explicitly guarantees respect for private and family life, a provision that the European Court of Human Rights has consistently interpreted as encompassing children. This interpretation imposes positive obligations on states to prevent, investigate, and remedy violations of privacy, including those arising within the family sphere. States are further required to ensure the existence of effective judicial mechanisms to address complaints concerning infringements of the right to private life, grounded in fair trial principles.



Similarly, Article 16 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child affirms the child’s right to protection against arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy, family, home, or correspondence. It underscores the necessity of legal safeguards to uphold this protection. Additional provisions of the Convention, including Article 40(2)(b)(vii), reinforce the centrality of privacy as a core component of children’s rights, particularly in judicial and administrative proceedings. Collectively, these instruments reflect a paradigm shift from viewing children merely as objects of parental authority to recognising them as autonomous rights-bearers whose interests may at times diverge from those of their parents.



Against this normative backdrop, the present study adopts a descriptive–analytical and comparative methodology to examine how legal systems reconcile parental autonomy with the need for state intervention to protect children’s digital privacy. The legal systems of the United States and France are analysed as two contrasting models. The U.S. framework places strong emphasis on parental discretion, rooted in constitutional protections of family autonomy and freedom of expression.



In this system, parental speech—particularly online sharing—often enjoys robust First Amendment protection, and state intervention remains limited unless demonstrable harm is established. Consequently, sharenting is generally treated as an extension of parental free speech, with minimal recognition of children’s independent privacy interests.



In contrast, French law adopts a more child-centred approach by explicitly recognising the child’s independent right to image and personal data. This recognition enables legal constraints on parental authority where parental conduct conflicts with the child’s best interests. French courts and legislation increasingly acknowledge that parents’ management of their children’s digital presence is subject to legal limits, particularly when it exposes the child to reputational harm, exploitation, or long-term digital risks. This model reflects a broader European tendency to prioritise data protection, dignity, and personality rights, even within family relationships.



The study further explores the implications of these comparative findings for the Iranian legal system. Although Iranian law lacks explicit statutory provisions addressing sharenting or children’s digital privacy as an autonomous right, it nevertheless contains normative foundations that support such recognition. Principles such as the best interests of the child, alongside established rules of civil liability and criminal protections against child abuse, neglect, and exploitation, provide a legal basis for redefining the scope of parental representation in the digital context. Iranian child protection laws already recognise forms of harm arising from parental negligence, coercion, or exploitation, suggesting that unchecked sharenting could be addressed through existing legal doctrines.



The findings of this research indicate that the absence of explicit regulation does not equate to normative incapacity. Instead, through purposive interpretation and comparative insight, Iranian law can evolve to acknowledge children’s independent digital privacy rights while respecting legitimate parental autonomy. Ultimately, the study argues that balancing parental freedom with children’s rights requires a shift from absolute parental control toward a model grounded in responsibility, proportionality, and the primacy of the child’s best interests. In an era where digital footprints are enduring and irreversible, safeguarding children’s privacy is not merely a policy preference but a legal necessity essential to protecting their dignity, identity, and future autonomy.