A child should have the right to become emancipated at any age, if the child can demonstrate to a court that the child is competent enough to take care of him/herself. If a child is not emancipated, then the parents have guardianship rights over the child and can exercise control over the child.
If a child wants to commit suicide because of a terminal illness against the wishes of the parents, the child would have to demonstrate understanding of the decision and become emancipated in the eyes of the court.
I find your last paragraph full of foggy concepts and ambiguous terms. NAP and self-ownership are agreed upon concepts and do not have some ideal platonic existence. If that's your point, I agree with it.
I am not opposed to granting some rights to some animals, such as the great apes. What the exact criterion for recognizing self-ownership should be has not been settled, as far as I know. Some claim a being should be recognized as having rights to the extend to which it can demand them. Others claim that a being should be recognized as having some rights if it demonstrates self-awareness. It's an interesting questions. Dismissing all claims for animal rights seems premature to me.
“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: