Yes, and age assurance done properly serves those rights rather than undermining them. Age assurance should be used to restrict access to content and services that are genuinely age restricted or harmful to children, not to block children from information, advice, support, education or participation. Where a service contains both restricted and beneficial content, the correct answer is proportionate design, not crude exclusion.
Knowing that a user is a child also enables age-appropriate experiences, stronger default protections and freedom from adult targeting, which is what frameworks such the UK’s Children’s Code, requires. If a deployment ever locks children out of help or education, that is an implementation failure to be corrected, and regulators should treat it as such.
Every country in the world with the one exception of the United States, has signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Even in the USA, their own constitution sets out rights that apply to all citizens, not only adults. So, there are legal protections against the abuse or over-interpretation of regulation in ways that is itself harmful to the interests of children.