More handpicked essays just for you.
Family structure and family relations in contemporary times
Family structure in contemporary times
A discussion of how family systems vary in different cultures
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In what situation is it justifiably reasonable for the government to intervene in the process of child development, before the child is born or after? Is it logical or ethical to play eugenics in the sake of raising children for a better future? In Hugh LaFollete’s essay “Licensing Parents”, he offers a new approach to parenting, the right to license parents. LaFollete argues that the licensing of parents is not only “theoretically desirable”, he also lays out how licensing could be established by talking about the “rights to have a child”. And although LaFollete does makes a good point about why licensing parents is a good idea, I will also point out some flaws in his essay to his position. LaFollete’s basic argument argues that the concept …show more content…
One of the biggest problem with LaFollete’s argument is that this is a form of eugenics. Eugenics is the belief and practice of trying to improve the overall genetic quality of the population by encouraging the good traits and discouraging the bad traits in order to breed the desired population, choosing usually the biggest, strongest or healthiest of the pack to reproduce and thus creating super children. In some cases eugenics is not a bad thing in some situations like for the sake of survival, which is not necessary our situation because we already have some of the most advanced medical facilities in the world that will ensure our survival. On top of that, it is more often times frowned upon, for the reason that it is unnatural and can often times lean toward racist and classist in this society if the parental licensing is to be practiced. If the licensing were to be practiced, there would be a high chance that there would be racial bias when it comes to applying for the license, admitting a certain race more than the other, or being classist, claiming that only the upper class is allowed a license because only they have the resources that a child need. Even worse, the parents who do take the test to obtain a license can also ignore what is encouraged in the test and continue raising their child according to …show more content…
Issuing a license will decrease the US population significantly, discouraging idea of sex in the fear of accidentally producing a children and having to go through the hassle of applying for a license that they may or may not be able to obtain. It can also encourage safer sex practices like birth control and condom usage, which is not necessarily a bad thing. On top of that, it will also cause a lot of traffic in the beginning process of issuing license for already existing parents which will take a long time before all parenting license will be put into practice, which can be a good thing because this will create lot of new jobs which will lead to more spending and boosting the economy but is time consuming. Another question that will arise when applying for a license that LaFollete did not cinsuder is what if the parent are not able to obtain a license? What will happen to the children? LaFollete can call for the children to be put into an orphanage to be put up to adoption by better parents or into a social service program but the potential flaw in that argument can be that the
In Hugh Lafollette’s paper, “Licensing Parents” he talks about the need for government licensing of parents. His argument states that for any activity that is harmful to others, requires competence, and has a reliable procedure for determining competence, should require licensing by the government. This argument relates to parenting because it can be harmful to children, requires competence to raise those children, and we can assume that a reliable procedure can be formulated. Therefore, parenting should require licensing by the government. I agree with Lafollette and shall focus on supporting him by addressing the most practical objections: There is no reliable procedure for identifying competent parents and it is impossible to reasonably enforce parent regulations. I shall address these objections and their reasoning, followed by responses that Lafollette and myself would most likely have, thereby refuting the objections.
Galton, David J., and Clare J. Galton. "Francis Galton: And Eugenics Today." Journal of Medical Ethics, 24.2 (1998): 99-101. JSTOR. Web. 8 Mar. 2010.
To choose for their children, the world’s wealthy class will soon have options such as tall, pretty, athletic, intelligent, blue eyes, and blonde hair. Occasionally referred to as similar to “the eugenics of Hitler’s Third Reich” (“Designer Babies” n.p.), the new genetics technology is causing differences in people’s opinions, despite altering DNA before implantation is “just around the corner.” (Thadani n.p.). A recent advance in genetically altering embryos coined “designer babies” produces controversy about the morality of this process.
With Dolly, scientists were able to clone her, but she only lived half the age as her mother. Yet, the root was determined, and further studies showed great promise, all with the usage of biotechnology with no immoral harm done to the animals that were utilized for the procedures, without the violation of any rights, such as the right to autonomy. While an opposer to genetic enhancements may say this right is violated because the individual’s future is no longer open, but is it really predetermined? For a parent to choose their child’s genetic makeup, it can be related to easily with a parent to withhold a child’s right to pursuing one thing over another, career-wise or
...an feel safe and escape from the cycle they are in wich could vary in helping them to cope with an abusive household and to inform them of what they can do to stop the abuse, or if they are in a wrongfull relationship with an adult. Also to teach them why teen/adult sex is not permited and to make them understad that if they dont want to tell who is the father is ok, but it would be best idea to tell if they are, and that nothing would happen to them if they tell. Some of the comparisons the supporters use to prove that this proposition would work in california had an origin in states with different demographics as in california where most of the teens where white or or from families that are economically stable. Unfortunately this is not true to the state of california in which most of the teens using this services are from minorities, and from low income families.
When looking at the development of abortion policy, it is clear that it has always been a subject of controversy. Campaigns for the legalisation of...
As people come to the topic of citizen’s rights, the majority of us will readily agree that rights are very much needed in a society. It has become common in today’s society for the government to try and take away its citizens rights. “The flag is just an indication that the parents will have to make a sacrifice. Sometimes it means the child will be handicapped, and the parents will have to work additionally hours to make up for the burden on the state,” (Haines, 26). The flag is symbolizing family’s ability to take the best path in making their future better. Whether it is having the baby and knowing they will to make a sacrifice, or if it is not having the baby to help society as well as the families case. Therefore the people believe they have rights, even though the government already knows the future because of technology. In this dystopia’s society, a ten with a flag baby is very rare. “Your child is a ten sir, that should be enough to make you forget about the flag,” (Haines, 26). The ten with a flag baby is so significant and rare due to the fact that it is very hard to understand how a baby that is perfect could have a problem like a flag. Also, just having a baby that is rated a ten is ridiculously rare. Having rights in a society is what allows the citizens to have
In the “Choosing for Disability” by Dena S. Davis, the main thesis is centered on the moral implications of parents purposefully wanting the genetic makeup of their children to reflect their own disability through the use of genetic medicine. I will proceed to summarize the arguments of the thesis in respect to genetic ethics and then critique it on the basis of autonomy.
While this is a valid statement, it can be refuted by everyone agreeing that there should at least be basic standards for raising a child. A parenting license would just enforce the standards every child should be brought up with. That being said, these licenses are not meant to dictate every move a parent makes with their child or children, the license is there to set a minimum standard for care of a child. The absolute minimum standard should be the basic human necessities to live; food, shelter, and health. However, the bar should be set where the children are happy, educated, and nurtured. This standard should not be hard to meet if the potential parents consider themselves fit to raise a child. The standard is there to keep parents who neglect or harm their children at bay. The license is a sort of test to show potential parents meet all of the criteria. If they fail the license test, then they do not get to reap the benefits of
People should not have access to genetically altering their children because of people’s views on God and their faith, the ethics involving humans, and the possible dangers in tampering with human genes. Although it is many parent’s dream to have the perfect child, or to create a child just the way they want, parents need to realize the reality in genetic engineering. Sometimes a dream should stay a figment of one’s imagination, so reality can go in without the chance of harming an innocent child’s life.
The main issue, as is so often the case with controversial subjects has been lost along the way. Everyone has become caught up in the right vs. left fight and ensuing name calling so few people are truly paying attention to the children themselves. America already has enough laws. What parents need most is education and support, not legislation. Also, those without children need to mind their own business and stick to subjects they have experience with, not just opinions. Having been a child does not give one insight into how to raise a child.
Morris, D. T. (1993). Cost containment and reproductive autonomy: Prenatal genetic screening and the American health security act of 1993. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 20, 295-316.
“It 's not easy as “I want to buy and egg,” states, the director of the Donor Egg Bank, Brigid Dowd. “Not everyone realizes what 's involved, and then when they hear the cost, many just pass out.” (CGS: Designing the $100,000 Baby,” par. 13) It is a fact that having certain traits are valuable, so this shows that the mere modification used on the designer baby, the more the cost. “If you are too rigid or become too obsessed with finding the perfect image you have in mind, the choice can become more difficult,” says Dowd. (“CGS: Designing the $100,000 Baby,”par. 16) The practice of human genetic modification will not be fair because only the wealthy will have enough money to spend on designing a baby. Therefore, the wealthy will have much more advantages such as longer, healthier, and successful lives. If only people of high class are able to afford designer babies, it will cause an even greater inequality between the rich and the poor (“The Ethics of Designer Babies”). It will also create a society based on “Social Darwinism”- The survival of the fittest. If creating designer babies will cause more inequalities and Social Darwinism, why should we allow this practice? (“The ethics of Designer Babies”)
“How far along in a pregnancy is it until the unborn child is considered human? At what point does it receive basic rights?” These propositions have been the topic of one the most controversial discussions of the century. Based on the research I have completed on this topic, it has been made indisputable to me that life begins at the moment of conception.
One of many arguments against this is that if the teens feel they are “destined” to be together and they wait to become married, there is a strong potential for pregnancy before marriage. However, just because teens wait to become married does not mean that they wait to share the privileges that married couples share. Today, sex before marriage is widely practiced. Many couples, who are not even considering marriage, have sex. Chances are that if a teen couple is thinking about marriage, they probably have already had intercourse. Allowing the teens to become married would only encourage sex before they are fully prepared to handle the responsibilities that come ...