Adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical choices.
First round is for acceptance only.
O1. For medical choices that do no prolong life or improve health, such as aesthetic procedures – if the parent does not want to pay for the procedure, then the adolescent will have to pay for it themselves. Otherwise, for procedures that prolong life or improve health, the parent will have to pay for them.
The highest value in today’s round is Ethical Egoism. (Definition here: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 02 “Egoism”, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egoism/#2)
This value must be upheld as it is the only way to ensure a proper departure of adolescents from paternal control. They do not reject paternalism due to selfishness but for moral reasons. (Same source as above to see what this means)
My criterion best upholds my value of Ethical Egoism because it allows free action. The individual is not controlled by the state and he or she can exist in a smooth plane, outside of control. They are allowed to develop in a self-interest that is morally right to society.
The triangle of the family promotes a social unity – each member of the family has a specific role to which they must conform – if they do not conform, society will view these individuals as deviants – the forced cooperation of the family is the psychoanalytic colonization of Oedipus.
When the adolescent makes his own autonomous decision, he or she is breaking the dominant authority of mommy and daddy – this breaks the Oedipal triangle – no longer is the child scared of mommy and daddy power, as it defies the norms of society.
Society wants adolescents to stay in the vice of the parents – if the adolescent chooses freedom over mommy-daddy, society will begin to punish – it will blame the adolescent’s rebellious nature on the Oedipus complex – it will say that the boy will want to rebel against the father because he is jealous of the father’s relation toward the mother – this is vice versa with a girl.
Of course, it is obviously not saying the child wants to sleep with its opposite sex parent and kill its same sex parent – but society is saying that your little rebellious nature is bad – it is saying that the only reason for this rebellion is because you want to defy your parents – Oedipus is designed to make the rebel child feel guilty – so society will do this by labeling he or she as rebellious.
If the child is forced to submit to society, it enters into the Nuclear Family, a perfect family – society’s grand design for conformity and control – if everyone is the perfect family then no one will question society at all and the hierarchies and exploitation can continue.
When the state uses excuses such as Oedipus to stop the rebellion – this leads the child to desire their own repression, fascism – they question the hierarchies of society and the state punishes the child by making them feel like they hate their parents and want to rebel – the child will desire their own repression by wanting the hierarchies of society to control them so that they do not seem like they are hurting their parents – we must not let this exploitation happen – an adolescent can have their own autonomy and they can question the hierarchies of the state.
Fascism is the path to pure destruction, as D&G explain in 1980 in A Thousand Plateus
The Nomad is a way out of Oedipus – it frees them from the territorialization of the psychoanalytic family and allows them to resist the dangers of fascism.
You offered no definitions no round rules in the beginning round so I will do it my way. By your only claim in the debate that encouraged me to join. Adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical choices. First I will start with definitions.
Adolescents: "(of a young person) in the process of developing from a child into an adult."https://www.google.ca...
Autonomous:"acting or able to act in accordance with rules and principles of one's own choosing."
Medical:"Medical means relating to illness and injuries and to their treatment or prevention."
So should all minors have the right to choose their own medical choices in all scenarios?
The answer should be an obvious no for many reasons.
1. Not all children thoroughly understand how desicions may affect them later in life.
2. It is a team effort for adolescents, between parents, doctors. Not just adolescents.
3. The end decision is usually made by the legal guardian because they should understand what's best for their child.
I don't understand what exactly your are saying.
I will have to ask you to stay on topic for this debate. I will rebute when your debate stance makes sense. I look forward to your response.
I concede your needless definitions. As for your question -- yes, but payment for them is specified in my 1AC.
You don't have any framework (values/criterion), so you should just accept mine as the ultimate value for looking at today's round. Standford in the philosophy department defines ethical egoism, and I defined and explained nomadism through my Heckman 02 card. Free action upholds ethical egoism, and nomadism upholds free choice -- nomadism links directly to my dropped value.
Basically, my case is using the philosophy of Deleuze and Guattari in their books about the nature of the family and the individual. If we allow free choice to make decisions, we can rebel against the power structure and so on. Society in the status quo of not allowing free choice views individuals as devaints, and has forced cooperation - this is where Oedipus comes in.
Defying parents through this free will is entirely good, I claim. Negation means affirming conformity and exploitation/hierarchies. This fascism, as Guattari coins in his books, will lead to us all dying.
Okay, so your entire case is basically that it is good for parents to decide. But look to my case, you see that this power struggle is inherently flawed - this is the rule of exception through the use of Oedipus. All people (adolescents and adults alike) have personal liberty and can make personal choices to attack these power struggles, so while they may not know the entirety of their decisions' implications, this is the only way to attack the nuclear family! The parent does not know best -- they exist to attack the adolescent and continue the hierarchy that is inherently flawed.
I have stated why it is up to the adults to make a desicision. If you want I could add some science in also.
Adolescents are particularly sensitive and responsive to influence by friends, desires and emotions, researchers say. It"s one of the hallmarks of this stage in life.
Teenagers often don't make the right choices.
"A major reason why teenagers often respond to influences with irrational decisions is the presence of a brain chemical known as dopamine. The brain releases dopamine when something makes us feel good, whether it"s receiving a teacher"s compliment or finding a $20 bill. Dopamine levels in general peak during adolescence. In teenagers, the strength of this "feel good" response helps explain why they often give in to impulsive desires."
If you want to talk Bible talk,
"Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord." https://www.biblegateway.com...
In conclusion to this round it should be clear why adolescents shouldn't be allowed to independently make medical desicions. I look forward to my opponents response again.
What even? Just extend literally everything that I said.
If you don't believe that books exist by some of the most famous philosophers of the 20th century, google it I guess? Your own ignorance of the facts doesn't mean that they are inherently false or something.
Adolescents might be subject to influence, but this exists to attack the nuclear family ... rebel against power structures, and so on and so on.
Deleuze and Guattari are not just people I made up. It'd be illegal for me to give their entire works for you to see on the internet, so I can't do that ...
Vote aff since literally everything I said of worth was dropped from the get-go...
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|