The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
6 Points

Children under the age of 16 should be allowed to work willingly on all jobs for pay.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/29/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,568 times Debate No: 58335
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




You will debate as against the above [con] Round 1 will be for accepting. Rounds 2-4 will be arguing upon this topic [let's keep it friendly"this means no cussing"and open-minded:
"support your details logically
"counter-argue each other's facts
"opinions should be kept at a mild rate
"facts should be present.

Round 5 will be our conclusions upon our topic. Thank you.


I accept this debate and will argue against the stated resolution.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting the challenge :) good luck to my opponent

Children under the age of 16 should be allowed to work on any job they want for pay. They should be able to have any job they want and should not be limited to odd jobs and starting their own [small] businesses such as landscaping, baby-sitting, lemonade stands, car washes, etc. There are many smart children out there and just becase some are immature, they shouldn't be judged as a whole and put on extremely restricted leashes. Infact, children as also quite smart, and even the immature ones can put on a serious face long enough to work their shift. The government is too overly controlling. As long as the children are not working overly dangerous jobs, have parental consent and are more than willing to work, they should be allowed to work for money.


I would like to thank PRO for this debate.

The Resolution

I would like to begin my arguments with a discussion of the resolution. As worded by PRO, the resolution being debated is, “Children under the age of 16 should be allowed to work willingly on all jobs for pay.” As agreed, I will be arguing against this resolution. I would like to point out that PRO proposes applying this resolution to “all” jobs. It is clear that PRO is arguing that 16 year olds should be allowed to work any job they like. I will provide three examples of types of jobs they should not be allowed to have.

Skill Jobs

There are many jobs that require a great deal of skill. Often, that skill can only be gained by years of study and experience. Based on the requisite schooling and experience, a 16 year old should not be allowed to be a surgeon [1], an engineer [2], or a pharmacist [3]. Although it would technically be possible to earn engineering credentials at the age of 16 if one began their undergraduate work at the age of 12, this is not practical. These jobs, as well as many others that require high levels of skill should not be open to 16 year olds.

My Job

According to PRO’s resolution, a 16 year old should be able to walk into any workplace and take any position away from the individual currently filling it. Not only is this absurd, it would cause all sorts of issues with employment contracts [4], and collective bargaining agreements [5].

Unsafe Jobs

It is well understood that the body and brain of a teenager is still developing [6]. This not only means that a 16 year old’s decision making process (which they would use to choose a job) may be questionable; it also means that damage incurred during an unsafe job may hinder proper development. Therefore, I propose that high risk jobs such as professional football player [7], military infantry [8], and prostitute [9] be off limits for a 16 year old.

Closing Thoughts

PRO has claimed that a 16 year old should be able to have any job (s)he wishes. I have given reasons why at least three categories of jobs should be off limits to 16 year olds. I await PRO’s comments in the next round.



Debate Round No. 2


Debatebot5 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


Debatebot5 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


Debatebot5 forfeited this round.


Sadly, this debate never happened. I argued my position and supported it with sources; PRO chose not to participate.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Preston 3 years ago
they can work, work permits, the employer has requirements though...
Posted by Phoenix61397 3 years ago
Can you define what "all jobs" means?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture