The Instigator
mayrivershark
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
MrJosh
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

Does Screening Teenagers Can Help Prevent Teen Suicide?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
MrJosh
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/27/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 752 times Debate No: 70782
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

mayrivershark

Con

"How can we not routinely screen young people for mental illness when it is such an important cause of suffering and death?"
In the following viewpoint, Richard Friedman says that many teenagers suffer with depression and other mental illnesses and don't get the help they need. Tragically, some of these teens end up taking their own lives. Friedman thinks school-based screening programs like Teen Screen are an effective way to identify kids at risk for depression and prevent suicide. Friedman believes that screening programs do not infringe on parental rights"in fact he says the parents of most teen suicide attempts aren't even aware their teen is troubled. He also says any associated with being positively identified as a suicide risk, is far less of a price to pay then death. Richard Friedman is a professor of clinical psychiatry and the director of the Psychopathology Clinic at Weill Medical College.

Source Citation-
Friedman, Richard A. "Screening Teenagers Can Help Prevent Teen Suicide." Suicide.
Ed. Jacqueline Langwith. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2008. Opposing Viewpoints.
Rpt. from "Uncovering an Epidemic"Screening for Mental Illness in Teens." New
England Journal of Medicine 355 (28 Dec. 2006): 2717-2719. Opposing Viewpoints
in Context. Web. 27 Feb. 2015.
MrJosh

Pro

I accept this challenge and defer to CON so that (s)he may argue for CON position.
Debate Round No. 1
mayrivershark

Con

mayrivershark forfeited this round.
MrJosh

Pro

MrJosh forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
mayrivershark

Con

mayrivershark forfeited this round.
MrJosh

Pro

I would first like to apologize. I was caught off guard by the 12 hour time limit, as it seems CON was as well. Now, onto the content of the debate. The question of this debate is whether or not suicide screening tools save lives. My opponent has taken the CON position, so I will argue that suicide screenings do indeed save lives.

This is actually a pretty simple matter. It is well understood that suicide is preventable, if depression is caught early [1]. There are numerous screening tools available to screen for depression and/or suicidal tendencies [2]. Therefore, it follows that the use of these tools will prevent at least some suicides.

CON has failed to demonstrate the negation of the resolution, while I have shown that screening tools can indeed save lives.

Sources:

[1] http://www.adaa.org...
[2] http://www.integration.samhsa.gov...

Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Splenic_Warrior 2 years ago
Splenic_Warrior
mayriversharkMrJoshTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: This was just a terrible debate all around. Both sides forfeited rounds, and the 3 round debate was too short to really get any discussion going. I give Pro arguments because (s)he makes a coherent argument for the Pro position, while Con's position seems unclear, and doesn't make much sense. Sources equal, Spelling and Grammar equal, Conduct equally bad.