The Instigator
Maria530
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Stirling
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Not All Parents Are At Fault When One of Their Kids Chooses to Rebels/Defiant towards Taught./Rules

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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...
Stirling
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/18/2013 Category: Education
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 635 times Debate No: 42569
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Maria530

Pro

Facts of the matter that when the parent is at fault it effects all the kids in the family not just one or two when the factor is 4 or more, Many of the parents set morals and values that most of their kids follow but there is always one that is born with a defiant and rebelling nature from day one the parent set bounders and place morals and values that was taught and are great models. Despite all that there is one or two depending on the number that will break the rules be defiant from day one of the parenting they are getting despite the ignorance to believe they are not doing all they are able to by laws. Even had there defiant rebellious kid in therapy for years but the child gets worse with age. But outsiders tend to be quick to judge when they have no clue especially the once that have no kids at all or base it on their own childhood. No matter if Christian morals and values or the most saint-est parent can end up being blamed for what their child is not putting to use the teachings or loves to break rules always had. True there are some parents and there are only 30 percent out of 100 parents that are truly at fault and all there kids are that way and if they have one only that child may use the mind of his/her own to defy all authority just because they feel like it. Most of these kids will admit that they did it despite the teaching of not to do bad or wrong and there parent taught them not to but they wanted to so they chose there way own ways and wants all the time. It was taken away buy most states that discipline was limited for parents to enforce like in the past but when that happened oh its the parents fault! NO NOT EVEN TRUE. Kids are told in School that their parents can touch them if they do anything if they do they can tell. But Kids never listen to details of the meaning by that law. They hear what they choose to and that is what kids do. Most of us adults today grew up where we got disciplines worse than others if they chose to do as they chose to do despite what they were told and taught by the parent but they got strong discipline and during that 1900's to early 1990's the crime level was lower and the prisons less packed but once parents were limited and the kids learned of this then the ones that are born naturally born more stubborn and strong willed not to listen they know a ground or lecture is nothing or rules post they can choose to do what they want and one little lie or frequent lie can make them have power over doing what they want. causing parents to be condemned when they are doing what they can do in there power to do. But society see the outside not the inside of what the facts and truth is and 80 are always wrong that the parent is at fault when NOT ALL ARE NOT. SO with that some will think other wise. And some parents that are not good makes many blind to a good parent that is battling nature of a child. All this is based on facts but many quick to assume and place false characterizing/judgment of 70% parents based on the 30% of the parents that are to blame. SO fact is not all parents are to blame unless you know for a fact all the kids are doing bad don't Judge the rest that are great with just one or some depending on size of family. Children have minds to refuse and it shows when you try to feed them and they refuse that food same concept with all other area and choices they will decide on despite what the parent says does or taught them.
Stirling

Con

Hi there! I will be glad to debate this topic with you.

Firstly, your main point I assume is that children are born defiant. As a general rule, this is not entirely true. Children behavior and attitude is developed with age through both nature and nurture. Of course, there is always cases such as children with ODD [Oppositional defiant disorder] whereas they are, in a way, "born defiant." However, that does not set a precedent for the majority of children.

Children defy authority for a variety of reasons. A few of which can be ODD, insufficient punishment/reinforcement from parents and other model figures [i.e. television figures] showing themselves in a less than mature way. However, it is undeniable that the parent holds a large part in this.

Parents can

a.) fail to enforce rules
b.) enforce rules too much/ not pick their battles and as a result causes natural defiance
c.) uses overly harsh punishment which will provide the same result as b.

Sometimes, the best way to deal with children is to allow them to have their way yet have a gentle guiding hand that nudges them towards the right way.
______

"Most of these kids will admit that they did it despite the teaching of not to do bad or wrong and there parent taught them not to but they wanted to so they chose there way own ways and wants all the time. It was taken away buy most states that discipline was limited for parents to enforce like in the past but when that happened oh its the parents fault! NO NOT EVEN TRUE"

I wish to remind you that in all 50 United States it is legal for a parent to physically hit a child. In fact, legislatures have shied away from setting many solid boundaries on parental enforcement and instead leaves it to the court. And to take any case to a court would require some serious punishment that never should've been inflicted in the first place. In the United States there have been many instances where court cases of physical beatings that have been ruled "not guilty" of abuse etc. too.

Parents have the complete right to enforce discipline and even without physical contact there can be many good ways such as lack of WiFi, time outs, groundings etc. to enforce rules.

"Kids are told in School that their parents can touch them if they do anything if they do they can tell."

This sentence is vague about what "touching them" meant but I will assume physical abuse. It is obviously encouraged a child speaks up if there is abuse but never in my K-12 education have I or any of my colleagues experienced an instance where a school official told us to speak up if our parents touched us.

"1990's the crime level was lower"

I wish to remind you that since the 1990's, crime rate in America has been steadily dropping. Source: http://www.disastercenter.com.... Anyhow, I do not see the bearing of crime rates on the behavior of children.

"Children have minds to refuse and it shows when you try to feed them and they refuse that food"

I also wish to remind you of the many instances, I am sure, where you [and I] have had foods that were not to our liking. That does not mean we should not eat them but it also does not mean that we are not entitled to an opinion. It is a frightening world where even food choices are controlled.

In conclusion, parents may not have all the responsibility in the behavior of a child but they definitely have a large chunk. Parents can determine the punishments, nurturing, guidance, care and outside variables [negative role models] that a child is exposed to. Parents have many rights to inflict punishment that despite not being actual legal "rights," are not legally completely banned. It is my belief that children, with the appropriate upbringing, education and environment, can be very agreeable and understanding.

There is a very interesting presentation http://prezi.com... that talks about genetics and attitude. It shows both sides of the argument but provides interesting arguments for the side of genes being simply our appearance but the outside factors being who we are.

I sincerely look forward to hearing back from you!
Debate Round No. 1
Maria530

Pro

Maria530 forfeited this round.
Stirling

Con

As my opponent has forfeited this round, I will be lenient and give more time for them to reply to my previous arguments and not present new ones
Debate Round No. 2
Maria530

Pro

Maria530 forfeited this round.
Stirling

Con

Stirling forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Maria530

Pro

Maria530 forfeited this round.
Stirling

Con

Stirling forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Maria530

Pro

Maria530 forfeited this round.
Stirling

Con

Stirling forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
Although I would like to debate some of your round 1 arguments, I do not wish to take the position
"All Parents Are At Fault When One of Their Kids Chooses to be Rebels / Defiant"
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Complicated_Mind 3 years ago
Complicated_Mind
Maria530StirlingTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: Conduct goes to Con. Pro forfeited every round after round one; S&G was tied as far as I could see; Con's arguments were not attacked due to Pro's many forfeits. Con also had clearer, more stable, and convincing arguments; Sources go to Con for using them; overall Con dominated this debate; for future reference I would recommend more spacing on Pro's part as it was a bit hard to read what she wrote.