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

Parents Are Responsible For Teens Delinquency

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/17/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 981 times Debate No: 70213
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




The first round is for accepting the debate.I will be arguing for.Parents Are Responsible For Teens Delinquency.


I accept.
I will "argue" (as Pro has no way of actually responding to me, it is hardly a debate or even a discussion) that parents are not responsible for crimes commited by teens.
Debate Round No. 1


Teenagers are more likely to have behavioural problems or become delinquent because they lack adequate time and proper moral lesson from their parent. Firstly i'll define the major terms,which are;Parents,Teens,Delinquency. PARENT: One who has procreated offspring,a father or mother. TEENS:The years of a person's life from 13 to 19,hence a teenager is a person between the age of 13 to 19. DELINQUENCY:Committing an offence or failing to perform a duty. I will explain few points amongst many,how parents are responsibe for teens delinquency. Family Disintegration.This is basically when the family is apart.A disintegrated family can lead to the misbehaviour of teenagers.A child from a broken home or with a single parent will lack the support,love and care of the other.Example,if the father isn't with living with the child,such child would lack the fatherly love and discipline.Most fathers would know how to discipline their teens,but when he is apart or not living together as family,he would not be able to perform and also teach the child the morals and other lessons such child is expected to learn.That is one reason you see teenagers misbehaving and participating in illegal activities because there's no one to help put them on the right track. Parental Negligence.Most parents do not pay proper attention to the children,expecially parents who are always busy with voluminous work.Parents who are always busy with work do not actually have the time to sit their teenagers down and give them the moral lessons.Such teenagers who already lacks the love,care and attention from their parent tend to misbehave or easily get influenced by their peers.Teenagers would always want to associate,hence when they associate with the wrong peers,the pressure becomes too high and because they cant help it,they just fall to it.That is the more reason we have teenagers invoving themselves in drugs and other illegal and criminal activities. Exposure To Violence.When parents allow their children to be exposed to violence,those teenagers would learn from what they have seen and surely want to experiment.An environment where buyind and selling of drugs exist,environment where gun shot is always heard,environment where there is always fighting.If parent allow their children to be exposed to it,this teenagers would one day get adapted to it and hence,they will practise it,even without the notice of their parents.Another example is when the parents (father and mother) have misunderstanding and always a fight in the family,the father always maltreating the mother and saying harsh words on her.This teenagers learns from this and then begin to exhibit this characters outside the house,unknowing to the parents. With all vivid facts,parents are evidently responsible for their teenager's delinquency.All parents are required to be more attentive to their teens,because their behaviours would tell how good the parents are in training their teenagers.


First, I find it 100% unfair for Pro to not define key terms, then change them as referenced in Con's R1 acceptance. Regardless, I will use these terms.

Pro has offered three reasons why parents are at fault for teenagers' offensive behavior. Ignoring the fact that it is expected that teens revolt from parental control in these formidable years, these are the reasons for teen delinquency: family disintergration, violence, parental negligence, and exposure to violence.

Since pro is making an absolute statement, this fault must lie in the parents in ALL cases.
If the mother dies during child birth, then this is family disintergration, as is if the parents were to die in a car crash or were murderer. Is Pro really stating that if the parents are dead, that they are to be blamed for their child's upbringing?
Further, if the parents are responsible enough to realize that they cannot provide a good life for their child and give it up for adoption, then this, too, is family disintegration and parental negligence, and is the cause of teen delinquency, according to Pro.

Parental negligence is troubling, but when you have a teen taking care of the family, they are often not being deliquent. In fact, there are performing duties that are not even theirs. So, parental negligence can actually teach responsibility and have positive impacts.

Unless Pro is stating that all teen delinquents are exposed to violence, this is unfounded and irrelevant. Further, this supposes that teens, if exposed to violence, will be deliquent themselves. This, too, is unfounded.

Pro has offered no solid evidence or link that connects his assertions to the resolution. Just coincedental anecdotes, that while are likely factors, are not exclusive or causal reasons in themselves why teens are deliquent.

These reasons ignore issues of mental instability, like neurosis and disorders. Can you really blame parents for a sociopath's actions?
Further, this assumes that no act of offence or failure to perform a duty could be an accident, misunderstanding, or beyond the teen's control.
I am sure there are plenty of teens who are delinquent and do not suffer from these three issues. And, as Pro has stated: I will explain few points amongst many,how parents are responsibe for teens delinquency.
If they do not apply to the deliquent, they do not show responsibility.

Further, responsibility is defined as:
1 : the quality or state of being responsible: as
a : moral, legal, or mental accountability
b : reliability, trustworthiness

Are we going to say that not only is a teen, especially one of 18 or 19, not respoonsible for themselves, but we should hold the parents accountable, but we are saying that parents cannot make a mistake?
I do not believe that a parent should go to jail becaue their 18 year old son got into a fight, nor should the parent be forced to pay for the 19 year old's cell phone bill.

Pro has not met the burden of proof, and it is clear that to hold parents responsible for their adult children's actions is ridiculous. In fact, why stop at teen? Why not blame the 50 year old child for their parent's mistakes? Or, can we blame the mistakes of the parent's parents for their failures for the teen deliquent?
Debate Round No. 2
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Khaos_Mage 1 year ago
that formatted weird...
Posted by Khaos_Mage 1 year ago

I think I can. Perhaps the instigator should have defined terms.
Posted by BoggyB 1 year ago
Khaos_Mage, Pro never said they were responsible for the crimes teens commit, he said they were responsible for their delinquency, you have to stick to Pros thesis, not your own.
No votes have been placed for this debate.