The Instigator
Deathbeforedishonour
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Phoenix_Reaper
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Parents Should Allow Teens to make Their own Descisions

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/25/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 17,036 times Debate No: 16699
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

Deathbeforedishonour

Pro

In my opinion teens should be allow to make their own descisions, and it shall be the job of Con to prove me wrong. Good luck to my opponant and thank you.

Contention 1: If parents make all the descisions for the teen, the teen would never learn how to make them. The teen would reach adulthood and never have any kind of experience, and that could have negative consequences. For an example, most teens are very blind when it comes to politics. They go through their lives holding political beliefs very similiar to their parents, and then when they get to collage the people are faced with the reality of politics.[1]

Contention 2: Parents should not make the descisions of the teenager because the parents even though they have lived longer, are not perfect and neither is the teenager. The fact that a imperfect person should be allowed to tell another imperfect person is ubsurd.

In Conclusion,

Teens will learn more if they make their own descisions.

Parents are not perfect therefore, they can not tell other people who are not perfect either what to do.

Teens should be allowed to make their own descisions.

Vote Pro

[1] http://www.lzbearfacts.com...
Phoenix_Reaper

Con

I'd like to thank the Pro for making this debate. Now onto the debate.

"In my opinion teens should be allow to make their own descisions"

To begin with teens already make their own decisions it is a matter of influence but I understand the position you are attempting to make and will follow upon it.

Definitions;

Opinion - a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge: [1]

Teen(s) - teenager - a person aged from 13 to 19 years. [1]

Decision - a conclusion or resolution reached after consideration [1]

----------

In response to Contention One my opponent contends that if the parent is to make the decisions of the teenage though out his or her life that it cripples them citing an example of political influence. Though my opponent may make a sound statement he lacks any acknowledgment that the parent is doing what their job is; to raise their child as he or she deems fit and to the standards of society.

The political example is a to each own about how life should be lived. Sure my opponent will contend that is exactly the point but I also would like to use his own source against him.

""The brain is mostly developing during the teenage years," Chhavria Abria, neurologist, said. "Usually the human brain is not fully developed until we reach the age of 25."" [2]

As the quote above states the brain is easy to manipulate/still developing. During this period it is crucial for the parent to instill proper social norms into their minds to help themselves fit into the world. More so it is also a period of the child being easily influenced by everything. Without proper guidance the child may fall into a hole that will be difficult to climb out of.

Which brings me to my opponents Second Contention which thesis is, "The fact that a imperfect person should be allowed to tell another imperfect person is ubsurd."

Perfection is incapable of being accomplished by definition. Even with the parents not being perfect they have something that teenagers do not posses; wisdom. Now my opponent stated that "though they (parents) have lived longer doesn't entitle them to tell another, younger, person how to behave." (In my own words.) This wisdom that parents posses is valuable for teenagers still growing so that the teenager does not haft to suffer what the parent already has, which is a big part of parenting.

Also to attack his thesis of Contention Two than who would teach the teenager anything? Let the teen do as they please no matter how self destructive it may be?

-----------

Now I shall bring up more practical points to favor my position. Current law dictates that a child/teenagers actions are the responsibility of the parent. Case examples in citation three. [3]

Due to the responsibility placed on the parent the teenager/child should not do as he or she pleases because they are not liable for what he or she does. Without being liable to their actions nothing is learned and the idea that they (teenagers) may always get away with anything they do without consequence will hurt their growth. One major part in growing up is realizing that you are responsible for your own actions and without punishing their actions it will hurt them when he or she see's what the real world is... cruel.

Vote Con!

[1] Oxford Dictionary http://oxforddictionaries.com...
[2] http://www.lzbearfacts.com...
[3] http://criminal.lawyers.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Deathbeforedishonour

Pro

C1: The teenager has learned enough values, while they were kids. A teenager can learn more if they experience the world for themselves, rather then hearing what their parents have experienced.

When they teenager gets into the world, he/she will be exposed to to all the proper social norms. Also, if the teenager gets into a difficult hole it will be the parents job to help them out.

C2: The teenager should be incouraged and given advice from the parents, but the parents who are no better then the teen should not have any say in how a teen conducts their life.

The teen is an individual in charge of their own life. The teenager would learn first hand what it is like in the world and will be forced to adapt to the hardships of life and make something of themselves.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebutle of opponent's Premise:

My opponent says that the parents are responsibe for whatever their teens do according to the law. This true but the parents can grant the teen emancipation, which is perfectly legal and should be done.[1]

The world and life all together is in fact cruel even if the parents are telling the teen what to do. This is how the teen would learn from their mistakes that they would make.

In conclusion,

Teens would would learn more without the rules that their parents give them.

Teens should be incouraged but not forced.

Teens would learn everything from being exposed to what the world really is.

It is perfectly lawful for teens to be emancipated from their parents authority.

Vote Pro

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Phoenix_Reaper

Con

"When they teenager gets into the world, he/she will be exposed to to all the proper social norms. Also, if the teenager gets into a difficult hole it will be the parents job to help them out. "

A teenage is incapable of entering an adult world and being exposed/adapting to proper social norms. Teenagers are known to be confrontational of social responsibilities. My opponent also states that it is the parents job to help them if he or she gets into a hole which defeats the entire purpose of what my opponent is trying to suggest.

My opponent is trying to suggest that letting teenagers, in essence, raise themselves while at the same time stating that if the teenager does something wrong that the parent should save them, thus defeating the purpose. How is it defeating the purpose? By letting the child attempt to adapt into an adult world or even making their own decisions without real consequence (the parents save them) the teenager learns that the parent will always be there to save him or her.

"The teen is an individual in charge of their own life. The teenager would learn first hand what it is like in the world and will be forced to adapt to the hardships of life and make something of themselves."

Sure the teenager may experience the adult world but without proper guidance – simply saying "do not do that" by the parent does not work which my opponent suggests by saying "given advice from the parents " - the teenager will most likely face drug usage. With the current parental guidance given to teenagers, even adolescences, drug rates have gone down. [1]

Without any real assistance from parents how will these teenagers know any better. Drugs will most likely lead to a hole that is extremely difficult to get out of. Granted this is one scenario, I'll provide one more.

A teenager girl who has no help from her parents may hurt their growth and view about how the world works. In today's society girls are generally seen as sex objects. A young girl being exposed to such views may end up as a prostitute due to the mentality that they are of no use elsewhere.



"My opponent says that the parents are responsibe for whatever their teens do according to the law. This true but the parents can grant the teen emancipation, which is perfectly legal and should be done.[1] "

Again I must use my opponents own source against him.

"In most countries of the world, adolescents below the legal age of majority (adulthood) may be emancipated in some manner: through marriage, attaining economic self-sufficiency, obtaining an educational degree or diploma, or participating in a form of military service. " [2]

In order to accomplish emancipation certain requirements must be met. Just giving a juvenile(s) emancipation will hurt them. The quote above are all reasonable reason as to when a child is able to manage their own life. Without any of the above reasons the teenager is susceptible to all laws which he or she will most likely not be aware of, thus hurting them.

"The world and life all together is in fact cruel even if the parents are telling the teen what to do. This is how the teen would learn from their mistakes that they would make. "

I refer to my two previous examples about how being responsible for themselves may hurt them. Getting sucked into drugs or prostitution is not a good way to learn a lesson. More so some mistakes are incapable of being learned or even worse are so tragic he or she may end up in jail for a long time.

There is one more piratical matter at hand... the teenager is sheltered. While being so young their under parental control and are, most likely, attending school which shelters them from the real world. My opponent thinks that just letting the teen make their decisions shows them the "real world." The real world only appears to those who do not go to school/out of school when you must work to live. Where your fashion sense and group of friends is trivial. Where your accomplishments mean nothing unless pliable to said work. Where their views on life are based upon inexperience and trivial ideas.

In summation;

Without proper guidance from a parental figure the child is in risk of being taken advantage of, notably females. Also the teenager may fall so far from help, whether it drugs or gangs, that he or she will be difficult to assist.

A point of this debate is about parental liability which my opponent answered with a two lines without actually fixing the problem. Emancipation is earned not given at free will.

Teenagers can not be exposed to the real world until he or she is out of school and from under their parents shelter. If he or she has either... little will be learned.

Vote Con!

[1] http://www.treatmentsolutionsnetwork.com...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by 150Hancock25 3 years ago
150Hancock25
Stated by the author, the conclusion of this piece is that "Teens should be allowed to make their own decisions". For this argument, the author contributes several interesting premises to support his or her claim. The first premise given by the author is that "If parents make all the decisions for the teen, the teen would never learn how to make them, the teen would reach adulthood and never have any kind of experience, and that could have negative consequences". Although this premise provides great merit the argument, the author neglects to take into account the fact that most teenagers lack a great deal of maturity and responsibility to make certain crucial decisions. Let's be realistic, in general we are talking about a group of individuals who still rely on their parents to wake them up in time for school each morning. In addition to a lack of maturity and responsibility many teenagers can be easily influenced by their peers into making decisions that are neither rational nor smart. This is a devastating fact that that has the potential to have far worse consequences than lack of experience when reaching adulthood.
The second premise the author provides it that "Parents should not make the descisions of the teenager because the parents even though they have lived longer, are not perfect and neither is the teenager. Even though parents are not perfect, parents have indeed walked this earth much longer than their teenage son or daughter. With these extra years of life brings a great deal of additional knowledge obtained through the words of their elders. These teachings can be passed down from generation to generation so the teenage child does not go into a situation blindly.
Although the author of this argument gives several good premises to support his or her conclusion they unwillingly neglect the reality of the situation. Unlike pre 1940's were many teen
Posted by 150Hancock25 3 years ago
150Hancock25
Openly stated by the author, the conclusion of this piece is that "Teens should be allowed to make their own decisions". For this argument, the author contributes several interesting premises to support his or her claim. The first premise given by the author is that "If parents make all the decisions for the teen, the teen would never learn how to make them, the teen would reach adulthood and never have any kind of experience, and that could have negative consequences". Although this premise provides great merit the argument, the author neglects to take into account the fact that most teenagers lack a great deal of maturity and responsibility to make certain crucial decisions. Let's be realistic, in general we are talking about a group of individuals who still rely on their parents to wake them up in time for school each morning. In addition to a lack of maturity and responsibility many teenagers can be easily influenced by their peers into making decisions that are neither rational nor smart. This is a devastating fact that that has the potential to have far worse consequences than lack of experience when reaching adulthood.
The second premise the author provides it that "Parents should not make the descisions of the teenager because the parents even though they have lived longer, are not perfect and neither is the teenager. The fact that a imperfect person should be allowed to tell another imperfect person is ubsurd". Even though parents are not perfect, parents have indeed walked this earth much longer than their teenage son or daughter. With these extra years of life brings a great deal of additional knowledge obtained through the words of their elders. These teachings can be passed down from generation to generation so the teenage child does not go into a situation blindly.
Although the author of this argument gives several good premises to support his or her conclusion they unwillingly neglect the reality of the situation. Unlike pre 1940's were many teen
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 3 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
haha notice the only people voting against me are parents...
Posted by Phoenix_Reaper 3 years ago
Phoenix_Reaper
I have now seen the other side.... though I somewhat agree with you.
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 3 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
@ AvalonClaire Indeed and agreed
Posted by Deathbeforedishonour 3 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
@Phoenix_Reaper If the parents didn't want to be liable for anything then they shouldn't have had the baby in the first place. Also, the parent should not be held liable for what another person(including their children) does.
Posted by AvalonClaire 3 years ago
AvalonClaire
I fully agree with debate , and its a persons own influence on themselves !
Posted by Phoenix_Reaper 3 years ago
Phoenix_Reaper
Parents are held liable for any action the child makes. Therefore I would limit their ability to cost me anything.
Posted by kohai 3 years ago
kohai
I'd accept, but am to pro.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by medic0506 3 years ago
medic0506
DeathbeforedishonourPhoenix_ReaperTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: A few years out in the "real world" will show pro why he lost this debate.
Vote Placed by Amveller 3 years ago
Amveller
DeathbeforedishonourPhoenix_ReaperTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: I get why you made this debate your parents are prolly on your ass for smoking to much bud