Pushy Parents are Good Parents
Debate Rounds (3)
[[This is the first debate I've ever started on this site, so please forgive any conventions I may unwittingly break! This is an 'education' debate, but could also be classed as a 'society' debate. I have set the posting limit to 24 hours, but I plan to post within an hour of seeing your arguments]]
My stance: I believe that pushy parenting is not only acceptable, but also beneficial to children, therefore making it a good parenting approach.
In this argument, pushy parenting is defined as: "taking an exceptionally keen interest in a child's education and strongly influencing them to enjoy and succeed at specific activities from a young age, such as playing a musical instrument, in an attempt to better their future."
CON will be against pushy parenting and will start their argument in the first round.
I will kick the debate off by stating that I believe pushy parenting should consist of influencing a child as opposed to forcing them, which could cause undue stress for both the child and parent. I do not believe that forcing a child to learn or take up an activity is an acceptable thing to do if the child becomes upset; pushy parenting should be an amalgamation between education and play.
1:Pushy parents; a parent who pushes their child to be better than everyone else. Often times referred to as "helicopter parents."
C1. "pushy parents" create negatives on a child.
Pushy parents give their children depression. Children who have been under the influence of pushy parents have seen a dramatic increase of depression then children who do not have pushy parents. This is because the child is expected to be more than they can be. Once the child doesn't live up to his or hers expectations they feel as if they are a failure thus leading to depression.
C2. Pushy parents cannot teach their children to live on their own.
Pushy parents have done things for their children that the children have to idea how to be independent. I don't have many characters remaining but you could read more here->http://www.forbes.com...
Attacking my opponents case
My opponent said that he or she's opinion on pushy parents is they just simply want the best for their children. "I believe pushy parenting should consist of influencing a child as opposed to forcing them. " This is a direct quote from my opponents first speech. We cannot use this opinion because it gives an unfair definition to what a pushy parent is, and will confuse the judges and myself. A pushy parent should be referred to as a helicopter parent and an encouraging parent should be referred to as a caring parent.
Caring parents are better because the ensure their child's success while appeasing the child's hobbies or interests. The parent gets what they want and so does the child.
Apologies for the tiny character count, it was an accident. Forgive extreme brevity.
Firstly, I must reiterate that the definition of pushy parenting in this debate was outlined in my original post -- please refer back to round one and familiarise yourself with it. I accept the term 'encouraging parent' as an interchangeable alternative to 'pushy parent', but pushing a child implies a stronger and more consistent use of encouragement, without unreasonable stress being caused as outlined in round one. A 'helicopter parent' is not the same as pushing a child; 'helicopter parent' denotes overprotion. I urge voters to discard my opponent's new and unwarranted definition.
Your claim of depression is uncredited. I concede that forcing anybody to do something that they do not wish to do can be stressful and can indeed lead to depression, but as highlighted in the definition above, I have already explained that undue force is an unjust extreme. A light amount of force is healthy encouragement; the child should never be brought to tears or subsequently depressed.
"Lack of independence"
This is a completely misguided claim. Pushy parenting does not involve pandering to your child's every whim; as explained in the definition section, pushy parenting is not 'helicopter parenting'.
A pushy parent is not a push-over parent
An early start leads to success
The fact is, human beings learn a lot easier as a children. Look at second language acquisition for example; a quick Google search will reveal the many studies that have shown children to absorb language like a sponge, whereas adults spend years -- decades -- trying to master a new tongue, but rarely gaining fluency.
Ask a successful singer when they started to sing and you will almost always be given an age younger than 5-years-old. Celebrity singers are well-documented; this information can quickly be found online.
The greatest minds and artists of all time were often gifted children pushed by parents.
Pushy parent. My opponent insists that this is the correct term because he or she presented it as the one and only definition. I urge my judges to completely ignore this definition. The reason why is because a pushy parent PUSHES their child. Often to do things the child isn't interested in. My opponents definition for pushy parent should fall under the category of caring parents.
first I will defend my case. My opponent attacked my depression claim by stating it was not cited. well with this evidence their is more damage than just depression. Increase risk of suicide, more likely to abuse drugs, the list goes on and on.http://www.independent.co.uk...
My opponent attacked my contention where I state pushy parents raise children who cannot function as adults. This attack is illogical because the parents are not obeying the child. The child isn't asking for parent help. The parents are doing it on their own.
Now to attack my opponents case.
The only part of the case added was about how pushy parents raise the best children in the world. This is not cited. The possibility for these gifted children pushed by parents to be great is simply because they are gifted is very great. The parents could have had nothing to do with it but take the rewards because they were "pushy."
Definition clarification: I very firmly outlined the definition in the first post; when my adversary accepted this debate, they automatically accepted the rules that I set out. They cannot attempt to change the original definition. The original definition sticks.
The article that you posted in support of the so-called depression, drugs and other related issues is irrelevant; the report, if read thoroughly, is about overprotecting a child and smothering their education by completing their homework and coursework for them.
"If we could really understand that when "helping" slips into taking over and the underlying message we are giving out is "you're not clever enough to do this on your own", maybe a space between parental involvement and a child's own authorship can begin to emerge."
This quote is lifted directly from my opponent's own source (second to last paragraph) and highlights my rebuttal: the article describes 'helicopter parenting' -- pushy parenting does not involve doing the child's work for them, but instead encouraging them to enjoy learning and enjoy doing things by themselves.
The parent simply pushes their child into certain activities that they would not have tried on their own; this will reveal hidden interests and talents, bringing the best out of them.
Finally, to please my adversary, here are just a handful of successful people that have openly credited their success to their parents:
Michael Jackson -http://en.wikipedia.org...
Albert Einstein -http://en.wikipedia.org...
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart -http://en.wikipedia.org...
Lang Lang - http://en.wikipedia.org...(pianist)
Lea Salonga - http://en.wikipedia.org...
Parents must take an active approach to their child's education from a young age. My opponant has given a good argument against being 'too' pushy, but I believe the benefits outweigh potential harm.
 - http://www.independent.co.uk......
Continuing on to the article I presented, These parents are pushy parents who are literally forcing their children into drug use, depression, and other dangerous acts indirectly by being too pushy. That is obviously bad and cannot be argued.
The second attack my opponent made was about the responsibilities of the parent. They even cited it. The article was basically just on when and where parents should get involved. Nowhere did it say arguing your child's paycheck was a good time to step in. This article actually flows to my side.
My opponent later said in the rebuttal their is a difference between "helicopter parents" and "pushy parents." Their is not. Helicopter parents hover over their children like pushy parents do. Hence the name "helicopter."
My opponent said pushy parents push their children into hobbies they wouldn't have done before. Isn't it just as easy for these parents to push their children into things they don't like? It's completely possible.
My opponent at the end of the rebuttal showed famous "pushed" children. Here are some famous orphans.
NELSON ROLIHLAHLA MANDELA
STEVEN PAUL JOBS
JOHANN SEBASTIAN BACH
JOHN WINSTON LENNON
LOUIS "SATCHMO" ARMSTRONG
All of the examples can be found here for reference-->http://thirdworldorphans.org...
Thanks to my opponent and to my judges judging this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by rross 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|
Reasons for voting decision: I think Con had some good arguments, but they became confused in relation to the definition of "pushy parent". I think the convention is that definitions presented in the very first round hold for the debate. If you have an issue with the definitions, you need to say so in round 1, or not accept. For this reason, I think Pro's arguments held up better.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.