The Instigator
ilovedebate
Pro (for)
Tied
21 Points
The Contender
kkdub
Con (against)
Tied
21 Points

Safe Haven Laws in the US should be for teens also

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  
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
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/16/2009 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,635 times Debate No: 9718
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (6)

 

ilovedebate

Pro

Safe Haven Laws should also be for teens because their parents might be in trouble financially and maybe they're not able to support them. What will they do then?
kkdub

Con

When the parents can not financially support their children that is when they have to work harder and do things like get second jobs. Since we are talking about teenagers then that means they are old enough to also go out and try to earn some money.

In addition to that, here in America there are many organizations to help those in need. If a family is at the point where they need to drop off a kid, then they can do things like apply for food stamps, go to the food shelter, go to the Open Door Mission, get help from church organizations and charities, and other places like that.

The reason we should not just allow parents to drop of their teenagers is because of stories like this. "The woman who dropped off the 15-year-old said she couldn't deal with the boy's behavior anymore." That is a quote from an article where in Nebraska we used to allow teens to be dropped off. But they had to change the law because we had people driving from other states to drop off teenagers for reasons like the one listed above where the guardinas just didn't want to deal with their kids behavior.
http://www.ketv.com...
Debate Round No. 1
ilovedebate

Pro

So, you are saying that teenagers are old enough and they should get another job to support their parents? What if they have a mental disability and they cannot get a job? If safe haven laws are only for infants, then where will those teenagers go? Also, parents are not angels and so not only can they be financially ill but they can also get arrested for committing a crime. Where will that teen go other than a foster home? The teens shouldn't be blamed for their parents actions, they look up to them for advice. Yes you might say that the government doesn't have enough money to look after teenagers but those teenagers will soon become the future of this country. Being a teen is only one step away from being a mature adult. It is like downloading a thing on your computer and it takes 21 years. However, when it's around 80% finished, you stop it from continuing. Why is taking care of infants any different from taking care of teens?
kkdub

Con

Pro asks if I am saying teens are old enough that they should get a job and support their parents. No, what I am saying is that the family has to work harder as a whole if their in a tough situation. The parents may have to get a second job, the teens may have to try and find a job or something simple like lawn mowing, and overall they have to tighten their belts. If the teen has a mental disability then there are programs to help. My sister has a mental disability and she gets a check from SSI every month.

If the parents are arrested for a crime then their kids go to social services which is the same place they go under the safe haven law. So either way the same thing happens, so I don't see how that is an argument for Pro.

Next Pro says that teens shouldn't be blamed for their parents actions and that teens look to their parents for advice. I don't see how this relates to the resolution, so can you please explain that argument.

" Yes you might say that the government doesn't have enough money to look after teenagers.." This is a quote from Pro and he is admitting that the government doesn't have the money. So if they don't have the money then how do you expect this law to work and why would you be for it. I would say that just with that quote it is reason enough to vote Con.

Pro then goes on to say "It is like downloading a thing on your computer and it takes 21 years. However, when it's around 80% finished, you stop it from continuing." Again I am not sure what Pro is saying here so I will ask that he restates his argument and then I will address it next round.

The final thing Pro asks is how is taking care of infants different from teen.
"The law needs to be changed," says Todd Landry, director of the Nebraska Department of Health & Human Services. "We need to get back to the intent of the law, and the intent of the law was always the protection of newborns in immediate danger of being harmed."
That is the difference, these laws are to save newborns, after that it is the parents resposibility to raise their children. If they need financial help then, as I said in round 1 and Pro ignored, there are many programs and organizations that are willing to help but simply dropping them off at a hospital is not an option.
http://www.cbsnews.com...
Debate Round No. 2
ilovedebate

Pro

ilovedebate forfeited this round.
kkdub

Con

Unfortunately Pro has forfeited, so extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
Hmm...maybe I should accept to try my hand at some Devil's Advocacy.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 5 years ago
quarterexchange
ilovedebatekkdubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Pro voted for himself all 7 points despite having no sources, forfeiting, and having a mediocre argument.
Vote Placed by boredinclass 5 years ago
boredinclass
ilovedebatekkdubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: con forfeit
Vote Placed by akumaxneko 7 years ago
akumaxneko
ilovedebatekkdubTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by ansonmypants 7 years ago
ansonmypants
ilovedebatekkdubTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by ilovedebate 7 years ago
ilovedebate
ilovedebatekkdubTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by oceanix 7 years ago
oceanix
ilovedebatekkdubTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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