The Instigator
LatinaGirl8894
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Should Moms be allowed to keep their newborn babies in prison with them???

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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...
Danielle
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/26/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 434 times Debate No: 91903
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

LatinaGirl8894

Pro

Round 1 is acceptance only. No arguments. Looking forward to having a great debate.

I will be arguing that they should be allowed to keep their babies with them.
Danielle

Con

Per the rules, Round 1 is for acceptance.

I look forward to an interesting discussion!
Debate Round No. 1
LatinaGirl8894

Pro

Studies show that mother's who are allowed to keep their babies with them in prison are less likely to end up back in prison later.

Babies who are born and raised in prison are less lively to function properly in the "outside" world. That would be the only environment that they know. It is what they are familiar with.

Mother's are usually the primary caretakers for the newborn and babies need that initial bonding period with their mothers. Having their baby in prison with them makes mothers strive to be better for their baby knowing that they can only stay with them up until they reach a certain age. That initial time with their mother will shape them for the rest of their life.

www.socialistworker.org
Danielle

Con

Pro writes that women who are allowed to keep their babies in prison are less likely to return to jail. However Pro hasn't proven that this is because of the babies being allowed in prison, specifically. Furthermore we don't allow everything just because it might have a positive effect; the effects must be weighed on a cost/benefit analysis.

My opponent points out that babies born in prison are not able to function well later in the outside world. This contention is a self-defeating argument and actually stands against her case. Indeed if babies don't do well living outside of prison, they should not be forced to live the first months/years of their lives within prison unnecessarily. This jails innocent children which is a violation of their 14th amendment Due Process rights.

Prison is a stressful, dangerous and restrictive environment. It would be a punishment to keep a child in prison during their first months/years of life. Within the first year, an infant should be exposed to music, games and other things that grow their cognitive development [1]. However being in prison provides very limited access to this much needed exposure.

My opponent will not be able to show evidence of positive long-term effects of newborns in prison; no such research exists. These programs put the mother's desires over the well-being of the child. Prison is an unsanitary and hostile environment that little children should not be forced to endure on behalf of their mother's mistakes.

Pro notes that spending time with their newborn is important for both mother and child. However when one is found guilty of a crime and sentenced to prison, they lose their rights and privileges regardless of the benefits. Many children suffer from having parents in jail [2] and yet we do not change the rules to ensure these parents and children are happy and well taken care of.

Criminals and their families have to adjust as part of their retribution. Consider that this program applies to women who have newborns after sentencing, but what about all of the young babies without mothers at home? This is an unfair privilege to people who are pregnant vs. just had a baby (or have small kids). It's also unfair to father's who might want custody of the baby.

Women facing incarceration may take advantage of these programs and become pregnant on purpose, in order to qualify for more comfortable living conditions and other special privileges. Moreover, providing this opportunity to women with newborns and not men with newborns is arguably sexist and violates equal protection under the law.

There are other problems with this proposal as well.

First and foremost, consider the fact that prisons are burdened with significant (Unconstitutional) overcrowding [4]. If there is not enough space for inmates, it would be irresponsible to suggest room is cleared to make nurseries and other spaces for kids that might simply not exist. Prisons are so crowded that it's directly hurting state budgets to maintain all those inmates - yet Pro is advocating an additional (significant) expense to tax payers.

Prisons do not have the resources (monetary and otherwise) to burden this expense. Inmates cost tax payers between $20,000 and $160,000 per year in this country with the average being around $40K. Increasing the cost of housing prisoners to accomodate their preferences is not fair to law abiding citizens -- or the newborns being forced to live among convicted criminals.

[1] http://www.cdc.gov...
[2] http://www.aetn.org...
[3] http://www.newsweek.com...
[4] https://www.alec.org...
Debate Round No. 2
LatinaGirl8894

Pro

LatinaGirl8894 forfeited this round.
Danielle

Con

Please extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
LatinaGirl8894

Pro

LatinaGirl8894 forfeited this round.
Danielle

Con

Please extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
LatinaGirl8894

Pro

LatinaGirl8894 forfeited this round.
Danielle

Con

Please extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Rosalie 9 months ago
Rosalie
Damn you Danielle....I was gunna take this, lolol.
Posted by Rosalie 9 months ago
Rosalie
Damn you Danielle....I was gunna take this, lolol.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lord_megatron 8 months ago
lord_megatron
LatinaGirl8894DanielleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited 3/5 rounds, while con didn't forfeit any rounds.