The Instigator
Mich3ll3
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
likespeace
Pro (for)
Winning
19 Points

Should Parents Be Prosected For Missing Child?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 4 votes the winner is...
likespeace
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/27/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,130 times Debate No: 29572
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (4)

 

Mich3ll3

Con

In my opinion, I believe that parents should not be prosecuted missing child. we could not deny that parents have responsibility towards their child. parent can be accused for missing child but they should not be prosecuted.A counter argument is that no one is hurting more than the parent when a child is missing and it was an unfortunate accident.
likespeace

Pro

I accept! As you are the instigator, and have a point to prove, I will allow you to present your case first.

While you are arguing, "Parents should NOT be prosecuted for missing children.", I will be arguing that, at least in some circumstances, they should be prosecuted. Good luck, and may you enjoy your first debates here. :)
Debate Round No. 1
Mich3ll3

Con

In my opinion, I believe that parents should not be prosecuted missing child. we could not deny that parents have responsibility towards their child. parent can be accused for missing child but they should not be prosecuted.A counter argument is that no one is hurting more than the parent when a child is missing and it was an unfortunate accident. moreover, the bonds between parents and child could not be broken. thus i strongly believe that the missing child is just an unfortunate incident and not a single parents wouldn't these to happen to their child
likespeace

Pro

There is a problem in this country. Children rely on their parents to speak for them. Who speaks for them, then, when their parents are also their murderers?

In most states, the unfortunate answer is nobody. Parents are not required to report when their children go missing or die under suspicious circumstances such as violent crime, suicide, or accidents. If and when law enforcement realizes something is wrong, it can be weeks to years later. By that time, the evidence has often gone cold, and it can be nearly impossible to prove a crime occurred.

If you wonder if this really happens, and here are some names--Rilya ("Remember I Love You Always") Wilson[1], Caylee Anthony (the basis of Caylee's Law in eleven states)[2], Brittany Williams[3], Peter Kema[4], Rene Romero[5], Michelle Pulsifier[6], Garnell Moore[7], Adam Herrman[8], and Ke'Shaun Vanderhorst[9].

Rilay Wilson's Cage (only)


(Above: A photo of Rilya Wilson and the cage she was kept in, before she "disappeared".)

Why do we allow this to happen in America? How do we stop such monsters?

I propose:

1. If a parent, guardian, or caretaker of a minor under 13 years of age in their care:

a. Fails to report their disappearance to a law enforcement agency within 72 hours
b. Fails to report their death by criminal violence, accident, suicide, or other suspicious circumstances within 72 hours to law enforcement, if the decedent was not attended by a licensed physician.
c. Knowingly and willfully provides false information related to 1a or 1b above.
d. Knowingly and willfully touches, removes or otherwise disturbs the body or clothing related to 1b above.

The answer is to prosecute these "parents". I urge readers to consider voting for Caylee's Law in your own state, or to push for similar legislation to help protect those without voices.

Sources:

[1] http://charleyross.wordpress.com...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] http://www.charleyproject.org...
[4] http://www.charleyproject.org...
[5] http://www.charleyproject.org...
[6] http://www.charleyproject.org...
[7] http://www.charleyproject.org...
[8] http://www.charleyproject.org...
[9] http://www.charleyproject.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Mich3ll3

Con

Mich3ll3 forfeited this round.
likespeace

Pro

In closing, I re-assert (1a) and (1c) are reasonable proposals for prosecuting parents for missing children in at least some cases. My opponent forfeited, and neither contested my arguments nor proved his case.

> "the bonds between parents and child could not be broken... "

I have established the fact that monsters exist.

Dear reader, I urge you to vote Pro, and to consider Caylee's Law in your own state.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
Ay de mi! Why do newcomers flee, when a strong argument they see?
Posted by Mich3ll3 4 years ago
Mich3ll3
sorry typo. should be 'prosecuted'
Posted by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
And what is "Prosected"?
Posted by Mich3ll3 4 years ago
Mich3ll3
child.
Posted by Sheldor 4 years ago
Sheldor
For missing a child or for missing children? Please refine your word choice, I'm considering this topic.
Posted by tennis47 4 years ago
tennis47
What does prosecuted mean?
Posted by Mich3ll3 4 years ago
Mich3ll3
why not you mail me about your opinion? im desperate to get some opinion about this argument =)
Posted by Mich3ll3 4 years ago
Mich3ll3
why not you mail me about your opinion? im desperate to get some opinion about this argument =)
Posted by Mich3ll3 4 years ago
Mich3ll3
why?
Posted by LaL36 4 years ago
LaL36
I wanna debate but I can't :(
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 4 years ago
johnlubba
Mich3ll3likespeaceTied
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: FF
Vote Placed by Deadlykris 4 years ago
Deadlykris
Mich3ll3likespeaceTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were never countered by Con. If BoP was on Pro, then said BoP was fulfilled; if it was on Con, then clearly it was not as he made no arguments aside from opening statements. Either way, for the above reasons, arguments to Pro. S&G to Pro for Con's poor spelling and grammar. Conduct to Pro for Con's forfeiture. Sources to Pro for Pro's use of sources.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
Mich3ll3likespeaceTied
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: ff
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
Mich3ll3likespeaceTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: F.F.