Should high schools provide daycare services for students who have children? Pro-yes, Con-no
Debate Rounds (4)
Rounds 2&3 are arguments and rebuttals
Round 4 is rebuttals and conclusion
The majority of teen mothers have to drop out of high school because they have no one to watch their child. This can lead to them not being able to get a decent job so that they can make a living to support the family they have.
"Although the number of teen pregnancies has dropped across the country, proponents of the day-care programs say they hope to prevent teens from leaving school to care for babies, with the added bonus of offering their young kids early childhood development. Critics say the centers promote unprotected sex by teens." (1)
Putting a day care center in a high school does not encourage teen to have sex. They are going to do it anyway so I don't know what the big deal is with there being a place just in case something should happen. The most important thing is that they finish high school.
" According to Susan Todd, CEO of Pathways, Gloucester High School is trying to do just that by having the girls who become pregnant finish high school. In the 2006-2007 school year, all four girls enrolled in the program not only graduated, but went on to attend college." (2)
This all but proves that if you give teen moms a place to drop off their baby while they attend class, they can go on to graduate from high school and also go to attend collage. They would not have been able to do this if there had not been a day care center for them available.
"A lot of people think we are enabling pregnancy," said Maxine Thompson-Burroughs, who operates the Early Head Start program at Northwestern. "We are not a babysitting service. The mission of the program is to help them graduate from high school." (1)
"The majority of teen mothers have to drop out of high school because they have no one to watch their child. This can lead to them not being able to get a decent job so that they can make a living to support the family they have."
With this statement I believe that Pro assumes that graduating high school allows that teen mother to already be able to get a decent job, this is wrong. Pro never defined "decent job" so I will say a "decent job" is above minimum wage. (Weekly earnings for "high school diploma, $652") Over 60% of these "decent" jobs will require a college degree and so the teen mom would need to at least go through another 2 - 4 years of college to obtain a "decent job". With all of this in mind, once the student goes to college they are no longer a teen as age 18+ is considered an adult, thus the daycare service that was available in high school was just absolutely useless, because they will probably still have trouble taking care of their child.
"I don't know what the big deal is with there being a place just in case something should happen."
There are tons of "big deal" in placing this in high schools, one of them being cost.
Schools get their money from taxpayers, and let's see... I don't believe many of those taxpayers will be happy knowing their money is going towards a daycare to help "some" students (who had a chance to NOT get pregnant), than to go spend it on education for all. Why should a taxpayer pay for someone's mistake!?
Also by including a daycare would mean to funnel some money for teacher salaries/extra curriculum/education into a daycare system, and I'm sure a daycare system is not the best use of money.
" all four girls enrolled in the program not only graduated, but went on to attend college... This all but proves that if you give teen moms a place to drop off their baby while they attend class, they can go on to graduate from high school and also go to attend collage."
This doesn't prove anything, the source said only four, which is a small sample to compare to the millions of teen moms who had help and never graduated.
Most of my argument may or may not be from previous comments above.
- A teen's body is a privacy of hers and not suppose to be a part of school, which is a government agency. In the fourth amendment, we as citizens have the "right to privacy" and by providing daycare services in a government agency would be like providing an abortion clinic inside of a school, they need to be separated not intertwined and of course I know you will argue that they have the choice to do so, then why even include that day care inside of school, it is illegal to be there in the first place.
- By placing daycare services in school, you are just delaying the inevitable for the parent. Like I stated in my previous rebuttal, I had stated that even if they were to finish high school, this doesn't assume they will be stable and have a perfect life afterwards. Less than 2% of teen moms earn a college degree by age 30! Basically by including daycare services in high school is a useless idea.
- Knowing that the daycare server is useless it will be funneling taxpayer's money from education to daycare services that only a few may need.
United States Constitution, Amendment IV
Day care centers have been in high schools for years already and they have done just fine. The schools have had no problems with them knowing that they cost money to run. I personally worked in one when I was in high school and I thought it was a wonderful experience that I would not trade for anything. It was nice knowing that whoever the child belonged to was still continuing to get an education.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." (1)
I fail to see how putting a day care service in a high school violates this amendment. This service is not being forced upon them; it is just available in case they need to use it. They do not have to put a center in the school if they don"t want to, it is not required.
I am not, and I hope everyone, is not interested in your subjective statement there. "What may be a wonderful experience" does not mean anything to help your case in this topic, what may be wonderful to YOU PERSONALLY will not affect ANYONE outside of you who have not gotten that so-called "experience". You have yet to provide any solid proof that will benefit teen mothers. So what if FOUR... teen mothers only graduated high school, a trivial educational medium to college. So what if YOU subjectively believe that you feel that in your heart you feel warm and fuzzy because teen mothers can continue with their education. Nobody cares about minimum and subjective sources!
- "The most important thing is that they finish high school."
Subjective statement, Some will believe high school is not the most important thing to finish, if you must state this, where are the facts to support this?
- "They are going to do it [have sex] anyway so I don't know what the big deal is with there being a place just in case something should happen."
An unsupported claim, assuming that every female teenager will have sex and possibly get pregnant. Not every female will have sex as a teen, it's silly to assume this and thus have a daycare service at all..
"they can go on to graduate from high school and also go to attend collage"
- I've read the article of the four teenage mothers, not ONCE did it say that they attended college, so to say that they can go from high-school to college is again silly and unreasonable. Also I mean who would now watch their child when they attend college? A daycare in college? Silly.
- "You do not need a college degree to get a stable job."
The Definition of a stable job, is "being able to keep the same job for a long time:", which is in conflict with "decent", and "dead-end" jobs because you can still work at a "dead-end" job and still have a stable job, so yes you are right you don't need a college degree to get a stable job, but you are wrong in the fact that by including daycare services you have a better chance of not working in a dead-end job with little to no success.
- "This service is not being forced upon them; it is just available in case they need to use it. They do not have to put a center in the school if they don"t want to, it is not required."
Then why even include this service, that WILL be wasteful spending... if not every will be using it. Imagine a daycare service where one child is there... how is that cost-efficient? If they removed it, wouldn't you think that would be unfair for that single mother? I mean if four people can graduate high school then that single person should have the rights to as well.
Many of the reasons center around getting a job and being a role model for those around you.
Never once did i say that every teenage girl was going to have sex and get pregnant. This was simply a small claim because teens do have sex without thinking about the consequences.
"they can go on to graduate from high school and also go to attend collage"
All I was saying with this statement was that they have the chance to go to college if they get their high school diploma, not that they all did.
The day care centers that are in schools already are being used, so that is why they should be there.
"Never once did i say that every teenage girl was going to have sex and get pregnant. This was simply a small claim because teens do have sex without thinking about the consequences."
- Pro states that she never claims about teenagers having sex, yet she states that her claim [Which apparently wasn't stated] is that teens have sex... And again never supports this at all with actual evidence of anything.
"All I was saying with this statement was that they have the chance to go to college if they get their high school diploma, not that they all did."
- Pro seems to agree with me that not all parents will go to college, which helps supports the fact that these daycare services will be useless.
"The day care centers that are in schools already are being used, so that is why they should be there."
- Umm... Pro claims that because something is already there, it should be there... How does that make sense? That tree should be there, because it's already there. Yeah sure, it's simple logic, but how that support anything. If someone wanted to cut down that tree, that argument is possibly one of the weakest.
I will conclude my arguments.
- Daycare services in schools are a waste of taxpayers money. If the service was to only help a selected few, the whole population wouldn't be satisfy knowing their hard working is only for the few who knew their consequences and yet don't have to pay for it. For example, it's like working a job to gain money, in which you must give some to a known alcoholic.
- Daycare services would funnel the money away from EVERYBODY'S education to a select few's personal and private need.
- Daycare services would cause a controversy on campus saying it would be useless, because some mothers would want their rights to privacy. You may claim that you aren't "force" to use it, then why even have that facility in the first place then if it will be such a controversial place. Most people aren't ready for the social impact that will come with pregnancy, and then to use our money for education on a service that benefits you only... that will only anger then more. I mean YOU had a chance to not have unprotected sex, and now we are going to have a service for you, because you lack the cognitive ability to make a choice? No thanks.
- Daycare services won't help the mother at all, it won't teach hard work that comes with a child. The daycare service will not allow the student to go to college, nor get a job, after high school what now? It doesn't teach the hard work and consequences for having a child. I mean imagine a world where every high school had a daycare, it's like saying "There's no consequences for having a baby, because I can just easily put him/her into the daycare!", it doesn't directly make them want to have sex, but it indirectly loses the consequences that comes with a baby.
Thank you for looking at this debate, please vote accordingly.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.