This House Would Make All Parents Attend Parenting Classes
Debate Rounds (3)
I will be arguing that parents should attend parenting classes. Parents are the primary role models for children especially during those critical ages when they are growing up. The problem is that parents are frequently unprepared to be the main 'teachers' for children. Most often that not, they still practice their old lifestyles since before they had children, like spending too much time away from home, abusing their children with negative remarks or beatings over small issues and so on.
The problem is that most parents do not know what are the best ways to bring up a child. Only with the advancement of research, psychologists are able to understand better how to use words powerfully to motivate or reprimand children, or when to severely punish a child and when to let them go scot free. We all experience this first hand when we think back of our childhood years and certain things our parents did which we will never agree on. This is especially evident when countless motivational speakers remind us that our childhood upbringing is flawed because of the lack of our parents' knowledge on how to educate a child, and this affects us until adulthood.
Research shows that problematic behaviour among adults like profanity, hypersexuality and so on are because of poor upbringing by parents and because of the bad environment at home which is primarily shaped by the parents.
For these reasons, Pro would strongly advocate governments and community leaders to make parenting classes a must for at least one of the parents, if not both. These programs can be held over one day. No matter how it is done, parenting classes simply must be put in high importance if we truly want to develop a safe and productive society. The family unit is the first stage of a healthy society.
Today, we have courses for soon to be teachers, employees and so on to teach them the soft skills and non-tech skills. Why not do the same for prospective parents as well? :)
On the opposition bench, I accept that parents are seen as the most important figures in the formative years of children. However, when the proposition brought up the issue of the frequency of unprepared parents, one can only assume that the proposition is implying of the cases of "accidental parents". I believe, that when two mature adults decide to have kids, the preparation will always be there, however incomplete it may be. Highlighting on the remark made by the proposition, that adults with kids usually practice their old lifestyles during their bachelor days, I thought that the proposition have made a scathing remark to all parents out there.
Being parents, having children, are blessings. And to learn and understand them are the treasure that need to be found. I am not saying that they shouldn't get help from others, because being first time parents are not easy without guidance. I believe that forcing upon new parents to attend parenting classes will violate their sense of freedom and will. For I believe, that parents, especially new parents, should have the rights to the options out there in getting advice for parenting. Sticking to the status quo itself, anyone can go to parenting classes on their own volition. if, they can afford such classes.
As the proposition did not highlight, as of how this enforcement will be, and if any subsidies are provided, we must assume that the money for these classes must come out of the parents pocket themselves. Being parents to a baby is not easy. It not only costs you your sleep and emotions, but a lot of money with it. Yes, adults within the upper crust of the society may be able to attend these classes, but as the proposition is imposing that all parents must attend parenting classes, people in the bottom half of the society need to fork out much needed money.
Furthermore, as I've mentioned above, the status quo is fine as it is. Young parents are able to refer to their parents as a choice.
My opponent says that accidental parents are unprepared. This goes without saying. My opponent then says that when two mature adults decide to have kids, the preparation will always be there. This is an assumption in itself. Even if two adults do get themselves prepared when the mother is pregnant, how can we be sure that preparation is adequate? As I mentioned in the previous round, it is frequently a lack of knowledge or the feeling that they already have enough knowledge that causes shortcomings in parents' upbringing of children. There needs to be some kind of curriculum parents can have access to to, in the very least, trigger their awareness on how much more they need to learn if it is truly in their best interest to create a loving, healthy family unit.
My opponent then makes a remark on how children are blessings and a treasure that needs to be discovered. To me, just because something is a blessing, even from God himself, doesn't mean we shouldn't put effort into maximising its potential. If anything, we should put even more effort.
My opponent mentions that young parents can ask their own parents. However, the generation gap makes it almost impossible for our elders to best comprehend how to bring up Generation Z, let alone fully understand their needs.
My opponent's point about fees is to me, not an issue. Even if we are to assume potential costs are high, it is worth it when children are brought up in the best way. Not only will they become well-mannered people, but their good character which stems from their upbringing will benefit them in making good choices regarding their career, their health, who they mix with etc.
Yes, of course, there is no guarantee. We can only do so much, but making sure parents are given this guidance from reliable and specialised sources is a must, because this is an investment on human capital, not only to the parents but also to the children. Investing in a person's mind pays off.
The proposition also felt that parents are not giving enough effort in raising children, and only with mandatory parenting classes will parents put in effort in raising a child. I thought that this was unfair as the early childhood especially babyhood is extremely challenging. Sleep depravation due to the baby's needs, constant worry for a growing child due to harms out there, and I can list out many more but I believe that the proposition can reminisce his growing up experience.
When the proposition said that parents, especially those with Generation Z children do not now how to raise their children. I thought this was again, extremely judgmental. You can't seriously believe that, especially with the fact, that for every generation from the start of humanity will always raise a new generation, the children. The proposition is also very misguided that the basic parenting skills aren't applicable for new generations. This is extremely untrue! The true meaning behind a generation, is the type of exposure that they have, for example, Generation Y is heavily exposed to electronics and the internet, creating a new kind of generation separate from those before. If you're to say that an future technological advancements will mutate this "GenerationZ" in such that they will not be able to receive parenting the normal way, then, and only then, will I accept this motion
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.