adoption should be illegal
Debate Rounds (3)
FYI IDC ABOUT GRAMMAR oops
As con, I will give a couple reasons why adoption should remain legal to start the debate.
Infertile Couples Can Raise Children: Couples in which conception is impossible as a result of infertility or other reasons have no way to have children except by adoption. There are ways for couples to get around their infertility, but these treatments are dangerous and often unsuccessful . Thus adoption is their only way to have the blessing of a child. Infertile people should not be cursed to never be able to raise children. A study by the Pew Research Center, among many others, shows that the vast majority of parents find childcare to be among the most rewarding things in their life. The published results show that "Parents find caring for their children to be much more exhausting than the work they do for pay. At the same time, parents find much more meaning in the time they spend with their children than in the time they spend at work." . Thus, since adoption is the only means by which infertile couples can get children, and raising children is an immensely fulfilling activity that is appreciated almost universally by parents, adoption should remain legal.
Unwanted Pregnancies Can Be Resolved Without Termination: I will not get into the morality of abortion, as I think it is irrelevant to my main point. However, unexpected pregnancies, especially teen pregnancies, although they shouldn't happen in the first place, unfortunately do happen. Adoption is a means by which those who are unable lawfully to terminate the fetus or who are morally opposed to such an action can avoid taking care of the child. It is unreasonable to say that teens who get pregnant should take care of the child; that would likely result in trauma for the child and insufficient opportunities in life. By giving the child up to adoption, they ensure a better life for the child than they could give. This is a list of benefits for the adopted child that there is a high chance they would not get if they stayed with the birth mother: "Emotionally and economically prepared family with adoptive parents to share love and provide support... Homely family environment to grow up in... Opportunities to grow up in a two-parent home and probably with brothers and sisters... Greater possibility of a better education... Greater possibility of meeting or fulfilling the emotional, physical, and psychological needs of the child" . By adoption, people with certain values or people who are restricted lawfully can secure a good life for their child.
Adoption, then, benefits the birthmother, the child, and the adopting parents.
Let's establish something. First, at the very most, all your response could show is that children who are put up for adoption at an age where they can remember well their previous parents are emotionally traumatized.
I agree that this may be the case; however, you have to examine the situations as a whole. The birthparent/s may be unable to care for the child sufficiently because of other problems in their lives; perhaps they are stressed financially; perhaps the mother is a teen pregnancy who is very obviously unfit to raise a child. In many scenarios, adoption, although it may cause the child depression, is a far, far better alternative to the birthparent/s being forced to keep the child.
It is an unfortunate side effect of the great thing that is adoption, that it can result in depression in the child; but outlawing adoption as a whole and in general is throwing the baby out with the bathwater and greatly overreacting, ignoring the massive benefits to all involved in most cases of adoption. I described these benefits in my first response.
You didn't really respond to any of my points, and I already described how the massive benefits outweigh the cons. There isn't anything else I can say, since you didn't add any new material to the debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro hardly responded to Con's points, whilst Con made objective, emotion-free arguments. Pro's spelling and grammar was bad on occasions. Sources to Con, because they helped his/her arguments in a relevant way.
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.