The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

child labour should be made legal in under developed countries.

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
xzfkx has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/9/2016 Category: Economics
Updated: 3 months ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 260 times Debate No: 93528
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




To begin with, child labour has its own pros and cons. It may be beneficial for some and may not be so beneficial for others, but when it comes to under developed countries, in most cases child labour is considered essential.
Child labour is a major source of income in households that aren't well off, and making it illegal would mean taking away a source of income, therefore must not be banned.


First off the definition of child labour according to is, "the employment of a child in a business or industry especially in violation of state or federal statutes prohibiting the employment of children under a specified age." Now that's out of the way you say "Child labour is a major source of income in households that aren't well off" First off children in these households your describing would not be making a 'major' source of that households income. The child's income would most likely be very small due to the jobs children are limited to. Before child labour was outlawed in circa 1938, children were mainly working in factory's for the reason of them being cheaper and more manageable. If they were lucky, they would be making only around half of what their parents were making.

The second point I propose is that, even if it was made legal, children would be taken advantage of easily. The supervision of their parents would be non existent, and it would be very possible for them to be overworked. There also would be a large tax influx due to the government having to supervise this. It would lead them to have to create even more jobs to look over these big cooperation's to make sure they follow all of the laws.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by lenalena 3 months ago
The Convention on the Rights of the Child was the first legally binding international instrument to incorporate the complete range of human rights for children, including civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. The Convention defines a child as anyone below the age of 18 years and spells out the basic human rights that children everywhere should have, including the right to protection from economic exploitation (Article 32) and the right to education (Article 28). It is the most endorsed human rights treaty in the world, ratified by all but two countries.

The two main Conventions focusing specifically on child labour, on minimum age for admission to employment and on the worst forms of child labour, were developed by the International Labour Organization (ILO). It is important that countries both ratify the Conventions, and take positive action to both end child labour and support the rehabilitation and education of former child labourers.
Convention No. 138 on the Minimum Age for Admission to Employment, 1973

As mentioned previously, child labour is work that children should not be doing because they are too young to work, or " if they have reached the minimum age " because it is dangerous or otherwise unsuitable for them. Countries that ratify this Convention undertake a legal promise to stop child labour and make sure that children below a certain "minimum age" are not employed. At the end of 2010, this Convention had been ratified by 156 of the 183 member States of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) - the member countries who ratified the convention had to then make it a law in their own country. The ILO is responsible for supervising and monitoring individual countries to ensure the law is being implemented. Most countries therefore have child labour laws. People who employ children in these countries are breaking the law, but these issues are ignored by third world governments ruling elites govern in their own interest.
Posted by anthonyliu1 3 months ago
Do you mean developing countries or developed countries? It seems to me it makes more sense to legalize child labor in developing countries since the average household income is lower.
Posted by OxfordUni 3 months ago
I agree with child labour, as long as it doesn't interfere with their education. Back in the old days when the world was simpler child labour wasn't such a serious issue, it was just seen as children helping out in the workplace and gaining some experience at the same time. But in these days, people have long developed the notion of child labour equates to slavery/ cruelty or something to that extent, which as we all know is not always true, there is a possibility that it could be that way but by banning child labour all together would make children miss out a lot of things they could learn in the working world whilst they are young.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.