The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

children should be aloud a friendly relationship with (teachers, ect, )

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/29/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 440 times Debate No: 69138
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




I think children should be aloud to have a friendly relationship with there teachers or who ever.
i was close with my teacher, i was going through a difficult time and my teacher Mrs Desena helped me alot. we were close but i knew that eventually she woundn't be there. and i wasnt going to be able to keep in contact. Because i knew this and with the difficult time in my life i went into severe depression and didn't know what to do. i didnt want to loose the one and most important person to me.. So i think children should be aloud to have a relationship with someone as long as they know whats right and wrong. now i think this is a good idea and i personally would let my child do this. if i met the teacher and was happy. If i found that he/she wasn't able to speak to me for what ever reason but had a sensible close bond with her teacher or who ever then i would be happy for them to do so. so whats your opinion on this ......


I'll assume those are your arguments. Then I'll try to be as short as possible as well, but i'll include formatting.

One. Relativity.

A relationship that goes beyond teacher-student affects other students indadvertedly. One kid sees that another is getting special treatment, even if it's only a smile or hello in the morning, and a little part of them gets triggered. They start thinking something's unfair and they take action against it.
I don't know to what extent this relationship is intact and visible between the student and teacher, however even just one time that the teacher takes the kid away to say anything to it w/o the others being called, that child is now the teacher's pet and the other kids' superior, even if nothing happened.
In one fell swoop, a kid that gets even an ounce of special or different treatment can become the person the class outcasts.

Two. Fish in the pond.

You're thinking along the lines of "why not," by expressing that there is very little risk to such a relationship, it's beneficial for the kid to have someone, but this person is still a stranger.
A child needs peers not figures in their life. Friends are more important than contacts at this point in a child's life. A teacher will not bring anything to the child's life that a close friend or caring parent could. So, if you need someone to rely on in your life, to tell your problems to, and someone who can help you, there are many other people you can turn to, and many caring peers, of your own age, are always around you in these situations.

Three. A fallacy.

The effect I describe under point 1 affects all other arguments. This is a psychological condition. The teacher is responsible for many kids and cannot be allowed to look after one of them more closely, it ruins the system.
Then, if the teacher does do this, the other kids cast this special child out. There's nothing different about this one child, but the teacher's contact made it different.
What this means is that no matter the relationship the teacher has with the child, extremely positive, necessary, or just friendly, if another classmate sees it, they will feel inadequate, saying "Why didn't the teacher choose me?" We cannot run this risk of affecting a lot of other kids for the sake of one kid who needs someone to help them in their life, especially since that child has alternatives it can turn to.
Debate Round No. 1


I disagree ! Teachers are no different, it has nothing to do with being a teachers pet or teachers showing more attention to that student. Teachers are human beings who are no different than me or you. they have feeling and personally i think it would be a great idea and shoudn't be frowned upon or looked down. I'm sure many people will agree that they had a teacher they were close with or they had a teacher that they liked and wanted to keep in contacted with or what ever, but because of all these stupid, silly, pathetic rules they couldn't or didn't. i think a if a child gets on well with his/hers teachers or confides in them then i think it's perfectably exceptable I'd rather my child be happy becasue they have a teacher or someone to talk to then upset and lonely because they didn't want to talk to me about a certain problem or issue. Yes it would bother me that they didn't want to talk about it but i would be happy knowing they had somone else to talk to or a helping them with there problems


It's not about the teacher, it's not even about the student.

You think the student is just getting another friend, but the student is getting a relationship instead of a friend.
This is the most significant aspect of this debate, that it's impersonal. What is to be judged is the relationship, not the people involved in it.
With that out of the way, I have to remind you that you're not responding to my arguments, what you did this round was jump onto someone else's comment and used that for your response. Metta said something that wasn't relevant to the round, and it was just a comment so it didn't matter, but you used it, unfortunately. Of course the teacher is a person as well, which is why we have this problem in the first place.

Parallel situation:
You own five cats. You are their owner, and you're a human. You feed them every day at four. At three, one of the cats comes onto your lap and purrs, and you obviously pet it. You have just created a relationship between only one cat, and yourself, its owner. That cat is now different. The cat is different because it got something the other cats didn't. The other cats let it pass for the time being.
A week later, that one cat gets something stuck in its fur. Two weeks ago, it would have come to the other cats so they could help it get it out, but now it comes to you. Two weeks ago, you also would've disregarded the cat and whatever's in its fur because you saw the cats helping each other this way, and the cat would have done just that. However, now you help the cat yourself, and it's all cleaned up.
The other cats see that it's coming to you and not to them, and that you're helping it and not them, solely on the basis that this one cat now needs you, and they have got each other.

This is the fallacy I described, and which has gone through round 2 uncontested, so I carry it through.

Once again, it is a fallacy to think that you can help one student, or one cat, without reciprocating this to the other ones. Even if they need your help, there are alternatives, as i describe, once again uncontested, in round 1, and then that student becomes different, even in the slightest manner, but nonetheless a manner that resonates strongly enough to change some aspects within the class's, or group of cats', social fabric.

If you eat a pack of cookies in the middle of class, you better have enough to share with all the others.
If you help one student in the middle of class, you better have enough time to also help all the others.
It doesn't matter if they need it, but if they feel as if they don't have it, the one that does will be unfortunate.
Debate Round No. 2


Oh well I'm very sorry ! but i don't agree at all. i think your totally missing the concept of what i mean and i think if you really thought hard about it and looked at all the facts and knowledge you have to do with this subject, then you would understand but your too busy looking at it from a negative point of view. Also i have to put this but do not refer things to animals this has nothing to do with what i am stating. CATS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS weather you were using this as an example. Again i must state that PEOPLE ARE HUMAN AND HAVE EMOTIONS AND FEELINGS !!!!! I think this is perfectly accept for a teacher to have a relationship with the student. i don't see why a job title or what ever should get in the way. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Range forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 1 year ago
i think as a teacher I would be hesitant to go to get coffee with a student. That being said, there shouldn't be anything wrong with students exchanging conversations about the subject they are interested in. If you stay on topic it shouldn't be a problem. I would try to avoid any topic that would make you at all uncomfortable. I would be hesitant, for example to bring up religion because that is something that could cause a lot of hurt feelings. But, yeah teachers are people with ideas and opinions, which they don't always get to express like they might like. So if as a teacher a student would come up to me for conversation I'd probably relish the opportunity.
Posted by JadeMdebatelover13 1 year ago
When i mean relationship i mean a friendly. not dating or what ever just like friends or just someone to keep in touch with, and as metaworldpeace says : teachers are humans, so really why can't we go out and have coffe with our teachers what makes them so different to us ? we all need someone to talk to i mean it;s the same thing as being best friends with your boss so i think children should have a realtionship with teacher if they wan't to . Do you agree ?
Posted by m8 1 year ago
My personal belief is that in order to get a relationship, one person needs to be able to hear the other, which can't be done if you don't speak 'aloud' as you say.
Posted by MettaWorldPeace 1 year ago
Teachers are humans too, and there shouldn't be anything wrong with them having a more intimate relationship with certain students. A student desires more than just rote learning, but human contact. If you're looking to adults for advice, a teacher may be a good place to go.
Posted by AwesomeSaucer 1 year ago
I'm curious what you mean by a "relationship". Do you mean social media? Meeting in person? Please elaborate.
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Hanspete 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 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: So to start, Conduct goes to no one because although Con forfeited a round I am not sure that Pro was actually arguing in that last round. Spelling and Grammar and Arguments to Pro, because not only did Pro make good well structure arguments, the were fluid and very well organized, other than that it was a fine debate.