Any activity that is potentially harmful to the others and requires certain demonstrated competence for its safe performance is subject to regulation LaFollette Any activity that is potentially harmful to the others and requires certain demonstrated competence for its safe performance is subject to regulation LaFollette Each objection focuses on the problems or difficulties of implementing this proposal the licensing of parents LaFollette The adoption system is unlikely to have the capacity to absorb such children, which will put pressure on institutional or foster care systems, which are often bad for child welfare.
Incompetent parents risk causing significant long-term harm to the their children. After all, adoption regimes already tend to involve the de facto licensing of adoptive parents.
We need to reject this whole bogus monstrosity and throw it squarely back onto the ash heap of history, from whence it came and where it belongs.
Having children is a serious business. In fact, I dare say that parenting is a paradigm of such activities since the potential for harm is so great both in the extent of harm any one person can suffer and in the number of people potentially harmed and the need for competence is so evident.
This, to my mind, would be a huge advance over the current system wherein DFCS or CPS interferes only after harm has been done—and then creates further trauma for the child. Unfortunately that help isn t always there for many girls in this situation.
Therefore, any person who rejects the claim that licensing parents is legitimate also rejects the idea that any other activity, such as driving, should be regulated by some sort of licensing procedure LaFollette.
Just like a bad driver who shouldn t be operating a motor vehicle has a greater chance of harming or killing an innocent person, an incompetent parent runs a greater risk of abusing or damaging their child. Mazes are used to not only study humans and their intelligence, but also that of animals.
In his argument for the licensing of parents, LaFollette puts forth the criteria that is used in the licensing of any of the above mentioned activities. The specific rights appealed to in this analogy are not without limitations.
Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract here. This reason is to protect innocent people from being harmed by incompetent people who are not skilled in these areas.
Such a world would hardly be desirable LaFollette If two incompetent people decide to have a baby, doesn t that baby stand a risk of being harmed by the parents incompetence?
In addition, from what I can piece together, the practical possibilities for constructing a reliable predictive test are not all that gloomy.
Note that there are some potentially harmful activities that are rightly not licensed. Post titles cannot consist only in questions, even if the title of the linked material is a question.
Because of these general feelings many objections to LaFollette s essay arise. Undermining or eliminating the family and its moral underpinnings atomizes individuals, leaving them to face the state alone, making us all strangers to one another in the eyes of the State. Such a world would hardly be desirable LaFollette If two incompetent people decide to have a baby, doesn t that baby stand a risk of being harmed by the parents incompetence?
Commenting Rules Read the Post Before You Reply Read the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. But this does not mean that they are protected under the first amendment. Thus, even if people have these rights, they may sometimes be limited in order to protect innocent people.
More College Papers Lady In A Rocking Chair essay Back forth back forth she sits in her creaky rocking chair pleasantly reminiscing about her lost childhood as she crochets a warm fuzzy quilt for her granddaughter. The results of this maltreatment are obvious.
Because of the form and quality of the intimacy associated with raising a child, many individuals develop a very strong interest in experiencing such a relationship. We might not punish parents at all we might just remove the children and put them up for adoption.
Something similar is true of performing surgery or practicing law. Now, who do you think would come up with a scheme?Libertarianism and Parental Licensing Back in December ofI posted “Licensing Parents,” defending a view Hugh LaFollette had introduced into philosophical literature in that the state should license parents (LaFollette further defended this stance in ; see Note 1).
Although the relationship between a parent and her children is different in some respects, it is also relevantly similar to that between a professional and those she serves. To defend these claims, I show how and why the rationale for licensing parents parallels the rational for licensing professionals.
In this essay I shall argue that the state should require all parents to be licensed. My main goal is to demonstrate that the licensing of parents is theoretically desirable, though I shall also argue that a workable and just licensing Author: Hugh Lafollette.
A response to hugh lafolettes paper licensing parents Com. Paper Crafts; A special education visitation at vineland high school Kids' The historical reason behind the catholic churchs opposition of women ordination A research on alcoholic dependency Thanksgiving.
Now that Lafollette has demonstrated that a parent licensing program should be in effect and is desirable, he refutes 5 common objections to the implementation of the program. The first is that we don’t have the means of testing what is a ‘Good Parent’.
While this may be true, it’s not what is required by the program. Positive Argument for Parent Licensing In the status quo, parenting is considered a right, but it should be considered a privilege.
Hugh Lafollette’s paper, “Is Licensing Parents Wrong?” suggests that the government should.Download