Login/Sign Up




Child Abuse: when is it nessary to remove a child from an abusive home.
Other

cheerleader4life
2 - 2
lithium
3 - 3


1
Right Away


cheerleader4life
Aug 11, 2008
Case #1
there is no excuse what so ever why a child or anyone for that matter should live in an abusive home. if you know about someone being abused you should tell the authorities right away before its to late and the abuser kills them. you wouldn't want that on your shoulders as you go through life, knowing that you could have saved this person's life if only you would have spoke up.

 
cheerleader4life
Aug 23, 2008
Case #2
yes i understand that there have been false claims of child abuse, but if there are clear signs that a child is getting abused...the child shouldn't have to stay there, and deal with that. it could lead to more serious problems like death.

 
cheerleader4life
Aug 23, 2008
Case #3
i know that my evidence is just a music video but that music video shows what happens to so many children around the world who don't get the help that they need when they are getting abused.

 
cheerleader4life
Aug 25, 2008
Case #4
if there is abuse in a home the child should be removed point blank...but if they are false accusations, then the child will be placed back with the parents, if the court system and prove that the parents are fit enough to be the parents that the child needs.

 
cheerleader4life
Aug 25, 2008
Case #5
yes i may have stated my argument the wrong way but i think people that have read it clearly would get what i'm trying to say. and yes going through the court system is very expensive, and maybe the parents that are getting blamed didn't do anything at all..but if they are getting blamed for abusing their children, they must be doing something wrong, that makes people think that they are abusing their children....people just don't make up lies like that. when someone is blamed, they are just looking out for the best needs for the child. how would you feel if someone knew you were getting abused, and didn't tell anyone, and just let you suffer through that throughout your childhood...i would think you would want to be removed from an abusive household...if not you must enjoy the pain and suffering that the children go through.

 
10
Its entirely dependant on the severity of the child abuse


lithium
Aug 15, 2008
Case #1
I'm hoping that i will be able to put a little spin on this one-sided debate. I am ready for a fight and i hope you are as well. For now, i will be arguing these two things:

1. The severity of the abuse and the qualifications of abuse need to be properly defined:

and..

2. Fighting Agaisnt False Accusations:

Before i go anyfurther, i obviously have every moral objection to child abuse. There is not an ounce of sympathy in my heart for any parent who is willing to do those awful things to their own flesh and blood. My prayers go out to those unfortunate children and families.

 
lithium
Aug 15, 2008
Case #2
1. The severity and guidlines:

I would like to apologize for this but i cannot seem to come up with the link to back this story up but i heard this story on the news a week or so ago that basically said this...Parents in the Chicago area were recently put on parental probation by the DCFS for being asleep early Sunday morning. While these parents were sleeping, their children (around the ages of 6-9) went outside in order to go to their grandmothers house for a "suprise breakfast". Little did the litte ones know, they were then locked out of their own house very early in the morning. They were then seen by neighbors shortly afterwards playing in and around the street. The neighbors called the cops and the parents were then charged with "abuse" and neglagence towards their children. They now have to have monthly meetings with the DCFS in order for them to survey how they are raising their own children. The DCFS actually REMOVED THE CHILDREN FROM THE HOUSE FOR 3 DAYS! This couple now has to deal with the embarrasment and frustration of having the DCFS involved in their lives and for what? Being asleep early in the morning? Dont get me wrong, the parents were neglagent in this case, they were, there is no beating around the bush. I have a son of my own and i realize the importance of keeping an eye on my child. But use common sense here, is it that unreasonable for those parents to be asleep still? Does not most of the credit go towards the little kids who were doing what they do best which is getting into trouble? Is this child abuse as the DCFS claims it to be? No. It is at best neglagence by the parents. This is just one example and again i apologize for the lack of a link to find this story but there are plenty more just like it.

The important thing is that these kinds of situations happen a lot and its labeled right away as child abuse. These neglagent or sometimes completely innocent parents are then put into the same basket of people who beat their kids, molest their kids, sicken their kids, and a whole list of horrendous other things. I dont think that its right and i think that more proper guidlines need to be established before children are removed from their homes in order to stop cases like this.

 
lithium
Aug 15, 2008
Case #3
2. False Accusations:

I did not have the link to that last story but if you notice in my evidence section there are over a dozen cases in which false accusations of child abuse have led to the wrongful imprisonment of people for alleged child abuse. And until autopsies were preformed, the cause of death or severe symptoms and signs of bruises and what not were right away labeled as child abuse. This next statement is from that evidence i've posted but their words reflect my own.

"Our instincts are to protect and defend defenseless children. It is a measure of a civilized society. It is equally instinctive to presume guilt. That tendency is even stronger when the accused must prove a negative---that what he or she is accused of didn't happen---and the accuser is a physician with a stack of degrees or, equally potent, a child. These combinations have led to countless criminal convictions: parents, day care providers, teachers, neighbors---even when the charges cannot be supported by objective scientific evidence, or when there was no physical evidence at all to support the claims.

We're having second looks at many of these cases, acknowledging that we've convicted innocent people, destroyed families and ruined childhoods. A second look at the processes that led to these miscarriages of justice is essential, because unless we learn from our mistakes, we will continue to repeat them"

It is not only the poor and shady defining lines that are a problem, but the false accusations as well. Further scientific and object evidence should be proven before sentences and verdicts. There is hopefully mountains more to come from me, i'm looking forward to your rebuttals and hope you respond soon. Good luck! Give me a G! "G"! Give me an O! "O"! Give me an...what no laughs yet? Ok i'll stop. Good luck.

 
lithium
Aug 23, 2008
Case #4
I dont need a music video to show me how awful people can be and how awful some people have it. Your video cannot sway my opinion the least.

I'm not saying child abuse is good! I'm not saying children that are being beaten to bloody pulps every day by their cowardly parents should have to stay!

This debate reads: When is it necessary to remove a child from an abusive home?

Your response to that is "Right Away" and that alone is completely refuted by what i'm arguing about. What if the allegations are false or bogus like in the examples i've given? Should good parents lose their children and be looked at the same way that the real abusers are? Your debate position "Right Away" suggests that regardless of the level or validity of the abuse, any child that falls under the category of "living in an abusive home" should be removed ASAP regardless of what i'm arguing.

 
lithium
Aug 25, 2008
Case #5
"if there is abuse in a home the child should be
removed point blank"

The main point i'm taking from that statement is POINT BLANK. Point blank means a lot. The American Heritage Dictionary defines abuse as:

1. To use wrongly or improperly; misuse
2. To hurt or injure by maltreatment; ill-use

Looking at these definitions in comparison to what we are debating..

1. "To use wrongly or improperly; misuse" and "To hurt or injure by maltreatment; ill-use" in terms of Child Abuse, that refers to parenthood and quality there of. Under your "point blank" mentality, any mistake no matter how severe, qualifies as abuse and those parents should lose their children. Can you honestly say that ANY PARENT has not atleast once made some mistakes involving the safety of their child? When i was 18 months old, i was in my walker and my mom left the basement door open. Needless to say, me and my walker went sliding down those basement stairs. My mom would tell me later that it was the most fearful she's ever been in her entire life. Her action was a mistake, not an act of wrongful child abuse. Parent's like here and every parent in the history of parents will make mistakes..WE'RE HUMAN! Removing a parent's child because of natural mistakes is immoral and irresponsible.

"if the court system and prove that the parents are fit enough to be the parents that the child needs".

I'm assuming you are basically saying "use the court system to filter out the false accusations". Correct me if i'm wrong.

But should good parents have to go through the long and expensive judicial process even if their "point blank" abuse was an honest mistake and in no way had intentions of purposefully harming the child?

 
lithium
Aug 26, 2008
Case #6
Argh. I dont know where to begin. It looks like my arguments are'nt resonating with you so in leu of having the same back and forth argument, i'll have my final statement and you can have yours. People who havnt voted yet, my next argument will be my last so vote as you please.

 
lithium
Aug 26, 2008
Case #7
I wont dignify your last few sentences with a responce or rebuttal. I refuse to.

"maybe the parents that are getting blamed didn't do anything at all..but if they are getting blamed for abusing their children, they must be doing something wrong"

No no no. By all means no, negatory, negative, the classic man falling off of a cliff "NOOOOOOOOOOoooooo". Please look at my evidence and you can get just a sample of cases of people who are wrongfully accused of abuse. Guilt by assumption is such the wrong way to go with this sort of thing. Just because parents or people in general are accused of something, doesnt mean they did it. Innocent until proven guilty my dear.

Under the "Right Away" institution that my opponent is arguing for, every parent that does anything no matter how small that qualifies as abuse should have their children taken out of their homes. I'm sure all of you reading can see the transparent flaws in my opponents statement but if you cant, look at my other arguments and it should change your mind.


 


Use these tags to find similiar debates

חתול כלב -------... 10 1984 25 A abortion abuse alcohol Alec All zoos should be closed alone america animal animals Apple Are Are you for or against ASDSFD assume astronomy bad Baha Baldwin baseball Basinger best bf bible bird hummingbird partridge black blacks blue body book boyfriend breathalyzer bring brownies bull-riding c calvin johnson camero cars cats cause cell phone allowance in a high school ( 9-12) environment challenge cheating Cheerleaders chicken Child child abuse children choice choose cigarettes cold comedy competitive debates computer Contraception control Convince convinceme cookies Countries country creationists Crime criminal history culture Cunt. Custody customer service dating day after tomorrow death DeathPenalty debate debating Democracy department store detroit lions Dick did divorce Divorice dog bites dogs Dormitory dp draft drinking Drug drugs DUI Dumb duran duran dynamics education effective? egg employment ert ethically Evolution evolutionists Exams expansion expences family farm feature request features ffff fiance Fight Flat flat dormitory football france Freddy Freddy Krueger friend Fuck fun funny future games germany gf girlfriend giving Global Global Warming go God Goner government grab great gun guns Gymnasts health heat hello Henry Dickson history holes homosexual humans humor husband i I'm beancrisp ice cream ICP Immovable Object In the horror world who is the better killer? interesting Iran iraq is it it be justsociety kids kill Kim kitten Krueger labor labs las vegas basketball team laws ld legalization life limits love Mac mac is better pc marijuana marriage married merit Microsoft military MineCraft MLB instant replay money more most movie murder Music mustang myans Myspace NASA Nature nazi New England News nfl no nuclear Nurture Obesity objectivism office work on Open open debates opinion Opponent Opponent's choice oppression order orwell panda PB or PH PC peace people perfect storm Philosophy physical work Physics pitbulls planets Plea bargaining in exchange for testimony point points Policy politics pop cluture porn porn wrong? pragmatic progress proliferation proving a point punishment puppy Random rasicm real receiving recognition recognize red region relationship relationships religion resolutions ridiculous runescape saddam same-sex marriage samesex marriage Sanctions santa satisfactory scholarships school science SCIENCE VS RELIGION Scott Panetti vs. Quarterman sdfsd second hand smoke self-voting sex Shakespeare should Should be legal Should we be forced to take P.E.? should you be charged with involintary man sloughter if you surve food to some one who is knowingly Silly single site SMoking smoking tobacco somalian pirates something Space spellenstein spelling spouse Stupid subconsciousness substantive sueing system TCG