My Argumentative Essay Topic is – Both parents should assume equal responsibility in raising a child. “shared parenting” is a controversial topic in family law. It generally refers to the presumption that children of divorced or separated parents should spend an equal (or almost equal) amount of time with each parent.
The concept has largely been promoted by fathers’ organisations that contend that a child’s life is enhanced if both parents continue to be significantly involved in the child’s life following separation or divorce.
2. What are the possibly different main claims/positions related to this topic? (There will be at least two (2) possibly different claims/positions, but there could be more; however, one of them will be YOUR claim/position.)
The position – which is the one that I take – is that both parents should assume equal responsibility in raising a child. The alternate position is that introducing the concept of ‘shared parenting’ in family law would be problematic since it would be shifting the focus away from the best interests of the child to political and gender-based topics. 3. What is your position regarding the topic?
My position is that each conceived the child therefore each is equally responsible for his development. 4. What evidence have you offered to support your claim/position? Have you included your survey results? More than 40 years have passed since the Capacity and Guardianship Law was enacted in 1962. The law stated that the court would base custody depending on the best interests of the child, and that that children under age 6 would automatically be placed in the mother’s custody (the Custody over Small Children clause).
That law was however passed in 1962, and as history shows (all will agree on this point – evidence cannot be more transparent), familial roles were very different then than now. Familial roles were defined: The mother was the housekeeper, and the father was the bread-winner. In the late 1950s, for instance, it was almost unheard of for a woman to be a university professor. There were still universities that declined to accept females as students.
Compare to toady where MIT’s recent report announced that the number of women on the faculty in the divisions of science and engineering has nearly doubled in the years since a decade ago (respectively form from 8% to 19% and from 10 to 17 %.) Tellingly enough, both males and females are granted liberal family leave policies. There are also far more women in senior positions at MIT (Jaschik, 2011)) 5.
Put your claim/position and evidence through the Scientific Method? and Proving a theory steps. Are there any steps on which your claim/position and evidence do not measure up to the examination? If so, what can you do to make them more acceptable? Any academic and non-academic source will unanimously agree that the world has changed since then (see the Magnus Hirschfeld Archive for Sexology report, for instance, as well as the statistical data on women’s progress in America gathered by the Federal Government (Council on Women and Girls). Women have entered the workforce enmasse, and a significant amount of men today have reversed roles preferring to be the ones who assume care for the child. There are, presumably, children therefore who are more familiar with, and prefer, their father than their mother. It is not unusual today for the father to be the one to cook and care for the child.
All of this can be checked by statistics and factual demographic accounts of the ratio of women who work in public positions now as compared to even a decade ago – certainly as compared to the late 1950s.
Similarly, statistics of men preferring to remain at home, caring for their child, rather than work can also be consulted. In fact, the situation has become so common that terms have been coined to describe this phenomenon. These include stay-at-home dad, stay at home father, house dad, SAHD, househusband, or house-spouse. The stay-at-home dad has been more regularly portrayed in themedia, especially in the United States.
Comparing those statics to those of the late 1950s will provide indubitable scientific evidence that times have changed and that, therefore, change in the legislation should be performed too. 6. Who is your intended audience?
(This does not have to be specifically your instructor.) My classmates, particularly females who may disagree with me. 7. What is your purpose? What do you want the audience to do, to feel, or to think? Remember that a persuasive paper is always asking for some sort of response from the audience. My purpose is to convince listeners that we are living in different times therefore conventions of the past may be outmoded.
Gender roles have changed. The Schnit Committee recommended changing custodial legislation and I wish to persuade readers/ listeners to support them. 8. What words or phrases have you included to cause your audience to do, feel, or think the way that you want them to do, feel, or think? Include all of your motivational or empathetic cues for your audience. I have used the terms ‘logic’ and ‘scientific’ who are credible buzz words. I have also led my audience through a tightly reasoned argument drawing on authoritative and impeccable sources 9. How can your position actually better meet the needs of your audience than other possible positions? I show my audience reality as is: firstly, the custodial law was created in 1962.
Secondly, gender roles were a certain way then; thirdly, they have drastically changed since. Conclusion – taking this into consideration, we need to reconsider custodial laws and support the legislation. I combine emotion with logic, but most importantly I use a logical stance in positioning one premise after the other, all based on evidence and scientific clarity, leading audience to a logical conclusion.
10. What more might your audience need to know before they believe that they need to do, to feel, or to think that what you are suggesting should in fact cause them to be doing, feeling, or thinking something? Audience will need to know more details about the proposed legislation, specifically the history behind the legislation, the arguments of the opposing side, and the details of the court case.
11. What position that is different from yours might cause your audience not to accept your position? Section 1 of the Children Act 1989 states that when making any decision on the upbringing of a child, the child’s welfare must be the court’s paramount consideration. A shared parenting presumption would constrain the court in following through on that resolution. The best scenario would be that decisions related to the child’s living quarters should be structured on a case-by-case basis.
12. Can you think of anything else that your audience might need in order to be persuaded by your argument? I would need to argue for the opposing perspective as well as, and even better than the opposing party can. My aim would be to understand them and to present their perspective in the best possible way. I would then transcend their perspective with my own opinion. In that way, my audience would need to know why people opposing the Schnitt committee’s recommendation that the Custody over Small Children clause be changed.
One answer is that some have questioned the need that he clause be changed given that he4 majority of mothers are already those raising small children. This seems like an argument ad infintum– one going around – or a red herring (petitio principii, going nowhere). It is precisely for this reason that the law needs to be changed: to eradicate inequalities and injustice of one gender being accorded greater responsibility than the other. Another argument is that some fear that fathers may use their children for leverage in divorce court.
However: what about the mothers who use their children as pawns in the divorce court? The only way that this can be prevented is by granted each parent equal custodial time. Then there is the compensation argument which states that being that the mother spends more time with the child she should also be compensated.
This does not wash over, since most males may prefer caring for their child rather than working. Both parents parented the child; both should cooperate in caring for him or her. There should be a joint custody program so that the child feels equally cared for by both parents. It is bad enough that the child has to –t through no fault of his own – go through the trauma of his parents’ divorcing.
Being separated from one in order to be the vast majority of time with the other is not only unfair but also conceivably stunting to the child. The only time the court should digress from this situation is when acting for the best interests of the child. References Council on Women and Girls: Women in America: Indicators of Social and Economic Well- Beinghttp://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cwg/data-on-women Doucet, A., (2006). Do Men Mother? Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press. Shared parenting’ gets rejectedhttp://www.nfm.org.uk/news/76-general/846-shared-parenting-gets-rejected Vidan, A. (2011). Making all parents equal Ha’aretzhttp://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/making-all-parents-equal-1.230242 Jaschik, S. (2011) MIT again reviews status of women.usatoday.comhttp://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2011-03-21-mit-women-higher-education_N.htm Magnus Hirschfeld Archive for Sexology. THE STATUS OF WOMEN IN THE WORLD TODAY http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/ATLAS_EN/html/the_status_of_women_in_the_wor.html • Critical Thinking Paper — Draft and Self-evaluation 2 (Due Week 9)” Once you have completed a draft which presents and defends your position for your chosen topic, look at your paper and pay careful attention to any arguments that you are using to support your position. (Note: If there are no arguments, then you have not written an argumentative paper!) Self-evaluation On a separate sheet (not part of the paper), identify the premises and conclusion of each of the arguments in your paper. Most papers will have one overriding argument and then several smaller arguments which “prove” the truth of the premises you are making in the larger argument.
Look at each of the arguments you have located in your paper. Carefully study them to see if there are any informal fallacies. If there are any fallacies, note the name of the fallacy beneath your identified arguments. Explain why each is a fallacy. Carefully examine each of your arguments again. Even if there isn’t an informal fallacy present, is each of the individual arguments valid? Do the premises provide enough evidence to support the conclusion? If you are not sure, try rewriting each argument as categorical syllogism and then test for validity.
Under each argument, identify whether it is valid or invalid. Explain to your instructor how you intend to change these arguments in your paper in order to be certain that they are free from fallacies and are perfectly valid. Once you have completed these tasks, continue editing and revising your paper in order to eliminate the problems that you have just noted and to make it more persuasive. The self-evaluation should be at least one (1) page, 250 words minimum. The evaluation should be typed. APA format is not required for the assignment.
Include your name and date. Your self-evaluation will be assessed based on development and completeness in response to the questions. The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are: Devise an action plan for overcoming the hindrances to the decision-making process by applying problem-solving skills to personal, professional, and academic situations and experiences. Use technology and information resources to research issues in critical thinking skills and informal logic. Write my paper clearly clearly and concisely about issues in critical thinking using proper writing mechanics. _________________________________________________________________________________________ Week 10 paper Separate but the same topic This should be a separate paper • Critical Thinking Paper: Revised” Write a four to six (4–6) page (1000–1200 word) paper that presents a reasoned, convincing argument for a position on a selected topic. Your paper should cover the following: 1. Follow the five steps of persuasion: establishing credibility, acknowledging the audience’s position, constructing a rationale, transplanting root elements, and asking for a response.
2. Clearly define your position and supporting evidence, including the results of your survey. 3. Include all the necessary “evidence” for the reader to reach the expected conclusion in each argument in the paper (whether the overriding argument or one contained in an individual paragraph) 4. Ensure that each argument in the paper (whether the overriding argument or one contained in an individual paragraph) is valid and free from both formal and informal fallacies.
5. Include at least four (4) references (sources). At least one (1) of your sources must be obtained from the collection of databases accessible from the Learning Resources Center Web page. The paper should follow guidelines for clear and effectively organized writing: • The paper is well-organized, and every explanation is both complete and easy to understand. • Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph for the paper. • Main ideas should be addressed in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences.
• Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, and mechanics. • The paper should be checked for spelling and grammatical errors. The format of the paper is to be as follows: • Typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman font (size 12), one-inch margins on all sides, APA format. • In addition to the four to six (4–6) pages assigned, a title page with the title of the assignment, your name, the instructor’s name, the course title, and the date is to be included, as well as a Reference Page. • Sources documented using APA style for in-text citations and listed on the References Page using APA style format.