Taking Sides

PART 1. Parental Decision Making: What's Best for Children...or What's Best for Parents? ISSUE 1. Is It Ever Appropriate to Spank a Child? <new>YES: Walter L. Larimore, from "Is Spanking Actually Harmful to Children?" Focus on the Family" (Focus on the Family, 2002) NO: Irwin A. Hyman, from The Case Against Spanking: How to Discipline Your Child Without Hitting" (Jossey-Bass, 1997) Walter L. Larrimore, vice president of Medical Outreach at Focus on the Family, explains that parents have always spanked their children, and believes that what we see in the media are only examples of times when parents have become abusive rather than using spanking appropriately. Irwin A. Hyman, director of the National Center for Study of Corporal Punishment and Alternatives, argues that there is never any reason to hit a child. Focusing on the emotional effects of spanking, he asserts that spanking is much more likely to teach children to tolerate and perpetuate violence than it is to correct disobedience.ISSUE 2. Does the U.S. Need a Parental-Rights Amendment? YES: Greg D. Erken, from "Halt Social Engineering of the Nation's Families," Insight on the News" (May 15, 1995) NO: Jack C. Westman, from "License Parents to Ensure Children's Welfare," Insight on the News" (May 15, 1995) Greg D. Erken, executive director for Of the People, a nonprofit, parental-rights organization, challenges the concept that anyone otherthan a parent knows what is best for children. As the First Amendment exemplifies the principles on which Americans base discussions and debatesaround free speech, he maintains that the parental-rights amendment should do the same for parents' rights. Jack C. Westman, professor of psychiatry at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, asserts that a parental-rights amendment sets the government and parents up as enemies. He argues that many government policies, such as child neglect, labor, and mandatory education laws, have served children and families well. He contends that the amendment is unnecessary.ISSUE 3. Are Single-Parent Families a Major Cause of Social Dysfunction? YES: Patrick Fagan, from "Broken Families Strongly Correlate With a Range of Social Pathologies," Insight on the News" (December 8, 1997) NO: Stephanie Coontz, from "Social Problems Correlate More Closely With Poverty Than Family Background," Insight on the News" (December 8, 1997) Patrick Fagan, a resident scholar in family culture at The Heritage Foundation, cites the increased stress, lower production, and highersocial risks that follow children who are born to single-parent families. These negative factors, he asserts, lead to other social ills later in life,such as unhealthy behaviors for managing stress and relationships that are based more on sexual attraction than on emotional connection and thereforeare unlikely to last. He acknowledges the perseverance of many single-parent households but argues that all things being equal, "the intact marriedfamily beats the single-parent family in every other measurable dimension." Stephanie Coontz, a family historian at The Evergreen State College in Olympia, Washington, counters that identifying a particular familytype as the source of certain social ills is not only inaccurate but can also lead to ineffective public policies. The challenges facing many peoplesuch as poverty, school delinquency, and work benefits, she contends, are there whether a person is single or married. Coontz maintains thatencouraging marriage as a panacea to these social ills is not the answer.ISSUE 4. Does Divorce Create Long-Term Negative Effects for Children? YES: Karl Zinsmeister, from "Divorce's Toll on Children," The American Enterprise" (May/June 1996) NO: David Gately and Andrew I. Schwebel, from "Favorable Outcomes in Children After Parental Divorce," Journal of Divorce and Remarriage" (vol. 18, nos. 3-4, 1992) Karl Zinsmeister, editor in chief of The American Enterprise", points to research and surveys showing that not only is divorce muchmore harmful to children but also that children themselves say they would rather remain in a household where parents argue and fight than to havetheir parents break up. Educators David Gately and Andrew I. Schwebel highlight literature that demonstrates how going through a divorce can actually strengthen achild, helping to build her or his self-efficacy and level of self-esteem.PART 2. How Much Control Should Parents Have Over Their Children's Lives? <new> ISSUE 5. Should "Abstinence-Until-Marriage" Be the Only Message for Teens? <new>YES: Bridget E. Maher, from "Abstinence Until Marriage: The Best Message for Teens," Family Research Council" () <new>NO: Sue Alford, from "What's Wrong with Federal Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Requirements?" Transitions" (March 2001) Bridget E. Maher, an analyst on marriage and family issues at the Family Research Council, argues that far too much funding has gone into programs that teach young people about sexuality and contraception-programs that she asserts are ineffective. She points out that most teens say they and their peers should receive strong messages about abstinence, and argues that there are significant negative physical and emotional consequences for people who do not save sex for marriage. Sue Alford, editor and director of public information services at Advocates for Youth, argues that young people are receiving sexuality information and messages from so many sources that it is irresponsible to restrict sexuality and other educators from discussing anything other than abstinence. She maintains that the programs taught under the Abstinence Until Marriage funding often provide factually inaccurate information and hyperbolic assertions pertaining to the potential consequences of sexual relationships outside of marriage.ISSUE 6. Should Parents Be Allowed to Opt Out of Vaccinating Their Kids? YES: Barbara Loe Fisher, from "Children at Risk for Adverse Reactions Should Be Given a Pass Without Penalty," Insight on the News" (April 24, 2000) NO: Steven P. Shelov, from "That Would Open the Door for Epidemics of Some Deadly Childhood Diseases," Insight on the News" (April 24, 2000) Barbara Loe Fisher, cofounder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, argues that the risks involved with vaccinatingchildren need to be weighed by their parents. She asserts that in some states government policies relating to vaccinations for children discount theparents' rights to choose what is best for their children and that parents should be allowed to decide whether or not to have their childrenvaccinated. Steven P. Shelov, chairman of the department of pediatrics at the Maimonides Medical Center in New York City, points to the vast number ofdiseases, disorders, and deaths that are preventable thanks to vaccines early in life. He maintains that parents should trust in science and theextensive research that has been done on these vaccines and make every effort to ensure that their children are vaccinated.ISSUE 7. Should Parents of Deaf Children Choose Cochlear Implant Surgery? YES: Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, from "Kids and Cochlear Implants: Getting Connected," a Brochure of the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (2001) NO: National Association of the Deaf, from "NAD Position Statement on Cochlear Implants," (October 6, 2000) The Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, an international membership organization and resource center onhearing loss and spoken language, maintains that a cochlear device can lead to greater hearing and speech capability throughout a person'slife. The National Association of the Deaf, the oldest and largest constituency organization focusing on accessibility and civil rights ofAmericans who are deaf or hard of hearing, argues that the cochlear implant treats deafness as a disability and ignores the historical and culturalaspects of deaf life. ISSUE 8. Should Parents Surgically Alter Their Intersex Infants? YES: Amicur Farkas, B. Chertin, and Irith Hadas-Halpren, from "One-Stage Feminizing Genitoplasty: Eight Years of Experience With Forty-Nine Cases," The Journal of Urology" (June 2001) NO: Alice Domurat Dreger, from "'Ambiguous Sex'-or Ambivalent Medicine? Ethical Issues in the Treatment of Intersexuality," Hastings Center Report" (May-June 1998) Amicur Farkas, B. Chertin, and Irith Hadas-Halpren, faculty of the Ben-Gurion University in Jerusalem, Israel, see ambiguous genitalia as atrue emergency. They assert that feminizing surgery should be done on an infant with congenital adrenal hyperplasia to ensure that as an adult womanshe will have sexual functioning and be able to give birth. Alice Domurat Dreger, assistant professor in the Lyman Briggs School at Michigan State University, explores the ethics in recommending toparents that they should have their children's genitals altered surgically. With so little education available about the true meaning and optionsrelating to children born with ambiguous genitalia, she wonders if any parents who decide that their child should have the surgery are truly givinginformed consent.PART 3. Should Children Have Legal Protections and Rights? ISSUE 9. Should the Senate Ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child? YES: United States Fund for UNICEF, from "United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Frequently Asked Questions," United States Fund for UNICEF" (1998) NO: Catherina Hurlburt, from "U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child: A Treaty to Undermine the Family," a Policy Paper of Concerned Women for America (September 2001) The United States Fund for UNICEF, a United Nations agency working for the protection of children's rights, points to the successes thatgovernments around the world have had in using the Convention on the Rights of the Child to promote children's rights and improve children's lives ingeneral. UNICEF contends that the Convention reinforces parental rights and promotes values and norms with which no one could take issue, such asfreedom from discrimination, access to adequate health care, and protection from physical harm and abduction. Catherina Hurlburt, a writer for Concerned Women for America (CWFA), maintains that the Convention on the Rights of the Child givesgovernment more power over children's rights than parents would have. In giving children the right to "express their views freely in allmatters," the Convention would, she argues, usurp parental authority and give children too much independence.ISSUE 10. Should Minors Be Required to Get Their Parents' Permission in Order to Obtain an Abortion? YES: Teresa Stanton Collett, from Testimony Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives (September 6, 2001) NO: Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., from "Fact Sheet: Teenagers, Abortion, and Government Intrusion Laws," Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. (August 1999) Teresa Stanton Collett, professor at South Texas College of Law, testifies in front of the U.S. House of Representatives in support of thefederal Child Custody Protection Act. Parental involvement, Collett maintains, is not punitive; rather, it offers the girl herself additional protection againstinjury and sexual assault. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., the oldest and largest reproductive health organization in the United States, argues thatparental notification and consent laws keep girls from exercising their legal right to access abortion. Notifying parents of their daughter's intentto terminate a pregnancy puts many girls at risk for severe punishment, expulsion from the home, or even physical violence. Planned Parenthoodcontends that, just as minors have the power to give their consent for other surgical procedures, they should be able to give their own consent toterminate a pregnancy.PART 4. Revisiting Ozzie and Harriet: Where Do Same-Sex Couples and Their Families Fit In? ISSUE 11. Should Same-Sex Couples Be Able to Marry? <new>YES: Human Rights Campaign, from Answers to Questions About Marriage Equality" (HRC's FamilyNet Project, 2004) <new>NO: Peter Sprigg, from Questions and Answers: What's Wrong with Letting Same-Sex Couples 'Marry'?" (Family Research Council, 2004) The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), America's largest lesbian and gay organization, outlines the current disparities American lesbian and gay couples experience as compared to their heterosexual counterparts because they are not allowed to marry legally. Peter Sprigg, director of the Center for Marriage and Family Studies at the Family Research Council, outlines why non-heterosexual relationships do not carry with them the same validity as heterosexual relationships, and therefore should not be allowed to marry legally. He states that the rights same-sex couples maintain they would get by being able to marry are rights that are already available to them.<new> ISSUE 12. Should the U.S. Constitution Be Amended to Protect the "Sanctity of Marriage"? <new>YES: The National Review, from "The Right Amendment-Marriage," The National Review" (January 26, 2004) <new>NO: Jonah Goldberg, from "Federal Marriage Amendment: A Bad Idea," Townhall.com" (2003) The National Review", a conservative news magazine, believes that a constitutional amendment is needed to reserve the word "marriage" for a man and a woman. It would also keep any state from allowing same-sex unions and any judge from making a decision inconsistent with federal law. Jonah Goldberg, editor of National Review Online", does not support same-sex marriage, but he does not think that a constitutional amendment is the way to go, either. He argues that many supporters of the Federal Marriage Amendment believe that this amendment protects and strengthens heterosexual marriage, and that this reasoning is flawed.<new> ISSUE 13. Can Lesbian and Gay Couples Be Appropriate Parents for Children? <new>YES: Joan Biskupic, from "Same-Sex Couples Redefining Family Law in USA," USATODAY.com" (February 17, 2003) <new>NO: Timothy J. Dailey, from "State of the States: Update on Homosexual Adoption in the U.S.," Family Research Council" (no. 243) Joan Biskupic, legal affairs correspondent for USA Today", discusses both the personal challenges for same-gender couples attempting to adopt in states that are not friendly to them, and provides an update of legal issues and options available to lesbian and gay couples, indicating a changing tide of acceptance toward couples of the same gender, as well as lesbian and gay individuals, adopting children. Timothy J. Dailey, senior research fellow at the Center for Marriage and Family Studies, provides an overview of state laws pertaining to adoption by lesbian or gay parents. He points to studies showing that children do much better in family settings that include both a mother and a father, and that the sexual behaviors same-sex parents engage in make them, by definition, inappropriate role models for children.PART 5. Twenty-First Century Relationship Issues: Should We, or Shouldn't We...? <new> ISSUE 14. Is Cybersex "Cheating"? <new>YES: Stephen O. Watters, from Real Solutions for Overcoming Internet Addictions" (Servant Publications, 2001) <new>NO: CBSNEWS.com, from "A Look at Internet Infidelity" (August 4, 2003) Stephen O. Watters shares personal experiences of several women whose marriages have been unsatisfying and who have sought connection with men online. He argues that the type of connection people can establish via the Internet can be extremely powerful, and that the significance of these relationships can be just as damaging to a marriage as a live affair-perhaps even more so, since these online sexual relationships can, he says, lead to an addiction. CBSNEWS.com reports that while Internet relationships may not be healthy for a relationship, they are not the same thing as, and should not be equated with, an actual affair. A sexual relationship maintained only in print is nowhere near as intense as a relationship that is consummated in person.ISSUE 15. Should People Live Together Before Getting Married? YES: Dorian Solot and Marshall Miller, from "What the Research Really Says About Cohabitation," A Report of the Alternatives to Marriage Project (2002, revised 2004) NO: David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, from "Should We Live Together? What Young Adults Need to Know About Cohabitation Before Marriage: A Comprehensive Review of Recent Research," 2d ed., A Report of the National Marriage Project (2002) Dorian Solot and Marshall Miller, cofounders of the Alternatives to Marriage Project, maintain that our society overemphasizes marriage,discriminating against people who wish to commit to another person and remain unmarried. David Popenoe and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, codirectors of the National Marriage Project, assert that living together before marriage cancontribute to a higher chance of divorce down the line, to less satisfying relationships, and to a deterioration in society'sregard for the institution of marriage.<new> ISSUE 16. Should No-Fault Divorces Be Allowed? <new>YES: Laurie D. Krauth, from "The Contentious Debate About No-Fault Divorce: Who Is Most at Risk?" American Association of Marraige and Family Therapy" (2002) <new>NO: Dennis E. Powell, from "Divorce-on-Demand: Forget About Gay Marriage-What About the State of Regular Marriage?" The National Review" (2003) Laurie D. Krauth, a psychotherapist, asserts that it is illogical and inaccurate to hold no-fault divorce responsible for the high divorce rates. Among her arguments in favor of no-fault divorce laws is that since women request divorces more often than men do, these types of divorce provide greater equality for female partners in their marriages. Dennis E. Powell shares the personal account of his own no-fault divorce. He maintains that no-fault divorce laws make divorce far too easy, and that the laws themselves do not inherently support any effort for reconciliation. In doing so, he argues, no-fault divorce minimizes the validity of a couple's marriage vows and the entire institution of marriage.PART 6. How Much Control Should the Government Have Over Our Personal Lives? <new> ISSUE 17. Are Statutory Rape Laws Effective at Protecting Minors? <new>YES: Sherry F. Colb, from "The Pros and Cons of Statuatory Rape Laws," CNN.com (February 11, 2004) <new>NO: Marc Tunzi, from "Curbside Consultation: Isn't This Statutory Rape?" American Family Physician" (2002) Sherry F. Colb, columnist and law professor, uses a case study involving a statutory rape case to raise concerns about whether rape and assault cases would be prosecuted sufficiently without statutory rape laws. Although not perfect, statutory rape laws can be assets in such cases as when the older partner denies the rape occurred or denies any responsibility for a resulting pregnancy or infection. Marc Tunzi, a family physician, believes that statutory rape laws are ineffective because people can get around them too easily. These laws, he argues, require that an otherwise healthy relationship between two people of different ages be criminalized, solely because there is some kind of sexual activity involved. As a result, medical and other licensed professionals do not want to break up these relationships that, in their professional opinion, are not problematic solely because of the age difference between the two partners.ISSUE 18. Should Health Insurers Be Required to Pay for Infertility Treatments? YES: Diane D. Aronson, from "Should Health Insurers Be Forced to Pay for Infertility Treatments? Yes," Insight on the News" (February 8, 1999) <new>NO: Merrill Matthews, Jr., from "Should Health Insurers Be Forced to Pay for Infertility Treatments? No," Insight on the News" (February 8, 1999) Diane D. Aronson, executive director of RESOLVE, the National Infertility Association, argues that reproduction is an inherent right, andtherefore the inability to become pregnant or cause a pregnancy should be covered by health insurance just as any other physical or mental challengethat inhibits a major life activity. Merrill Matthews, Jr., vice president of domestic policy at the National Center for Policy Analysis, asserts thatmandating coverage of infertility treatment, a costly process, would unfairly burden subscribers whose rates would go up to help offset these costs,as well as small businesses that are not insured under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).ISSUE 19. Should the Government Be Able to Decide Who Can Have Children? YES: Barry G. Silverman, from Dissenting Opinion, William Gerber v. Roderick Hickman," U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (September 5, 2001) NO: Myron H. Bright, from Majority Opinion, William Gerber v. Roderick Hickman," U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (September 5, 2001) Federal Court of Appeals judge Barry G. Silverman cites constitutional precedence to argue that while inmates have a right to marriage, theConstitution does not guarantee the right to conjugal visits. As a result, the right to procreate is reserved as a future right that can be fulfilledonce an inmate has served his or her time for crimes committed. Federal Court of Appeals judge Myron H. Bright cites past Supreme Court decisions to demonstrate that prison inmates retain certainconstitutional rights even though they have broken the law. This includes, he asserts, the right to procreate.