HGTC The Current After Abuse Happens Do Something Approach Questions

Having Trouble Meeting Your Deadline?

Get your assignment on HGTC The Current After Abuse Happens Do Something Approach Questions  completed on time. avoid delay and – ORDER NOW

Do my paper

LaFollette is famous/infamous for the suggestion that parents should have to pass various tests, inspections, etc., before being granted a “license to parent”. At base, he is motivated by the desire to prevent child neglect and abuse. He considers the current after-abuse-happens-do-something approach to handling cases of child neglect and abuse to be extremely morally unacceptable. He values the safety, health, and well-being of all children and contends that such should be protected through the establishment of a state/federal parent licensing system. His proposed system would likely follow testing, inspection, etc., procedures similar to those used by current US adoption systems. See this week’s video/video outline for an overview of his reasons and overall argumentation.

This week’s questions:

1) Do you share Lafollette’s concerns about the current after-abuse-happens-do-something approach to responding to cases of child abuse and neglect? Does the current system seem to be morally adequate or inadequate? Your reasoning?

2) Does Lafollette provide sufficient support for his parent licensing proposal? That is, do his reasons seem to provide sufficient support for the claim that all parents should have to pass various tests, inspections, etc., before being granted the privilege of keeping and raising a child? Your reasoning?

3) What practical challenges might be encountered if federal/state governments tried to establish a Lafollette-style licensing system? Do these challenges seem possible or impossible to overcome? Your reasoning? If you tend to think that the challenges facing the establishment of a Lafollette-style system would be impossible to overcome, then what might a workable alternative look like? Your reasoning?

*A few things to keep in mind: Lafollette’s proposed system would not prevent people from having kids. Instead, it would simply require that people pass various licensing tests, etc., in order to legally keep the kids that they happened to have. Also, Lafollette is not dissuaded nor defeated by objections like ‘this would allow the government to intrude too far into peoples’ personal lives, etc.’ His responses to this form of government intrusion/paternalism objection will always be to ask whether or not parents are being honest when they say that they are willing to do ‘anything’ for their children. If people are willing to do anything to protect their kids, then wouldn’t allowing quite extreme government intrusion, parental competency testing, inspections, etc., be included under the notion of ‘anything’? And moreover, isn’t massive government intrusion a small moral and practical price to pay when compared to the value achieved when a child is preemptively saved from experiencing neglect and/or abuse?*