Sociology

Introduction

The issues on slavery in the United States began after Virginia was settled by the English and lasted until the establishment of the thirteenth amendment on the constitution of the United States. The African Americans were the ones affected in the free- labor where the white Americans benefited and attained their wealth.

The slavery among the black Americans has ended but still, the issues continue to arise and dispute about reparations remains to be controversial. Slavery is said to be a common expression of racism among Americans and unfortunately, it is the one viewed as the main reason why the blacks in the US are treated unfairly. The influences from the scenarios that happened in the past brought sufferings to a lot of people right now and are predicted that racism would continue to arise even in the 20th century.

Slavery is seen as one of the reasons why many blacks are separated from whites today though it is not blatantly expressed in society still it can be depicted in other areas such as in employment (Rodriguez, 2007). It is unavoidable to encounter such people who consider blacks as mere slaves only. However, some scholars said that slavery could be a reason why the never-ending homelessness, youth violence, and single-parent households occur in society.

It is also an issue that the African American people were stereotyped as people who were self-contempt, self-hatred, self-afflicted, and self-flagellated. Racism prevails in the debates about slavery because this discussion shows the world the evidence of what white people did to the blacks. Ironically, it is not a good idea to determine black people as slaves only and white as the slave-owners just because of race discrimination (Van Deburg, 1984).

Today, the world is saying that racism or the issue of slavery does not occur anymore because every people have their freedom and rights which they may enjoy for their welfare. But some black activists are appealing to the Courts or maybe in Congress to get the payback from the whites to the African American reparations; this is for the black people to have an equal position as the whites have in the society.

Even though the whites are saying that they are now paying for it in the form of affirmative action, welfare, and other kinds of transfer payments, a black economist argues that those are not enough and more money is needed to be able to get back the lost capital and have the damages repaired for the businesses that they had during the long years of slavery and imparity.

Furthermore, slavery is also one factor to consider why the Black Americans lost their own culture and adopt the new ideas from the whites. But actually, the African Americans gained a new culture in that adaptation from the whites but they indeed lost their ancestral tribal affiliations. But despite being slaves, it is undeniably seen that the African Americans learned some traits which constitute civilization for their identity.

An example of that is being close to each other even though they are not related by blood; they adopted the trait of calling each other “brother” or “sister” as a sign of humanity. Another thing is that, after slavery, the black Americans learned to protect themselves and distinguish their strengths and weaknesses for them to respond to the abusive form of slavery from the whites (Rawick, 1972).

Discussion

Many people are arguing whether African Americans should receive this reparation from the whites or not. There have been a lot of good and bad critics about this certain issue. Another question bugging in the minds of the concerned people is that to what extent should African-Americans receive reparations for the effects of slavery if in case they would be given the chance of this kind of payback?

The reparations for slavery is a proposal in the United States by some people which says that there should be just compensation for the descendants of those who were enslaved to recognize the free labor which they have provided before. It is further said that the Americans will not get their wealth and global power without the help of the black slaves whom the whites discriminated against before. The compensation mentioned in the proposal suggested having different kinds of payments from community-based developments related up to health and education issues. But these ideas were still highly divisive and in the deciding time of how it is going to be implemented.

A conservative author, David Horowitz, who wrote the article about the Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Blacks is a Bad Idea for Blacks – and Racist Too, pointed out his ideas and opinion about the disadvantages of reparations and why the Americans do not owe anything from the blacks. The first one is that because there is no particular group that may hold the responsibilities for the slavery that happened before.

Horowitz said that the black Americans should also be held liable in this issue because they were slave owners too. The second one is that there is no certain group who got all the benefits from the slavery of the black Americans. The black Americans were claiming that the whites solely got their wealth from them but come to think of it if the slave-owners became rich, didn’t they think that the slaves got wealth too? The Gross National Product of black America made their community the 10th most prosperous nation in the world and they enjoy more than their own country which is Africa from where they originally belong.

The third one is that a small number of white Americans only owned slaves and other white Americans gave up their lives to set the slaves free. The next one is that America today is a multi-ethnic nation and almost all Americans do not have connections on the direct and indirect forms of slavery. The fifth reason which Horowitz enumerated is about the Historical precedents that are used to give justifications on the claims of reparations that do not apply, he said that it is based on the race and not on the damages it had created (Horowitz, 2001).

The other five reasons also comprise the arguments about the reparations which according to David Horowitz should not be given to the black Americans during the period of slavery because the African Americans also benefited from the slave owners. The black Americans were not discriminated against in this issue because there has been no distinction between the roles of the black Americans during that period since there were black Americans who acted also as slave-owners. Also, Horowitz pointed out that giving reparations to black Americans is a form of discrimination among blacks because reparations may be a kind of help given to the victims of a certain instance.

And the blacks are not mere victims in this situation. The reparations were already given to the blacks as the whites have provided welfare for them in the form of employment, educational assistance, and rewriting the American law considering their race and giving importance to them to avoid racism issues. Another reason is considering the debts that the blacks owe to the white Americans. It has been known that some whites gave up their life for the freedom of the blacks and saved them from being slaves indeed, so Horowitz claimed that it is just not to give extra reparations for the effects of slavery (Horowitz, 2001).

Thus, it is extremely obvious that the view of Horowitz on the reparations for slavery does not have to take into account. The answer to the question earlier as to what extent should the whites pay the blacks is answered. The blacks have already gotten their pay and now it appears to be fair in the sense of treatment among whites and blacks. The whites have provided the reparations suited for the blacks even before. The equal treatment for the blacks nowadays is enough because they are enjoying the things which a white American is enjoying too. The blacks benefit from the country and got a lot of opportunities as well.

Conclusion

It may seem very biased on the side of the blacks to enumerate each reason why they should not get any more reparations from the whites. This may mean racism or discrimination for the blacks and feel the big gap between them and the whites. Indeed, the blacks got a point on pleading for reparations because they were greatly affected before not only in the sense of the loss of their ancestral tribal affiliations but also it is like losing their own identity as black Americans since they have adopted the new world of the people they have been acquainted. Understandably, the blacks may feel anger and imparity.

The slavery among black Americans has ended though and the white Americans were the ones considered as the promoters of the campaign against discrimination and racism. But still, it is considered slavery as a crime in the sense of morality. However, Americans should not be considered heroes or villains in this issue. The issue of racism and discrimination should vanish in this era because in the world today, blacks are now given equal opportunities to white ones. Some educators said that the blacks should be thankful to be in a country that has the civilization of being free from its power (Berlin, 1982).

Slavery indeed is a crime of morality but the African Americans’ slavery issue should be considered as a way of adopting a progressive culture that will lead them to a better condition. Racism has not been an issue if people would keenly observe the situation because the fellow blacks of the African American race have been slave-owners so the whites should not get the entire blame and responsibilities for the reparations. Anyway, the African-American citizens of America appear to be the richest and most fortunate black people living. There are no hesitations that the white Americans need the support of their fellow African- American citizens and vice versa to achieve the welfare for the whole country.

References

Berlin, Ira, Joseph P. Reidy, and Leslie S. Rowlands, eds. Freedom: A Documentary History of Emancipation, 1861-1867 5 vol Cambridge University Press, 1982.

Horowitz, David. Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Blacks is a Bad Idea for Blacks – and Racist Too. FrontPageMagazine. 2001. Web.

Rawick, George P., ed. The American Slave: A Composite Autobiography. 19 vols. Greenwood Publishing Company, 1972.

Rodriguez, Junius P., ed. Encyclopedia of Slave Resistance and Rebellion. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2007.

Van Deburg, William. Slavery and Race in American Popular Culture. Madsion: U of Wisconsin P, 1984.

In the United States, married couples receive many legal benefits that couples who live together but are unmarried do not. More and more, gay couples are insisting that they receive the same legal rights that the traditional, heterosexual married couples receive. Gay rights advocates believe that it is inequitable and biased to refuse to give certain privileges to any couple, gay or not. For example, marriage enables spouses to receive insurance through their partners’ employers. They are also allowed many other rights such as the ability to make decisions for their partner who is being hospitalized and have the right to sue on their behalf and cannot be forced to testify against them in court. Married couples also pay less in taxes and many other social and financial benefits but because gay couples are legally prevented from marrying, they are excluded from receiving the same considerations that married heterosexual couples enjoy. However, fierce public and congressional opposition to gay marriage has built legal barriers which prevent homosexuals from marrying.

Opponents to gay marriage argue that in a traditional relationship, it is the woman that domesticates men. The man trades a promiscuous life for the stability and security of marriage. If both of the partners are men, there is no stabilizing force indicating that both men will continue to be promiscuous. This will lead to the breakdown of the institution of marriage as a whole. Society’s increased acceptance of homosexuality in general has already weakened marriage enough. This line of reasoning has many factual errors. Most obviously, it does not account for lesbian relationships. It seems to imply that they are free of fidelity issues and that there is evidence that traditional relationships suffer from less incidences of cheating spouses than do gay relationships. Taking into consideration that a very large percentage of both genders in a traditional marriage admit to having an affair and half of all marriages end in divorce, this argument has little credibility. Finally, homosexuality, if at all, is at the end of a very long list of factors causing the break-down of marriage. The cultural transformation of the 1960’s and 70’s gave women increased economic and birthing autonomy. This along with liberalized laws allowing quick divorces have been a much larger influence on the traditional view of marriage than has the general acceptance of homosexuality. (Sullivan &Baques, 1999).

While true that the presence of women and the subsequent children act to domesticate lustful males of the species, marriage does as well. Marriage is not simply a contract, it is a social bond cemented by various expectations celebrated with gestures and rituals. Extending this cultural phenomenon to gay couples would strengthen their bond which could only strengthen the traditional union. “When homosexual couples can legally commit to each other for a lifetime, they, too, will be able to say to each other, ‘If you really care about me, as opposed to just wanting to have sex with me, you’ll marry me” (Rauch, 2001). Most probably, the majority of gay men want a committed relationship for much the same reasons straight men do. Without marriage as an option, homosexual couples are subject to less stable relationships which heighten the possibility of promiscuity within the gay community which is what those opposed to the idea claimed to fear in the first place. The concept of gay marriage is repugnant to those in opposition for religious reasons, not for practical or social concerns as has been shown. It would seem the government, therefore, should not be involved in the legislation barring gay marriage. But, of course, the government is intricately involved in the gay marriage debate.

According to a Washington Post/ABC News poll, about 60 percent of Americans oppose gay marriage. However, the same poll found that 53 percent were against a constitutional amendment outlawing the lawful acknowledgment of same-sex unions (“Civil Unions”, 2004). This sentiment has been reflected by some legislators such as those in the State of Connecticut who oppose same-sex marriage but support civil unions. Gay rights activists had heavily lobbied lawmakers in an effort to legalize gay marriage but they compromised on a civil union bill when support for marriage was rejected by most. A Republican governor, M. Jodi Rell, signed the bill last year making Connecticut the second state to offer gays and lesbians civil unions after Vermont. This law provided all the legal privileges of marriage. Other states, such as California, offer various rights under domestic-partnership laws but not full rights. Rell explained that she signed the bill because she was opposed to discrimination in any form. While Connecticut gay rights activist groups applauded state lawmakers, they expressed displeasure that the law fell short of offering a comprehensive equivalent to marriage and that they would persist in their efforts to “work toward the day when there are not two lines at town hall, one for them and one for us” (Simmons, 2005).

In Oregon, voters passed a constitutional amendment that banned gay marriage which reversed more than 3,000 marriage licenses issued to gay and lesbian couples. A subsequent Oregon Supreme Court ruling which upheld the amendment also left open the option of civil unions. The day prior to the ruling, a bipartisan group of state legislators drafted a bill that would allow civil unions, a measure which was backed by Governor Ted Kulongoski. The Governor admitted that the bill “may be a little ahead of its time,” but also believed that the progress of social change would “soon make legal protection for same-sex relationships a reality in Oregon, if not immediately through marriage” (Simmons, 2005). Although many couples who had their marriage annulled by the Supreme Court were disappointed, many were pragmatic about the situation and reluctantly accepted the idea of civil unions believing that, as did those in the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s, ‘separate but equal’ will ultimately be rejected by the majority of the people. Many previously married gay couples admit however that social change doesn’t happen overnight.

Recently, the Senate rejected a Constitutional amendment that specifically banned gay marriage by a 49-48 vote. It was not expected to pass and would have certainly died in the House of Representatives. The vote had nothing to do with amending the Constitution. The proceedings were for purely political purposes. Republican Senator John McCain voted against the amendment, as did other Republicans. They evidently thought that it wasn’t obligatory to pander to their conservative constituents. “Perhaps Sen. McCain could ignite the middle enough to really make a change in 2008. If nothing else, that might get both the Democrats and Republicans off their pandering to the extremes and start paying attention to the majority of us” (Tucker, 2006). Unfavorable polling numbers have Republicans trying to rally their base by showing public support for this emotional issue. This strategy worked for President Bush in the 2004 election and those trying to keep their jobs on the Hill have learned well from him. The Republican tactic was to put gay-marriage bans on the ballot in each state so as to get more conservative voters to the polls. In Ohio, the key state in Bush’s victory, this strategy worked by drawing more voters to the polls even though the ban was entirely unnecessary because gay marriage was already banned by state law. Opponents of gay marriage claim that legalizing it will serve to endorse homosexuality however; it has been proven by studies that the number of gay people will hardly change in either direction simply because of legislation (Tucker, 2006).

In 1997, the General Accounting Office reported that heterosexual married couples enjoyed more than 1000 benefits and protections. These marriage incentives range from survivor benefits through Social Security, the ability to take sick leave from work to care for a sick partner, federal and state tax breaks and veteran and insurance benefits. They also include things like “family discounts, obtaining family insurance through your employer, visiting your spouse in the hospital and making medical decisions if your partner is unable to” (Belge, 2006). Following the enactment of the Defense of Marriage Acts (DOMA), an amendment added to many states’ constitutional definition of marriage, many lawsuits have been filed all over the country against local and state governments whether or not they offer health insurance and other benefits to their employees’ unmarried domestic partners. DOMA prohibits the state governments from providing benefits to a dependent in a relationship that does not comply with the state’s constitutional definition of marriage. Both the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Gay-rights groups disagree with these amendments.

Shortly after Alaska adopted a similar marriage amendment in 1998, the Alaska ACLU took the State to court on behalf of several gay couples who had a partner employed by the state. The suit claimed that the government practiced institutional discrimination by disallowing benefits to employees’ partners because those same benefits were offered to the heterosexual partners of state employees. The ACLU lost in trial court but in 2005, but the state Supreme Court overturned the lower court’s decision. The court ruled that “the benefit system is discriminatory because benefits are extended to employees’ married partners and because same-sex couples are constitutionally barred in the state from marrying” (Gentile, 2006).

Those opposed to gay marriage believe that these relationships do not serve the best interest of the state. Since they cannot bear children that would ultimately add to the tax base of a community there is no incentive for the state to recognize their union and provide them the benefits of marriage, an expensive burden to the state. Advocates of gay marriage have not been able to show what financial benefit their marriage would be to the state. “If sexual love alone becomes the primary purpose of marriage rather than procreation, the restriction of marriage to couples loses its logical basis, leading to marital chaos” (Kolasinksi, 2004). The marriage laws, established by the state, ensure that the couples who do get the benefits of marriage are those who benefit the state by having children.

Those that oppose gay marriage have yet to provide evidence that the children of gay couples whether biological or adopted are harmed by this living arrangement. Some have expressed fears that these children will be more likely to become homosexuals suggesting that it would be appalling if that were the situation (Sullivan &Baques, 1999). In today’s world, the fact is that most children do not live in ‘Leave it to Beaver’ type households with a housewife and a father who works at the office from nine to five. 25 percent of children are born out-of-wedlock to single women who are predominately young and impoverished according to Bureau of Census statistics. Half of all marriages end in divorce and ‘traditional’ married couples with children comprise just 26 percent of U.S. families. “It is unrealistic to pretend that children can only be successfully reared in an idealized concept of family, the product of nostalgia for a time long past” (“Social Norms”, 1999).

Gay couples exhibit similar family and societal values as those of the traditional couple while engaged in the activities of their daily lives. Other than the fact that one couple is of the same sex and the other is not, the neighbors would notice no difference. They cherish and are involved in family life, abide by the law and are committed to making their communities a better place for all to live. The legalization of gay marriage benefits society because the very obligations of a marriage itself discourage promiscuous sex which carries the advantage of decelerating the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the costs associated with the treatment of these diseases. Marriage also encourages a family-type atmosphere in the house, neighborhood and community.

Many believe that being gay is a choice and individuals should choose to be heterosexual for the reasons previously discussed and base their opposition on this assumption. Of course they have no answer when asked when they made their choice of which sex to be attracted to. Very few people make the choice of the gay lifestyle and why would they? Who would choose to be constantly ridiculed and discriminated against? In addition, the conservative, right-wing propaganda proposes that homosexuality only concerns the act of sexual intercourse and believe it to be a perversion. Homosexuality is multi-faceted involving true love and affection, indicating it is not just about sex, much the same as the traditional relationship. It’s past time that being gay means being considered a second-class citizen by society and by the laws of the land. All citizens of the U.S. should expect to be treated with respect and equality. This remains the goal but the fact is, it should already be a reality.

Works Cited

Belge, Kathy. “The Difference Between Marriage and Civil Unions.” About Lesbian Life. (2006). Web.

“Civil Unions for Gays Favored, Polls Show.” MSNBC. (2004). Web.

Gentile, Annie. “Employee Fringe Benefits.” City and County. Vol. 121, I. 5, 2006, p14-16.

Kolasinksi, Adam. “The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage.” The Tech. Vol. 124, N. 5. (2004). Web.

Rauch, Jonathan. “Give Federalism a Chance: The Case for Same-Sex Marraiage.” National Review Online. (2001). Web.

Simmons, Todd. “Civil Compromise.” Advocate Report. I. 939. (2005).

“Social Norms and Judicial Decision-making: Examining the Role of Narratives in Same-Sex Adoption Cases.” Columbia Law Review. Lexis-Nexis. (1999). Web.

Sowell, Thomas. “Notion of Gay Marriage is Product of Sloppy Thinking.” Jewish World Review. (2000). Web.

Sullivan, T. Richard & Baques, Albert. “Familism and the Adoption Option for Gay and Lesbian Parents.” Queer Families, Common Agendas. New York: Haworth Press, pp. 80-82. (1999).

Tucker, Brian. “Constitutional Amendments to Ban Gay Marriage.” Crain’s Cleveland Business. Vol. 27, I. 24. (2006).

Introduction

Child sexual abuse is a treacherous epidemic that eats through the layers of American society. In the United States, the number of children who get abused increases every year. Sexual abuse can have serious negative consequences on children. It can disrupt their mental peace and inflict traumas on their psyche. Children who have become the victims of sexual abuse will have many behavioral disorders, and depression and anxiety will always haunt such children.

There will also entail in a number of adverse changes in their character. Most victims of child abuse become more and more aggressive in their behavior. Anger and hatred will keep such children away from their parents. These children, in the future, can get addicted to alcohol and other drugs. Fear of married life prevents them even from thinking of marriage. Some children, after being subjected to sexual abuse, develop sexual behaviors like homosexuality. Children have affected adversely and sometimes they even commit suicide once they are sexually abused.

Main body

There are various reasons for the increased child sexual abuse in the U S. It is actually a hidden social problem. More and more children are being sexually abused and assaulted every year. There are a number of reasons of varied nature, for the increasing menace of child sexual abuse.

The first and foremost reason for the rampant child sexual abuse is the lack of awareness among children. Children do not know that it is a kind of exploitation. They do not understand that they are being sexually abused. Even if they have some apprehension that they are being sexually abused, they fail to find a remedy.

Those children who are sexually abused do not recognize what it is and usually, they are sexually abused by someone near to them in kin. So they do not get an idea whether it is wrong or not. The perpetrators threaten children to keep it a secret. Children become afraid of losing their parents and, therefore, they never tell it to them because they are silenced with threats that their parents would be killed, etc.

Another factor that adds to the increase in child sexual abuse in the United States is the lack of awareness among parents. Parents, in most cases, are ignorant about such a problem existing in their country. They allow their children to sleep with others, which gives opportunities for them to abuse the children.

Parents of those children who have been abused, usually never reveal it to anyone due to the fear of shame. This is actually a blessing in disguise for the offenders and it encourages them to continue without any interruption. If more and more people come up lodging complaints against such anti-social elements, there will be a sudden decline in the number of such crimes.

If the punishment for those people who abuse children is made more severe there can surely be a change in the attitude of such anti-social elements. Parents are afraid of the possible shame that they have to suffer due to the issue.

They also scold the innocent children and they get offended if they reveal it to their parents. Children are afraid of their parents and they never tell to them. This is actually the problem of lack of communication. Children should always have access to their parents and there should be such a relation between the parents and children that allows them to speak anything openly to them.

Alcoholism and the use of drugs are other factors that increase child sexual abuse in the United States. There are many instances in which a father is under drug or alcohol exploiting a female child. Many people once drunken forget about what they are and in what relation they stand to others. Alcoholism leads people to become insensitive and it creates an extra urge for sexual satisfaction. The use of any other drugs can also lead people to such acts. There are cases that tell about the fall of many good people due to overconsumption of alcohol or drugs.

People are afraid of many sexually transmitted diseases and they are on the lookout for persons without any sexually transmitted diseases. Usually, children would be free from such diseases. So some people in order to have safe sex always go for children who possibly have had no sex in the past. This also contributes to increasing the rate of child sexual abuse.

Research data shows that child sexual abuse is on the increase. “The National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect was released in September 1996, following up on previous studies conducted in 1980 and 1986. The study found that child abuse and neglect were seriously worsening. Between 1986 and 1993 the number of cases doubled, going from 1.4 million to 2.8 million; and the number of cases involving serious injuries nearly quadrupled, rising from 143,000 to almost 570,000.” (Hopper).

The statistics show that the rate of child sexual abuse is alarmingly on the increase. Many children are being sexually abused every day. “In 2005, the most recent year for which the U.S. government has figures, 12.1 of every 1,000 American children, almost 900,000 in all, suffered abuse by adults, with parents of victims accounting for almost 80 percent of the abusers.

Every day, about four children die in the U.S. because of abuse or neglect, most of them babies or toddlers. And those are just the cases authorities know about: for every incidence of child abuse or neglect that gets reported, it’s estimated that two others go unreported.” (Jaffe-Gill, Jaffe, and Segal).

Conclusion

These facts reveal that child sexual abuse in the United States is rising at an alarmingly rapid pace. It is a social problem that exists in the United States and it needs to be dealt with seriously. Each year thousands of children are being abused. It is quite shocking that it has become very common in the United States. Child sexual abuse affects the victim and society adversely. The scar that child sexual abuse leaves on society, as well as the children, is ever-lasting and disturbing.

Work Cited

Hopper, Jim. Child Abuse: Statistics, Research, and Resources. 2007. Web.

Jaffe-Gill, Ellen., Jaffe, Jaelline., and Segal, Jeanne. Under stand, Prevent & Resolve Life’s Challenges: Child Abuse and Neglect: Types, Signs, Symptoms, Caused and Getting Help: Child Abuse Fact. Helpguide. 2008. Web.

Introduction

Marriage is a very powerful bonding not just because it is covered by law, but also because of the very concept or institution it conveys to people (Kotulski, 2). Not just a mere ceremony, marriage is considered a right that all people including homosexuals should be given. Gay marriage is still on a battle for its acceptance in the society, and there are a lot of issues concerning its pros and cons. Its legalization is a problem met by the concerned homosexuals who had long been victims by public scrutiny for their unusual practice of having the same sex as a partner.

Gay marriage is striving to gain a legal right since that would mean not only having the privileges the same as those of a married heterosexual couple, but also to gain respect for their same-sex relationships. Homosexuals also want to communicate the love and commitment that are behind their still unaccepted partnership (Kotulski, 5 and Baird and Rosenbaum, 10).

Main body

The observance of heterosexuality and same-sex relationships is no longer a new issue or an argument so to speak, for it has been practiced for centuries until now. Same-sex relationships started in ancient Greece and Rome, though it was not until 1869 that homosexual relationship was recognized as a term. Same-sex relationship was considered normal in the ancient cultures, where in well-known philosophers in Greece were engaged in such.

Aristotle, Plato, and Socrates had male partners and considered them as their wife. This was not an issue since it was very normal for their culture to have a young man as a lover of an older man. When the young man became an adult, it would be his turn to find his own young man as a partner. In other areas, Rome for example, the Roman emperor himself had a male lover and even married him.

Gay relationships are also common in Native North Americans who practice the lifestyle known as “Berdache”. In this system, males dress like females and date other men. They do not suffer from much scrutiny unlike gays or homosexuals in other places because their outward looks are that of a heterosexual. Homosexual relationships can also be a normal part of the society, as is shown in countries like Canada, Denmark, Netherlands, and Norway where gay marriage is already legal. Many people, specifically the heterosexuals, are still against gay marriage and could possibly be due to the inherent fear of the different changes this legalization could bring about it the society (McKinnon, 1).

Tradition is one common argument against gay marriage. Advocates believe that tradition as a contradictory element is irrelevant. This is simply because if tradition would be used as a defense to oppose change, then a lot of laws would not be implemented. If the United States, for instance, is so strict that it does not allow tradition to be changed, civil rights, high technology, interracial marriages, and even independence would be among those that are still far from its reach. Also, people could possibly be tortured or scrutinized for having their own religious beliefs that are different from that of a majority. A believer of science who would stand up against a traditional belief of the Church can likewise be prosecuted for opposing what is already an established or traditional idea (Baird and Rosenbaum, 11).

Another argument posed by is opposing parties is procreation. However, advocates emphasize that not all traditional heterosexual marriages produce children. The reason might be due to some form of physical disability to procreate of one partner or both. Another is an understanding between the heterosexual couple that they would simply not produce any child because they do not want to or for any other reason. On the other hand, many homosexuals engaged in live-in partnerships raise children.

Gay couples make use of surrogate mothers to perform the task that they can not do. Doing this strategy gives them much more attachment due to the fact that they can be sure that the child that the surrogate mother would bear is their own flesh. Gay couples also resort to adoption. Advocates of gay marriage pose the argument that the society agrees that each and every couple has the right to experience being parents to a child. This right should also be given to gays, especially to those who are already living together and in the course of raising a child.

Since this opportunity of raising children is already being exploited by gay couples, they might as well be allowed to marry each other. The society can be wrong for scrutinizing gay couples who raised a good or even heterosexual child for many years, not wanting them to marry each other under a legal system (Kotulski, 27).

Another controversy against gay marriage comes with biblical opposition. First of all, not all people are Christians and hence, not all carries a Christian belief. Another thing that matters is that religion should not control the government and therefore does not have the right to dictate any decision regarding the legalization or not of gay marriage. It should be remembered that the government operates based on its own system or rules, which are not the same as the standards determined by Christian morality.

This would in turn mean that the government, which is the body in the position to legalize same-sex marriage, should not use these religious standards to determine whether or not it is constitutional or not to implement the legalization and acceptance of gay marriages (ACLU, 1-2, Kotulski, 28-30 and Baird and Roenbaum, 9-10).

Conclusion

The common arguments posed against the legalization of gay marriage are biblical restrictions and moral implications, procreation, and tradition. Opposing parties are still striving to prevent the homosexual from getting what they want. It should be noted that their offensive attacks can be proved to be lacking of a reasonable basis and are also unconstitutional. Everybody must first understand and accept that homosexual couples are normal. Legalization of gay marriage means being unselfish and giving everybody a chance to be happy.

Works Cited

ACLU. “ACLU Answers Gay Marriage: Should Lesbian and Gay Couples be Allowed to Marry?” 2008 .

Baird, Robert M.and Stuart E. Rosenbaum. Same-Sex Marriage: The Moral and Legal Debate. 2007.

Kotulski, Davina. Why You Should Give A Damn About Gay Marriage. 2007.

McKinnon, A, 2007. The Pros and Cons of Gay Marriage. Web.

Having one child is better than two or more

People plan on when to have children and how many to have although, some countries have introduced birth control policies to control their population. For example “in china, the government has introduced a one-child policy that restricts urban couples to having one child” (Matt). In order to maintain sizable families, couples have adopted family planning methods. Family planning refers to a plan to have children, by using birth control techniques. It’s mostly used by a married couple who want to have a limited number of children to bear and to time pregnancy occurrence.

Benefits to the family

Every couple wishes to have families which they can afford to look after socially and financially. Having a family which one can afford to raise is advantageous to the couple and the economy as well. In today’s world, many couples have decided to have one child rather than two for various reasons. Although financial constrain is the primary reasons for having one child, there is also social benefit aspect.

First: “Parents aim at maintaining high living standards, not only for themselves but also for their children” (Masso). If a couple has one child all the resources will be focused upon just one child. With resources being focused on one child, it is easy to support the social life of that child hence the worry of the child of feeling lonely and socially segregated is taken care of. Housing one kid is easier than two because you will only need at least a three-bedroomed house: no need to buy an extra flat for your child. Clothing for the kid will not be much problem because you will need few clothes. Food for one kid is not difficult to buy as compared to feeding more than one child. For example, currently, the prices of basic foodstuffs have sty rocked hence people with more than one child are heavily feeling the pinch. The child is given the quality and enough food, hence protected from malnutrition. Parents find it easier to buy a car for one child than when they are two or more.

Second: All parents wish to give their children a better education. Some are willing to take their children to private schools, better colleges, buy them the best and recent textbooks, and even provide home tuitions for certain subjects. It will be easier for couples with one child to provide such education to their child than those who have two or more. This is so because the cost of taking one child to private schools or college is lower than taking two or more. The cost of higher education is so high and getting more than two children through university education is a mountain to climb. With one child, the burden of educating him or her is low and hence your child will get the best available education because he or she will no need to compete for school fees with any other child.

Third: Having one child gives the couple enough time to spend with their child as the child develops and learns. Taking more time to be with their child creates special closeness (it’s hard for people with two children to be close to each one). “A mother will not divide oneself between two young babies who require her attention” (Masso). It’s easier to carry one child as you visit your neighbors, friends, and going out grocery shopping. Such attention by the couple to their child makes a great difference as compared to a family with more than one child.

In the first years of life, a child requires much attention from his or her parents and therefore a child born alone in a family gets all the benefits of individual attention. Because one child receives such individual attention throughout his or her young life, he or she is in better position to succeed in adult life. “Only child reduces any conflicts among children as they compete for attention and love from their parents because she or he is the only around who requires attention from his or her parents” (David et al). In case the parents die there is no problem of sharing inheritance fortune because only the child inherits. Court battles in solving the problem of sharing inheritance will not arise with one child.

Fourth: In case one of the parents is away, on job duty, or abroad for business, the parent left behind will not find it difficult to raise one child alone. Again the cost of raising one child by single a mother is not big as when she was rising two or more. In case the two parents separate (divorces), the parent who is left with the responsibility of raising the child will not find it hard.

Fifth: With one child to take care of, parents are a better place to enjoy their life to the fullest as well as maintaining their relationship intact. “An additional child to the family brings problems to the family” (Weston, 40). There is no point in the life of one child mother when she will be faced with the problem of dealing with a toddler at the same time having another child in her belly. Raising a toddler is a tedious job but, once he or she starts walking and talking it becomes fun knowing that you will never have another child. Multiple children constrain family travels particularly when they are young. Carrying more than two children while on a picnic is quite a difficulty since you spend much of your time looking after them instead of enjoying your travel.

With one child the problems of the sleepless night are reduced because you can keep that child near you. There is no quarrel in the house as children fight one another since it’s the only child. Actually having more than one child might weaken a couples’ relationship because you find a situation whereby, the mother loves one child more than the other which is quite dangerous for the family’s union. Such a scenario creates tension within the family and might weaken the family bonding resulting in divorce.

Sixth: There more children you have the more maternity leaves you to get from work. Having one child will just guarantee a short time maternity leave hence reduce the chances of interrupting mothers’ career path. “After a short period maternity leave, the mother can resume her job without necessary updating her skills” (David et al). As result mothers have more time to pursue their careers, increasing their financial earnings. Having more than one child interrupts with mother’s career as she seeks more maternity leaves to give birth.

Seven: A one-child family can access better health services for the mother and also there is the reduction in mortality rates. “The risks associated with pregnancies are reduced because mothers only become pregnant once and for all” (Backett and Alexander 34). The risk of mothers dying when giving birth is avoided in the future. Mothers of only one child tends to have better health and live longer than mothers of more than one child because only child mother does not waste a lot of energy and blood while giving birth. The cost of accessing health services is minimal in a family of one child. Parents can buy health insurance and also access the best hospitals in the country: even the family may hire a family doctor. There is no worry of having more than one child being sick and also the chances of spread of communicable diseases are minimal. Only child family is batter placed to give their child the necessary care to protect him or her from disease-causing bacteria and virus. They are to afford the best anti-bacteria soaps and disinfectants for the family use.

Eight: Savings rate in a family having one child are high because they spend less, that is, there is more money in the bank. The cost of raising one child isn’t huge as if one was raising two or more. Parents employ few resources in terms of money and time on their child hence more money to invest. Only child businesses can own businesses such as grocery shops or invest in securities. Because parents will not depend on their children when they grow older, there is the possibility of saving for the future. Also, they will be enough money in the account to cater for the child in his adult life. The child will never have to strain if even he or she does not secure a better job.

Benefits of having one child for a country

One child policy has impact on the population of a country. It checks the growth of the population to a point that does not strain the economy of the country. If all families in a country with a high population growth rate were organized under one-child policy, then the fertility rate will fall to a point suitable for the economy. At appoint in time we will have two children instead of three if the birth rate was not controlled. For example, “the policy of one child in china has reduced the population by more than 400 million people since it was introduced in the 1970s” (Therese). If the population growth rate of a country is checked through one-child policy then, it would be easier to implement economic growth policies. A large population with few resources constrains the capacity of the country to increase its gross domestic product. Thus reduced population reduces problems associated with overpopulation such as epidemics, growth of slums, overstretching social services (health, education), and strain on the environment. “With a low population, demand for natural resources is checked as well unemployment rates caused by surplus labor” (Don and Bryant).

Only child families constitute to a less population in an area hence there are no competitions for social services. With one child helps the government by cutting, the cost of providing social services and infrastructure: the government will construct few schools, hospitals, and social amenities. No competition in public hospitals because parents can afford private hospitals, the population in public schools is reduced to a sustainable level. The cost of putting and maintaining infrastructure such as roads and railways by the government is checked because few people are using them.

Environment: There are environmental benefits brought about by choosing to have one child. Only child means small population hence reduced competition for natural resources. “High population resulting from large families is said to be causes of much pollution to the environment” (Don and Bryant). Vast lands covered with forest are destroyed to pave way for settlement and agriculture especially in rural areas. As the result, water catchments are destroyed causing rivers to dry up leading to water shortages. Incidents of poverty, growth of slums in urban centers are associated with large families hence having only child families checks this problem.

The current world food crisis and the high inflation rate is caused by the fast-growing world population. The problem is expected to worsen in the future if the population growth rates of countries particularly developing nations are not checked. Thus, in my opinion, the population growth rate problem will only be checked only and only if we develop one-child family culture across nations.

Works cited

1. Backett K C, and Alexander H, Talking to young children about health: methods and findings, Health Education Journal, 50, (1991): 34-37.
2. David M, Edwards R, Hughes M, Ribbens J, Mothers and Education: Inside Out? Exploring Family-Education Policy and Experience. London: Macmillan, 1993.
3. Don Hinrichsen and Bryant Robey. 2000, Population and the Environment: The Global Challenge.
4. Masso, P Whitfield, A child to call my own: a study of adopted women and their experience of motherhood. The Benevolent Society, 2003.
5. Matt Rosenberg, 2008. China’s One Child Policy: One Child Policy in China Designed to Limit Population Growth. Web.
6. Therese Hesketh, Li Lu, and Zhu Wei Xing. 2005. The Effect of China’s One-Child Family Policy after 25 Years.
7. Weston, R Kilmartin, Children? No children? Effects of changing personal relationships on decisions about having children. Family Matters no.57 2000: 14-19.

Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest may arise when the primary interest is influence by the secondary interest that can have an adverse influence on one’s professional judgment and objectives. A potential conflict of interest can occur in this topic because of my work in the field of engineering that can provide benefit to the sports industry and attain a financial incentive through this contribution. As an engineer, I acknowledge and disclose this conflict of interest willingly in order to remain as objective as possible in current analysis.

Introduction

The ultimate goal of sportsmanship is not simply winning but rather pursuing victory with honor through giving one’s best effort. In the sports industry, ethics require such important aspects as fairness, respect, integrity, and responsibility. As the industry evolves, new technologies and equipment get introduced and thus influence the way in which certain games are being played. This means that the tools that are being introduced should be developed in a manner that would enhance the activities of individuals who participate in sports. Because innovation and new technologies facilitate the changes in different sports, it is recommended to analyze the concepts that can influence their application ins ports engineering.

As with any other product, the introduction of engineering solutions in the sports industry is expected to be sound both in terms of ethics and technologies. According to the study conducted by Dyer, the lack of attention to interventions related to “ethical issues associated with the use of sports equipment and technologies can contribute to the absence of consensus” in the general public (1). Therefore, the current analysis aims to describe how innovatively engineered technologies and equipment can be used ethically in sports, causing no harm to athletes. Because there is a large number of available techniques and tools, there are serious risks of injuries and harm, as well as the creation of settings in which some athletes have the advantage over others in terms of performance.

The ethical dilemma linked the use of equipment and technologies in sports refers to the need to ensure the greater performance of athletes without facilitating inequality or causing physical harm. Furthermore, as found by James, despite the fact that effective sports engineering enhances the performance of athletes, makes sports safer, more enjoyable, and more accessible, significant concerns are raised regarding the passiveness of athletes and the fairness of competitions (3406). During the extensive discussion associated with the integration of technologies and equipment into sports, issues raised were found to be highly similar to those connected with the techniques of human enhancement, such as chemical and biological ‘doping’ (James 3406). This represents the significant ground for consideration because sports engineering is substantially different from prohibited technologies of enhancement, with new advancements being banned only in instances when they facilitate unfairness by giving some individuals an advantage over others.

It is important to note that the ethics of using equipment and technologies in sports is a matter of public opinion. This makes the issue at hand even more challenging because the general opinion is rather fickle and can change rapidly as a response to external events. Therefore, the open dialog should be included in the ethical considerations of integrating technologies into sports activity since their engagement would encourage an all-encompassing look on the topic. Specific arguments made against the use of sports engineering include the violation of the spirit of sports, unfairness due to enhanced capabilities, deskilling, and the influence of money. Arguments in support of integrating new technologies and equipment into sports include the enabling of progress and avoidance of stagnation, banning performance advantage, as well as the look into the future of sports development. Therefore, the ethics of sports engineering present multiple challenges in research due to varying perspectives on the subject as well as different ways of solving the problem

Analysis

In the current study, the fairness and effectiveness of integrating equipment and technologies into sports were aligned with seven crucial concepts pertaining to ethics. These concepts include professional identity, virtue ethics, responsibility, organizational culture, trustworthiness, risk, and life cycle analysis. All of these concepts are necessary to discuss in the project because they would have a direct influence on how technologies are integrated into the sports industry. Through exploring each concept one-by-one, it is possible to reveal important information on how engineers can benefit the sports industry without having an adverse influence on fairness.

Professional Identity

Professional identity is a concept that comprises of a set of specific motivations, attitudes, values, and experiences associated with a certain professional sphere (Slay and Smith 86). Professional identity influences the ethical aspect of any work, including engineering, because it enables individuals to understand the meanings and values that they hold when doing their job, what that work means for them, as well as who they are within the profession. These identities are based on the idea of belonging to a group of individuals working in the same field and the specific roles that people pursue in their work. As mentioned by Slay and Smith, people categorize themselves into groups by deriving their own identity from a particular group and forming boundaries (87). The alignment of professionals with specific characters promotes higher self-esteem in practice as well as more significant commitment. Therefore, professional identity is essential for the discussion of sports engineering ethics because the practitioners in the field are expected to share the same values.

Professional identity is the concept that applies to the current exploration of sports engineering ethics because it would allow the researcher to understand the objectives that sports engineers pursue. When professionals work on advanced technologies to be integrated into sports, they use their identity in order to abandon traditional values and focus on their duty and integrity, thus narrowing the sphere of responsibility to the process of developing technologies and tools to enhance sports activities. Moreover, professional identity ensures that sports engineers have an interest in what they do and can be active participants in the process of enhancing the industry and its capabilities (Tsakissiris 5). Thus, those sports engineers who understand their professional identity are more likely to benefit their profession and develop practical solutions.

Virtue Ethics

The concept of virtue ethics is applied to the current context as it refers to the right action that a virtuous person would do in the same or similar circumstances. Virtue ethics is person-based and looks at the moral character of persons carrying out specific activities associated with the profession, rather than general ethical rules and duties that have their particular consequences. The concept deals with not only the rightness and wrongness of individual actions and provides guidance as to the type of characteristics and behaviors that a virtuous person will seek to reach. The theory is essential to apply to the topic at hand because of the need to understand the influence of character on professional action. Thus, in order for the actions of sports engineers to be virtuous, the professionals are expected to be good people overall and work toward the improvement of their expertise.

The principle of virtue is important to apply to the current discussion because it teaches professionals to carry out specific actions virtuously in certain situations. A person who acts virtuously is someone who possesses and lives the virtues, which are moral characteristics that are necessary to ensure that people act in the interests of others and not only themselves. The aspect of rational thought is applicable to the considerations of virtue ethics because it encourages individuals to think about their roles in the profession, their goals, and the ways of reaching those goals. Virtues are multi-dimensional and range from justice to self-care; however, all of them are necessary to improve the overall practice and avoid actions that would be harmful to others.

Responsibility

Responsibility plays an immense role in the present discussion of ethics in sports engineering. In the given context, responsibility is imperative to consider because it enables the exploration of not only sports engineers’ good judgment but also such problems as inappropriate action and negligence. Sports engineering applies the concept of responsibility in the sense of performing activities that are associated with the roles of professionals working in the sphere. More specifically, responsibility is associated with multiple aspects of engineers; function and includes both outcomes and processes. A responsible professional is the one who understands the predetermined set of obligations for one’s job and meets the set expectations when accomplishing it.

Ethical responsibility associated with sports engineering is the operation of the business through improving and maintaining the bottom line while setting high standards for making positive contributions. Those engineers who understand the challenge of developing solutions enhancing the sports industry are expected to address the issues that arise along the way and can motivate themselves to be effective in doing their work. The responsibilities of sports engineers are vast and can change from one task to another. However, being dedicated to one’s profession is the main responsibility that should be enforced in the practice of sports engineers.

Organizational Culture

The concept of organizational culture is relevant to the current analysis because it implies the consideration of behaviors that employees are expected to show in their professional life. Organizational culture usually dictates the way in which employees act and engage in the organization, share the values of a company, set personal goals, and understand how they fit within an organization, as well as the way in which they engage with other individuals. Applying the concept of culture within organizations is important because it will shed light on a variety of procedures and aspects of work required to facilitate ethical choices and foster effective communication between employees.

When sports engineers work in organizational environments that do not consider the needs of their employees, the likelihood of ineffective performance as well as unethical actions on their part increases. Because of this, it is essential to ensure that when sports engineers work on technologies and tools, their environment benefits performance and effectiveness. To facilitate the integration of advanced tools into the sports industry ethically, organizations providing such services should be in tune with the needs of their workers and ensure that they have the resources that would facilitate their effective performance. When everyone knows what is expected from them, uncertainty and ambiguity are eliminated, thus contributing to the ethical integration of technologies.

Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness is important to discuss in the context of the present research. In an ideal world, engineers are expected to have the ability to be effective problem-solvers and have no influence on ethics. Professional work and the decisions that engineers make require a high degree of expertise that is usually not found in the general public. This means that individuals who work in the sphere of sports engineering should have sufficient background to understand both the objectives of their work and the possible limitations brought by public opinion. For this reason, trustworthiness becomes an essential aspect of relationships between the public and professionals. The assessment of engineers’ trustworthiness is based on such factors as the perceptions of their purpose as well as motivation to work on a specific field. Therefore, the motivation of professionals to work in a particular sphere should be seen as making improvements both for particular clients and the public in general.

Research on sports engineering has shown that the opposition toward the integration of technologies and equipment into games is associated with decreasing fairness. As mentioned by James, “even the most biased of fans still want a fair competition” (3407). When sports engineers develop technologies that limit the fairness of competition, their contribution is not considered trustworthy. Most people would agree that fair competition is the one in which the best athlete is seen to win, which represents one of the most common grievances associated with the role of technologies in sports. The issue of money also comes into play when it comes to trustworthiness. The relationship between the use of new equipment and its suitability in sports encourages the discussion on whether the ones who can afford to use technologies are more likely to win (James 3407). Therefore, trustworthiness is an essential aspect of sports engineering because its absence can enable bias and unfair advantage of some athletes over others.

Risk

Because the international market for innovative sports equipment is vast, competent engineers should work on developing tools that are safe for use. The equipment should prevent injury and enable the performance of athletes without causing any disruption (McIntosh 194). Therefore, the concept of risk should be explored in the current study because of the need to identify the potential limitations of using sports equipment, their economic implications, bodily trauma and injury, as well as mortality. The improper design and functionality of technologies could potentially have negative consequences for individuals engaging in sports. According to McIntosh, elements associated with the discussion of risks in sports engineering include the methods of risk management to set objectives, injury mechanisms, the range of standard and abnormal sports loads, efficacy and effectiveness of present and past equipment, as well as user expectations (McIntosh 193). The safety of using sports equipment is essential in the discussion of ethics because of the need for not only preventing the severity of the injury but also eliminating the occurrence of injuries completely.

Sports engineers are expected to work beyond the development of new solutions but also improving the existing equipment, as mentioned by McIntosh (193). For example, such simple tools as helmets or footwear can benefit from additional engineering solutions. Using stronger materials as well as considering the biomechanics of protective equipment can represent a valuable contribution of sports engineers whose ethical responsibility is to avoid the occurrence of injuries among athletes.

Life-Cycle Analysis

The final concept to consider is life-cycle analysis (LCA) as a sustainably-focused engineering methodology that considers a set of decisions within the product life cycle. This aspect is important to the discussion of ethics because it ensures that engineering procedures do not have an adverse influence on the environment. Sports engineers should consider the sustainability of their work when developing new equipment and tools. Life-cycle Engineering (LCE) is expected to use a cycle pattern of production, which starts with the raw material extraction and ends with it through disposal recycling. Therefore, every stage of the cycle, including transportation, utilization reuse, recycling, material sourcing, and manufacturing production, is completed in such a way that it would benefit the environment and facilitate the engineering efficiency and its contribution to sports.

Conclusion

The exploration of sports engineering ethics has shown to be associated with a broad range of issues. When developing solutions to enhance the performance of athletes, engineers should consider the public opinion regarding the ethics of using enhancing technologies. Some see such technologies as offering unfair advantages to individuals participating in sports. Therefore, sports engineers are responsible for developing solutions that will improve performance without increasing bias in the competition, and the exploration of ethics concepts has allowed looking at the multi-dimensional nature of the topic.

The analysis of seven concepts that include professional identity, virtue ethics, responsibility, organizational culture, trustworthiness, risk, and life cycle analysis allowed to look at the most concerning areas associated with the ethics of sports engineering. All of the concepts that were analyzed lead to the conclusion that engineers should consider two key issues: safety and fairness. When working on their equipment to be used in sports, engineers are expected to work on solutions that would not be harmful to athletes or the overall environment. Here, the concepts of risk and life-cycle analysis come into play. While the former is associated with the creation of safe tools, the latter is concerned with the production that does not have an adverse effect on the environment.

Fairness is reached when sports equipment does not offer an advantage to some athletes and puts others at a disadvantage. Trustworthiness, professional identity, responsibility, virtue ethics, and organizational culture are concepts that are integrated into the expectation of fairness. Sports engineers should show their trustworthiness by benefitting the athletes as well as being responsible for their developments. To facilitate both fairness and trustworthiness, organizational cultures play essential roles because they promote the improvement of environments to benefit the performance of engineers. Overall, the subject of ethics in sports engineering requires further exploration in the research literature. While the analysis drew from several studies in the field, there is a significant gap in research in terms of reaching a high degree of ethics within the industry.

Works Cited

Dyer, Bryce. “The controversy of Sports Technology: A Systematic Review.” SpringerPlus, vol. 4, 2015, pp. 524-525.

James, David. “The Ethics of Using Engineering to Enhance Athletic Performance.” Procedia Engineering, vol. 2, 2010, pp. 3405-3410.

McIntosh, Andrew. “Biomechanical Considerations in the Design of Equipment to Prevent Sports Injury. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part P: Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology, vol. 226, no. 3-4, 2012, pp. 193-199.

Slay, Holly, and Delmonize Smith. “Professional Identity Construction: Using Narrative to Understand the Negotiation of Professional and Stigmatized Cultural Identities.” Human Relations, vol. 64, no. 1, 2011, pp. 85-107.

Tsakissiris, Jane. “The Role of Professional Identity & Self-Interest in Career Choices in the Emerging ICT Workforce.” Queensland University of Technology. 2015, Web.

Introduction

A child is any human being below the age of eighteen and should be treated as a person not as a sub person. Children’s rights are the rights of children as human rights but they give special attention to the needs, care and protection of the children. Children need to be given their rights as children to do anything that help them develop physically, mentally, and socially. Under the United Nations convention of children’s rights, children rights also include care and nurturing.(Cornell University)

Children’s rights interpretation can be defined in different scopes depending on the social political, cultural and economic perspectives.

Comprehensive children’s rights should include three considerations;

• Provision: Children do not have the energy or resources to provide for themselves and therefore it is the responsibility of their caretakers, that is, parents, guardians, and social workers to provide them with basic needs as well as schooling.
• Protection: Children should be protected from abuse by their care takers since they know little about their rights and they cannot be able to make decisions on their own hence it is important for them to be given protection from abuse of any form regardless of their cultural, social, political and economic background.
• Participation: children’s rights should take into account the rights to participate in the community welfare, listening to their opinion and involve them in decision making of their own needs and rights. Children should be allowed to choose on what they want but not for them to be dictated on what they want.

The convention of children’s rights is affected by various factors that make the rights of children not to be met though they are universal under the human rights and children’s rights of the UN convention. These factors are:

Environmental and Social Factors

The environment can make the rights of children to differ from one place to the other; it is hard to satisfy the children’s rights. In countries of industrial development, the environments are polluted and have influenced the health of infants thus hindering their development. In the USSR for example, the process of industrialization has resulted to uncontrolled pollution that have adversely affected the health of children.

These affects the characteristics of children which differ significantly from other children according to a research conducted by Professor Martin McKee of European public health carried out in Moscow.

The social cultural factors of a community can also determine the rights of the children. In the African traditional setup for example, girls were not supposed to be educated and were taken as assets and thus their rights are not respected. The gender discrimination of children in a society determines the rights of a child.

Economic Background

The social economic status of a family might not allow the parents or the guardians to fully adhere to the children’s rights because some rights such as the right of provision require resources that may not be available to all. These factors therefore affect the provision of children’s basic needs since they are beyond their parents will. (Ammerman, 1990) Parent factors are also prominent in child abuse and in poor families where children are more prone to abuse than in well off families. These are basically determined by the parents. (Judith, 1998)

Political Environment

The political structures of a state also have a greater influence on the child’s rights. The poor political systems that influence the economic power of the citizens drastically affect the provision of children’s rights. This affects the health care for children, education, food and provision of good housing for children. The states are also responsible for the enacting laws that protect children’s rights. They are also responsible for ensuring that the rights are protected.

In war torn countries children’s rights are often abused with girls being raped, children suffer malnutrition, and are denied the right to education for example, in Sudan, Iraq, Somali and Sierra Leon during the period of wars. In Bangladesh, the law prohibits child labor but amazingly 21% of children work in the labor force. Physical abuse is also very high and children exploitation is on the increase despite being contrary to the laws. This is simply because the government does not emphasize on the protection of their rights. (Alhadi, 2000)

References

Ammerman, T. (1990). Families and Relationships, (London: John Wiley).

David, A. (2004). Children’s Rights and childhood, (New York: Routledge).

Haldi, A. (2000). Research and Evaluation Division, BRAC Center, (Bangladesh: Mohakhali, Dhaka).

John, T. (2006). Children’s Rights: Policy and Practice, (London: Haworth Press).

Judith, T. (1998). Interpreting Pre- Quaternary Climate from Geologic Records, (Columbia: Columbia University Press).

Kate, D. (1993). Children’s Rights: A Book of Nursery Logic, (Boston: Houghton).

Marie, P. (1999). Sparing the Rod: School Discipline and Children’s Rights, (New York: Trentham Books).

Paul, L. (2001). Towards Liberation of the Child, (New York: Elek).