Aff
In the words of John Stuart Mill a 19th century philosopher and political economist,” Whatever crushes individuality is despotism, by whatever name it may be called and whether it professes to be enforcing the will of God or the injunctions of men.
In defense of the rights of an individual and in opposition to succumbing to despotism. I hereby affirm the resolution: adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical choices.
Seeing that this is debate of morals based on the usage of ought in the resolution my value is Justice and my value criterion is individuality. before I begin I would like to outline a few terms:
I define Justice as the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
I define individualism according to the …show more content…
To turn a person loose to an unrestrained liberty, before he has reason to guide him, is not allowing him the privilege of his nature to be free"
In accordance with the philosophy of John Locke and in protection of the health of children I negate the resolution: Adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical decisions.
the usage of ought in the resolution implies a debate of ethics thus my value for this debate is Justice
My VC is minimizing suffering-namely the prevention of the loss of life, bodily harm or psychological trauma.
I define Justice as the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
As a brief on time road map I will first elucidate the differences between child cognitive decision making and that of an adult. I will then go on explain that allowing children to make medical choices without the input of their legal guardians is partial and therefore in violation of justice. I will then finish by showing how if this resolution were to be affirmed the justice to which all humans are entitled according to the charter of the U.N and the U.S constitution would be violated
C#1 Adults are more capable of making logical impartial medical decisions than …show more content…
For example if an adolescent chooses to undergo a procedure which affects their genetic material such as chemotherapy, their offsprings may have to deal with the consequences.
According to the World Health Organization: “What happens during the early years of life affects adolescents’ health and development, and health and development during adolescence in turn affect health during the adult years and, ultimately, the health and development of the next generation.” This means that allowing adolescents to freely undergo dangerous medical procedures will affect a whole range of other things, including the next generation. Not only are adolescents causing themselves suffering, they are also bringing suffering upon generations to come.
C#3 The Justice and physically well being of children is infringed by allowing them to make medical decision without the input of their
In the words of John Stuart Mill a 19th century philosopher and political economist,” Whatever crushes individuality is despotism, by whatever name it may be called and whether it professes to be enforcing the will of God or the injunctions of men.
In defense of the rights of an individual and in opposition to succumbing to despotism. I hereby affirm the resolution: adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical choices.
Seeing that this is debate of morals based on the usage of ought in the resolution my value is Justice and my value criterion is individuality. before I begin I would like to outline a few terms:
I define Justice as the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
I define individualism according to the …show more content…
To turn a person loose to an unrestrained liberty, before he has reason to guide him, is not allowing him the privilege of his nature to be free"
In accordance with the philosophy of John Locke and in protection of the health of children I negate the resolution: Adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical decisions.
the usage of ought in the resolution implies a debate of ethics thus my value for this debate is Justice
My VC is minimizing suffering-namely the prevention of the loss of life, bodily harm or psychological trauma.
I define Justice as the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
As a brief on time road map I will first elucidate the differences between child cognitive decision making and that of an adult. I will then go on explain that allowing children to make medical choices without the input of their legal guardians is partial and therefore in violation of justice. I will then finish by showing how if this resolution were to be affirmed the justice to which all humans are entitled according to the charter of the U.N and the U.S constitution would be violated
C#1 Adults are more capable of making logical impartial medical decisions than …show more content…
For example if an adolescent chooses to undergo a procedure which affects their genetic material such as chemotherapy, their offsprings may have to deal with the consequences.
According to the World Health Organization: “What happens during the early years of life affects adolescents’ health and development, and health and development during adolescence in turn affect health during the adult years and, ultimately, the health and development of the next generation.” This means that allowing adolescents to freely undergo dangerous medical procedures will affect a whole range of other things, including the next generation. Not only are adolescents causing themselves suffering, they are also bringing suffering upon generations to come.
C#3 The Justice and physically well being of children is infringed by allowing them to make medical decision without the input of their