595 Words Specific Question: "Laws holding parents responsible for their children's crimes would not result in serious injustice." Purpose: To persuade parents to be more cognizant of their impact on their children's lives.Audience: My parents, my class, potential lawmakers, and myself.Central Idea: A child receives its his moral values through his its parents and if these values are wrong, should we not hold the parents responsible in a crime, include the parents in a crime, just as we hold them civilly responsible.Thesis: If parent is the one person responsible for the child's values that he it bases decisions on, then the parent should be responsible for any act a child does, criminal ...view middle of the document...
The influence of a parent in the shaping and developing of a child's moral sense, their ability to tell right from wrong, is undeniable. This phrase "who but a parent is an adult" is awkward - rephrase. The rest of the sentence is good. Who but a parent is an adult who is supposedly totally committed to the upbringing of a child, and has the emotional bond to reinforce any influence, good or bad, on the child? Without this influence, the child, much like a puppy left untrained, will turn wild and uncontrollable. However, this influence is not required; unfortunately only financial damages to repay for deeds done by a child are required today.It is wrong for a parent to leave a child without moral sense and not be accountable. I think a parent, who is legally responsible for the child until his (their) eighteenth birthday, must instill a value system so the child they may grow properly and function normally in an adult society. When an adult grows up without this value system, where are the people who (that) have failed in their duty? The parents, those who raised the child through his (it's) formative years, they are the ones who should be responsible for their children's actions just as much as their child...
