Follette's Arguments Against Licensing Parents

Section 2 – Problems with LaFollette’s Argument

Although LaFollette responds to many objections in his argument, his rationale for licensing is still flawed. As he explains, our objection that “since people have a right to have children, any attempt to license parents would be unjust” (LaFollette) is dismissible because our right is given under the circumstance that we are capable of raising them. While I agree with LaFollette that we need minimum competency to raise children, his argument is established from invalidly comparing parenting and adopting. Adopting is distinctive from parenting. By adopting children, we are claiming ownership over them, so necessary steps are crucial to ensure adoptive parents are able to raise children without

Firstly, parental licensing invades our right to reproduce. We have control over what we do to our bodies, so if we want to reproduce, we can do so without government intervention. Some may argue that our rights are not absolute rights, so our right to have children is no exception. Consider our right to freedom of speech. Although we are free to speak our mind, we are restricted from hate speech and slander. The same goes for our right of life. We are equal in that we all have the right to live, but killing someone as self defense is admissible. Even so, our right to have children is inherently different from our right to free speech and right to life because procreation is our biological right. As I mentioned earlier, we are using our own body to do what we want. To say the least, we do not need licenses to engage in sex, so it makes no sense to require one for

He promotes parental licensing on the basis that it prevents children from abuse, but I have shown that his argument is unconvincing. There is no reliable way to test prospective parents as parenting is subjective. In addition, I have pointed out more fallacies in his argument to show how his licensing scheme lacks substantial meaning since he establishes his argument by making faulty comparisons between driving, adoption, and parenting. I have also provided that parental licensing is immoral because it invades our right to have children, our right to privacy, and our children’s rights. Finally, I addressed possible objections such as how we do not have absolute rights and parental ownership over children to show how parental licensing is immoral regardless. Parental licensing may seem plausible but when we take a deeper look at it, licensing is obviously impractical and