In his article, Hugh Lafollette argues that the state should possess the right to license all parents through an established licensing system aimed to protect the wellbeing of children. Lafollette provides a valid inference and his premises for a licensing programme are as follows: P1. All harmful activities are regulated by the state in order to protect innocent people P2. Parenting can potentially be harmful, seen with the neglect and abuse of some children C. Therefore, parenting should be subject to regulation by the state in order to prevent the harm of children (innocent individuals within society) Lafollette builds on the intuition that the state has the right to protect individuals within society which he highlights, is sometimes achieved through prescribing licenses to people who exhibit a certain level of competence and thus granted the freedom to carry out particular activities which are potentially harmful. With this logic, it seems plausible to regulate parenting, an activity which leads to “more than half a million …show more content…
Lafollette recognises that we ought to be cautious of government interference, however claims that many rights such as freedom of speech and religion are already regulated by the state to prevent such violations of those rights which lead to atrocities such as slander and human sacrifice. He further assures that the level of encroachment would be similar to that of our current adoption system, a system “far more vigorous” than Lafollette`s proposal. He further undermines this view by noting that parenting carries the risk of harm to innocent individuals thus shouldn’t be an unconditional right, rather one where subjects must demonstrate the ability to earn its right, acting in accordance with the rules the licensing programme