Research Paper Stuff

Thesis: The views regarding whether or not early preemies should be given medical treatment drastically differ between doctors and parents.  

Doctors' feelings regarding the topic:

• NICU Procedure -- 
• I plan to further my research on this part of my paper and possibly incorporate facts regarding my niece's experience in the NICU.
• Expense -- 
• Carson, Erin. “Complications of Preemies.” ehow.com. eHow Health, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2011. ---> U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimated cost to save preemies: 26.2 billion in 2005 
• Evans, Julie. “Should Very Premature Babies Be Left To Die?” thestir.cafemom.com. The Stir, 10 March 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2011.  ---> Quote by Dr. Daphne Austin – “Very premature babies—those born before 24 weeks—are too expensive to save.  Keeping them alive is prolonging their agony.  The money used to treat them could be better spent treating things like cancers.  Doctors are doing more harm than good by resuscitation 23-weekers.” (This would be a great quote to use in my paper because it supports doctors' overall views regarding the topic of saving very early preemies.)
• Developmental Problems --
•  Carson, Erin. “Complications of Preemies.” ehow.com. eHow Health, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2011. ---> Those who survive - more apt to develop "serious lifelong disabilities" cerebral palsy, learning difficulties, behavioral disorders, breathing and respiratory problems, feeding problems, vision/hearing loss. (I plan to continue more detailed research on a couple of specific disabilities/disorders)
• Evans, Julie. “Should Very Premature Babies Be Left To Die?” thestir.cafemom.com. The Stir, 10 March 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2011. ---> Quote According to an article in the Daily Mail, “of the babies born before 24 weeks gestation, only 9 percent ever leave the hospital.  The rest die.  Of those who survive, only 1 in 100 escapes without a disability like blindness or cerebral palsy.” (I believe this quote will be put to great use in my paper because it touches on the reality of how many surviving preemies face lifelong serious disabilities and disorders that not only have a major impact on their lives, but also on the lives of their parents.)

Parents' feelings regarding the topic:

• Want to do whatever they can to save their child no matter the circumstances.
• Don't want to live their lives questioning whether or not their child could have been saved.
• If so, they would never find the answer because they wouldn't be given the chance to have their baby saved.  (These are all points I plan to make in my paper.  I am sure there are many valid supports within my sources; therefore, I am going to begin digging much deeper to find quotes etc.)
• Argument that each case is different --
• Peveteaux, April. “Saving a 21-Week-Old Preemie May Not Be Great News.” thestir.cafemom.com. The Stir, 30 May 2011. Web. 11 Oct. 2011. ---> There are exceptions: miracle babies.  Why should a specific line be drawn when each case is different and has different circumstances.  Example of miracle baby: Germany – miracle baby born at 21 weeks 1 pound… baby Frieda (twin brother died)  survived, doctors gave good prognosis (babies so early usually only have 3% of surviving without “neurodevelopmental impairments”)

    (This seems like a great supports for my paper.  It proves why many parents believe no specific line should be drawn when determining how early babies must be to receive medical care.  This example is proof of a miracle baby!)

  
  *** I plan to further research on my topic.  As of now I have 7 sources; therefore, I need at least three more.  There are definitely more points and quotes I plan to find within the sources I already have and within new ones I find.  (But I believe this blog is a great start to my electronic notes!) 
  

Thesis Statement - Research Paper

The views regarding whether or not early preemies should be given medical treatment drastically differs between parents and doctors.

Effects of Prematurity

Carson, Erin. “Complications of Preemies.” ehow.com. eHow Health, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2011.

http://www.ehow.com/about_5436602_complications-preemies.html

Erin Carson addresses the many complications that can occur after a premature baby is born.  She touches on both short and long term disabilities that may be encountered, and she also offers some shocking results regarding preemies.  Carson directs her article toward parents-to-be and parents of babies born premature.  Her intent is to inform them about the many complications that must be dealt with when parenting these little miracles (immediately after birth and throughout the child's lifetime).  She also offers several tips that could potentially prevent premature birth.  In regards to complications, preemies tend to experience many.  Some of their organs may be underdeveloped, leading to breathing and digestive problems.  Preemies may also have skin discoloration, eye disorders, infection vulnerability, and more.  A number of infants born premature face long term complications or disabilities as well, some of which include the following: cerebral palsy, learning difficulties, behavioral disorders, breathing problems, and vision or hearing loss.  Many believe that only the earliest born preemies are capable of obtaining these problems, but this assumption has been proven wrong.  According to March of Dimes, late preterm babies actually have a greater chance of having developmental difficulties and learning disabilities during their school years.  In order to lower the chances of having a premature baby, one must take caution by scheduling regular check-ups and maintaining a healthy living style during pregnancy.  Doctors should also never schedule a C-section before a woman’s due date.  Carson’s article was not bias one bit!  It was based solely on facts and offered some very useful information.  I am looking forward to putting this newly learned material towards my research paper!

A Grieving Mother’s Story

Cohen, Tamara. “They left my baby to die in my arms: This mother thought her son had a fighting chance when he was born at 22 weeks…but the hospital staff refused to help him.” dailymail.co.uk. Mail Online, 20 April 2011. Web. 7 Nov. 2011.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1366801/Premature-baby-dies-mothers-arms-hospital-staff-refused-help-him.html

Tamara Cohen addresses the sad story of a preemie that was not even given the chance to survive.  She touches on how the lives of baby Tom’s parents have been affected ever since doctors refused to save him.  Cohen directs her article toward parents of preemies who are struggling to cope with the loss of their child.  Her intent is to educate them about how NICU doctors in some hospitals are refusing to give medical care to preemies born earlier than 24 weeks. Tracy Godwin is the mother of premature baby, Tom.  He was born at only 22 weeks and survived for 46 minutes.  The true question though, is could he have been saved?  No one will ever know.  Doctors refused to give him medical care because it was against their “policy” to save a preemie born so early.  Baby Tom’s parents will forever wonder if their son could have been saved if born at a different hospital.  This article strictly includes facts and refrains from being bias.  It simply tells the story of a grieving mother who experienced a nightmare after her premature son was born.  Although I will most likely be able to put some of Cohen’s article towards my paper, the information I use will not be of great detail.  The article failed to mention why the hospital had such a policy.  It also didn’t include the views of doctors in regards to the situation; therefore, I will continue to research the opposing side of my topic. 

NICU Doctors: A True Disappointment

Strom, Ron. “Parents Fight Hospital Over Care Of Preemie.” wnd.com. World Net Daily, 28 June 2002. Web. 26 Oct. 2011.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=14394

Strom addresses a shocking story about the conflict between doctors and the parents of a preemie born more than three months early.  After doctors suggested ending its life support, the parents instantly fought back in an attempt to have their baby saved.  Doctors gradually became angrier as the parents continued to oppose further recommendations regarding the matter.  As a result, an ugly battle began between the two parties.  Strom directs his article towards parents of premature babies.  His intent is to warn them about potential obstacles, or in other words, heartless doctors that they may encounter during their baby’s journey in the NICU.  Parents of baby William received very little respect from doctors at Memorial Hospital in Colorado Springs after he had been born.  To argue their point, doctors gave William an EEG test in order to measure his brain activity.  They told his parents that he had only a small amount of activity in his brain.  Later, William’s parents found out that EEG tests are not very reliable when given to preemies.  Before being transferred to a hospital in Texas, their baby was given another test.  Unlike the first, it showed certain brain activity.  Soon after transferring hospitals, it became evident to William’s parents that they were not going to be treated any better by doctors in Texas.  Doctors there too argued that the preemie should not be given any more medical care.  Thankfully, they did not get their way.  Within his time spent at Methodist Hospital in San Antonio, Texas, William’s parents endured nonstop hatred from the doctors.  In that course of time, many issues were disagreed upon.  Shockingly, doctors became so upset that they told lies and threatened to contact Child Protective Services.  Attorneys even became involved.  Eventually the issues were settled and baby William was finally able to be taken home after spending the first four months of his life in the NICU.  Strom’s article is somewhat biased.  It focuses strictly on the opinions of parents and the negative aspects of doctors in the NICU.  Although this is the case, doctors included in this article failed to give a logical reasoning behind their opinions; therefore, why shouldn’t readers side with the parents?  Strom’s article explained the story of baby William and his parents in a great amount of detail.  In my opinion, it was saddening.  Parents of preemies go through so much as it is.  They definitely do not need the added stress of having to deal with hurtful, lying doctors.  A number of people may not be exactly interested in this topic, which is completely understandable seeing that many are not personally connected to it.  If someone is looking for something random and shocking to read though, I would highly recommend this article!  In my opinion, the situation is extremely upsetting, and the article itself is overwhelming at times!  

NICU Medical Care: Parents Must Make Decisions

Davies, Deborah. “Ethics in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.” preemie-l.org. Preemie-L, 1999. Web. 17 Oct. 2011.

http://www.preemie-l.org/ethicsdd.html

Davies’s article expresses her opinion in regards to how parents should determine whether or not their premature baby receives medical care after being born.  She addresses the issue that all cases are very different and unique in their own way; therefore, it would be absurd to draw a specific line to determine which babies are saved and which are not (depending on exactly how many weeks premature they are born).  Davies directs her article specifically towards parents of preemies, but also to doctors and nurses within the NICU.  Her intent is to express why parents, not neonatal doctors, should be the ones to determine whether medical care is given in an attempt to save the baby.  She goes into great detail in order to make her valid point clear to readers.  As mentioned before, no two preemie stories are identical.  While there are some extremely strong preemies that have a lot of potential, there are others that have very slim chances of survival. In many of these situations, it is obvious to both doctors and parents what decision must be made.  Although this may sometimes be the case, Davies mentions how there are a number of different situations.  She states, “But there is a gray area, where the best option isn’t clear, and these difficult decisions require thoughtful, heartfelt judgments by the parents.”  After all, why should complete strangers be left to make such a serious, life or death decision?  Although Davies article is very informative, she remains very biased.  In other words, she only gives strong reasoning for the opinion she supports, which was that ultimately, parents should have the final decision regarding whether or not their preemie receives medical care after being born.  Although she remains very one sided, Davies offers a great amount of reliable information seeing that she has a Ph.D.  She had an extremely focused article, though, and organized her thoughts in a very useful manner.  Overall, I found this article very informative.  I have the exact same opinion as Davies and enjoyed listening to her thoughts regarding the topic.  This has definitely been my favorite preemie article so far, and I intend to put this knowledge towards my research paper!  I’m sure this article would be of some interest to parents or family members of preemies who also have the same views.  It was great!

Resuscitating Early Preemies: No or Go?

“Do Not Resuscitate Very Early Preemies, Says UK Report.” bioedge.org. Bio Edge, 21 Nov. 2006. Web. 11 Oct. 2011.

http://www.bioedge.org/index.php/bioethics/bioethics_article/do_not_resuscitate_very_early_preemies_says_uk_report

This Bio Edge article addresses the debatable issue of whether or not preemies born very early should be saved.  It gives examples of the extremely opposing views that doctors and parents have.  The article also includes reliable examples of the challenges that families may face during and after the fight to save their preemie.  The information is directed towards doctors, nurses, parents of preemies, and other family members.  Its intent is to inform people that each situation is different.  In other words, a preemie born relatively early may have a harder time fighting for its life than one born even earlier.  Many doctors believe giving care to babies born earlier than 22 weeks in unnecessary.  Others believe that an attempt should be made to save babies born between 24 and 25 weeks if their parents so wish.  Why were the circumstances different for Charlotte Wyatt, who was born at 26 weeks?  Doctors refused to make an attempt to save her because they believed she had no chance.  In the end, she survived but faced many disabilities.  The real question is, if doctors would have given her medical care to help fight for her life, would she have survived as a perfectly healthy little girl?  Maybe she would have, but the question will always remain.  Unfortunately, Charlotte’s handicaps put a lot of stress on her parents, who later split up because of it.  Such handicaps that preemies may face have a large impact on families.  On the other hand, the debatable issue still remains.  How early should a premature baby be before no medical care is offered in an attempt to save it?  Should a specific line be drawn at all, or should it be up to someone?  Is it fair to families if doctors decided whether or not a preemie is saved, or should it be the parents’ choice?  Bio Edge’s article brings about many unanswered questions open for discussion.  It not only touches on the views of parents but also those of doctors, council members, and medical associations; therefore, the article does not lean towards one particular side.  Overall, this article included a large range of information, along with real life examples.  These items led to a very valid point – “every case is individual and every case should be judged on its own merits.”  Although this article was full of opinions, I felt like it jumped back and forth quite a bit.  As I do more research, I plan to continue reading unbiased articles, but may also try to read some very strong biased ones.  In doing so, I feel I could find much more information and opinions from several sides of the argument.  Again, this topic probably won’t interest those my age, but seeing that I have a niece who was born premature, it catches my interest!     

21 Weeks: Too Premature To Save?

Peveteaux, April. “Saving a 21-Week-Old Preemie May Not Be Great News.” thestir.cafemom.com. The Stir, 30 May 2011. Web. 11 Oct. 2011.

http://thestir.cafemom.com/baby/121007/saving_a_21weekold_preemie_may

In this heartwarming, yet concerning article, April Peveteaux addresses the issue of whether or not saving a 21 week old preemie is a good idea.  She touches on the miracle story of one baby girl, but expresses the opinions of many regarding the issue. Her intent is to inform and educate parents, doctors, and others concerned about the possibilities preemies may face if born at an extremely early date.  Frieda, who was just one pound when being born at 21 weeks, is a perfectly good example of a worthwhile fight to save a preemie.  As of now, this strong little girl is thriving and absent of any lifetime disabilities that most babies would face if born so early.  The truth though, is that only about 3% of babies born this early are lucky enough to encounter a life with no physical or mental impairments.  The debatable issue of whether or not so much money should go towards saving these babies is ongoing.  Parents and doctors seem to have very opposing opinions regarding the issue.  Peveteaux refrains from being bias in her article.  She mentions why many mothers would argue the fact that an attempt should be made to save their baby, no matter its prematurity.  While doing so, Peveteaux also explains the concerns doctors and nurses have in regards to the amount of money and time spent to try and save these preemies.  Overall, this was a very brief, yet informative article.  It remained very balanced and offered views from both sides.  Although many of my classmates may not find interest in this topic since it greatly affects parents and doctors, I do plan to further my research.  In doing so, I will find detailed views from both sides of the issue, explaining why certain people think the way they do.  

Reflection of Six Topics

Overall, I enjoyed reading the six articles I chose to post about.  Each were very different from one another, but several of them related in some way.  The six topics I blogged about are the following: Teen Curfew, Preemies Worth Saving, Idolizing of Celebrities, Cruelty of Zoos, Reality TV Shows, and the Effect of Social Networking on Kids.  My favorite by far was "Preemies Worth Saving?"  I enjoyed putting my prior knowledge of this topic towards my first paper, the individual source essay.  Because my niece (Adelynn) was born premature, I have very strong opinions regarding whether or not doctors should be able to choose if preemies have the chance of being saved or not.  Since I enjoyed writing that paper as much as I did, I would like to continue putting what I know towards a future assignment, such as our research paper.  As for my argumentative essay, I have thought a lot about which of my six topics would be best to argue about.  Teen curfew and the effect of social networking on kids are both directed towards children, teens, and their parents; therefore, I don't feel the two topics are suitable for me.  I found a lot of interest in the idolizing of celebrities and the realness of reality TV shows, but in my opinion, both would be somewhat hard to argue about seeing that I agree with both sides of each in some way.  I have came to the conclusion that I will use the topic "Are Zoos Cruel?" for my argumentative essay.  I believe I will be able to research enough information regarding the views of both sides.  I then plan to choose a reasonable solution to accommodate for everyone, including zoo animals.  I am looking forward to finding more sources in regards to this topic.  After I complete my argumentative essay, I will then begin researching the debate regarding premature babies.

The Effect of Social Networking on Kids

“Social networking’s good and bad impacts on kids.” physorg.com. Physorg, 7 August 2011.

Web. 25 Sept. 2011.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-08-social-networking-good-bad-impacts.html

PHYSORG’s article addresses the issue of whether social networking has a good or bad impact on kids.  It includes both positive and negative effects and explains the importance of communication between children and their parents.  This article is directed mainly towards parents of children who are involved in social networking.  Its intent is to inform parents about how their kids’ lives may be affected due to interacting on social networking sites.  The article also tries to persuade parents to have a trust filled relationship with their children and to communicate with them more often.  PHYSORG touches on how social networking can affect children in a negative way.  It includes how this action may lead to social behavioral problems, health issues, and learning complications.  While social networking can be harmful to children and teens, it may also be beneficial.  The article states how those who are involved with social networking can display more empathy to others, learn how to interact with people behind the safety of a number of screens, and absorb new tools for teaching in a fascinating way.  Although this article remained unbiased, it failed to explain why and how social networking has the positive and negative effects it does on children and teens.  Overall, this article was “okay”.  It offered both good and bad qualities of social networking and was very to the point, but didn’t go into much detail.  I wouldn’t choose to further research this topic because I feel it is directed more towards parents.  Even though teens my age probably have opinions regarding the effects of social networking, I don’t believe many of my classmates would find enjoyment in this article either; maybe when we all get a bit older and have kids of our own.

Reality TV Shows: Real or Fake?

Ventre, Michael. “Just How Real Are Reality TV Shows?” today.msnbc.msn.com. Today, 14

            April 2009. Web. 25 Sept. 2011.

                      

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30092600/ns/today-entertainment/t/just-how-real-are-reality-tv-shows/

Michael Ventre addresses the topic of whether reality TV shows are actually real or not.  He explains how producers may be a large part in what is being done and said on the show.  Ventre includes the words “rigged”, “manipulated”, and “scripted” in his article, all of which he believes can be used to explain reality shows.  He directs his thoughts towards viewers of these shows, especially those who believe they are entirely “real”.  His intent is to inform people of what they are actually watching.  He hopes viewers will consider the fact that many of their favorite reality shows may be scripted.  Being a producer himself, J. Rupert Thompson stated, “Certainly, reality TV is a very manipulated format where the basis of it is that real people are put into unreal situations to create a story.”  He later voiced, “I think the educated viewer knows what reality TV is and what it has become.”  Many believe that in certain reality shows, such as Dancing with the Stars and The Bachelor, specific decisions are made by the producers themselves in hopes of keeping viewers entertained and waiting in anticipation for the following week’s episode.  Although Ventre’s article focuses mainly on how reality TV shows are not completely real, he does include comments from others regarding the fact that specific shows must include some reality.  Lynette Rice stated a fact in regards to the hit reality show Dancing with the Stars.   “…there aren’t producers out there manipulating Steve-O’s legs while he’s fox-trotting.  He’s doing it all himself”, she said. Overall Ventre’s article was very interesting.  He included many views from others, such as producers, and remained very focused as well.  While he mainly supported the idea that reality TV shows are manipulated and not entirely real, he did manage to include how parts of them are.  I feel that this is a good topic for me to further do research on.  I believe that many reality TV shows, such as Jersey Shore, are extremely unrealistic.  Although I do enjoy tuning in to several reality shows, I believe that MTV especially stretches the word “reality”.  Reality TV has become extremely popular.  Many teens enjoy a good drama filled show; therefore, many of my classmates may also find interest in this topic. 

Are Zoos Cruel?

“Animal Rights Uncompromised: Zoos.” peta.org. Peta, n.d. Web. 19 Sept. 2011.

http://www.peta.org/about/why-peta/zoos.aspx

PETA’s very opinionated article addresses the issue of zoos and animal rights.  The organization makes it clear that animals that are put in the presence of a zoo have a limited ability to behave naturally as they would in the wild.  This restriction strips animals of their rights and has a number of negative effects on them.  PETA directs their thoughts towards those who work at zoos and wildlife parks, along with the people who visit them.  Their intent is to persuade people to make changes in regards to the treating of wild animals.  It was said that although many believe zoos help to protect endangered species, this is untrue.  Most zoos prefer to include popular animals in order to attract customers; therefore, these animals tend not to be endangered. PETA states, “Warehousing animals for life is not the way to save them from extinction.  Their salvation lies in protecting habitats, not in creating prisons.”  The article also included information regarding the effect that “zoo life” has on animals released into the wild.  They tend to be unable to defend for themselves because they adapt to life in the zoo.  Overall, PETA supported their opinion by giving strong examples regarding the effect that zoo life has on wild animals.  While doing so, they left out all opposing views and focused strictly on their own beliefs.  Seeing that they are the “PETA” organization, it is easy to understand why they lean one way so strongly.  Although I recognize why this group thinks the way they do, I as a child always enjoyed zoos; therefore, believe they have both good and bad qualities.  This topic would be difficult for me to further research and use for an argumentative paper because I agree with both sides in some way.  It may be easier for several of my other classmates to use if they feel strongly about one of the two sides.

Idolizing Celebrities

Miller, Alison. “Idolizing Celebrities Negatively Affects Teenagers’ Self-images.” gather.com. Gather, 20 Oct. 2008. Web. 19 Sept. 2011.

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474977483509

Alison Miller addresses the issue of young children and teens idolizing celebrities.  She touches on the fact that this has been occurring since the beginning of time.  Young children, once reaching a certain age, begin to follow their favorite celebs.  The problem with this is that many of the idolized celebrities display negative behavior that has an effect on the behavior of their young fans.  Miller directs her article towards the entire human race but specifically parents of teens and teens themselves.  Her intent is to explain how important it is for young children and teens to look up to and idolize people who display positive behavior and actions.  Miller focuses on the variety of problems that a number of celebrities become familiar with throughout their lifetime, from alcohol and drug addiction to eating disorders.  As children begin to follow stars at a young age, they strive to become more and more like them as the years progress.  Although Miller supports her opinion by giving examples of how celebrities negatively affect teenage behavior, the opposing side’s views are absent.  Overall, this article is interesting but remains very “one sided”.  It gives valid examples of celebrities’ faults but fails to provide some of their positive traits.  Although I do agree with Miller’s general opinion, I believe not all celebrities have those negative characteristics.  Some truly can be good role models and promote good decisions in life.  I may not have a so-called “celebrity idol” but this topic did interest me.  I feel that with more research including the opinions of an opposing side, this topic would be a possibility for me to argue about.  I’m sure several of my classmates would also find interest in this topic seeing that a majority of us are up to date with the newest and most popular celebs.

Preemies Worth Saving?

Evans, Julie. “Should Very Premature Babies Be Left To Die?” thestir.cafemom.com. The Stir, 10 March 2011. Web. 10 Sept. 2011.

http://thestir.cafemom.com/baby/117363/should_very_premature_babies_be

Julie Evans, mother of a preemie born at only 27 weeks, addresses the argument of whether extremely premature babies should be saved or not.  After summing up the miracle story of her baby boy, she explains the reoccurring opinion amongst doctors regarding the subject.  Many are coming to believe that the act of attempting to save preemies that are born earlier than 24 weeks should stop.  In her blog, Evans touches on the reasoning behind the doctors’ opinions along with her personal view.  Her intent is for readers to give the issue a second thought, one much deeper than their initial.  She directs this topic toward those of adulthood, those who have had children, or those who can truly understand its importance.  Within her blog, Evans explained the strong opinion of Dr. Daphne Austin, who believed that saving those born earlier than 24 weeks is much too costly.  It was mentioned that the money put towards those attempts could be used for something more achievable within medical means.  A majority of babies born that early do not survive; regardless of the constant medical care and attention they are given.  Those that do tend to face lifetime disabilities that they and their families have to deal with.  When the issue was brought to Evan’s attention she had several thoughts.  Being the mother of a preemie she would not have asked for anything less than to have her little boy saved.  Even after she had experienced the situation herself seven years ago, she still wondered if a line should be drawn somewhere by doctors.  The question she faced and continues to face is whether or not that line should be those born at less than 24 weeks.  Overall, Evans blog consisted of interesting information regarding the saving of premature babies.  Although she is a mother of one herself, she refrained from being bias and instead further examined the thoughts of medical caretakers.  I feel that this topic is definitely a good option for me, seeing that my niece was born at only 28 weeks and was only two pounds.  We spent two months visiting her in the NICU and I was able to experience the struggle she went through and the extreme care she was given.  I have some strong opinions regarding this topic and would enjoy furthering my research.  On the other hand, I do not think my classmates would find much interest in this topic.  It would be difficult to understand everything premature babies go through in regards to medical care without actually witnessing it.

Teen Curfew

Morron, Jennifer. “Teen Curfew?” gothamgazette.com. Gotham Gazette, March 2006. Web. 10 Sept. 2011.

http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/children/20060310/2/1783


Young writer and freshman in college Jennifer Morron addresses the topic of a teen curfew in New York City.  While many believe that keeping children under the age of 18 off the streets would prevent criminal behavior and violence, others believe it should be up to the parents of teens to set such curfews.  Morron directs her article not only to teens and their parental figures but also to the entire population of New York City.  Occurring violence has an effect on everyone who lives in the surrounding area, not just those who are directly involved.  Morron states that having a set curfew of midnight in New York City would be beneficial because teens would not have the opportunity to become involved in troublesome activities.  She gives examples of how criminal acts of violence by and against juveniles have decreased in the cities of San Diego, California and Dallas, Texas after a specific curfew had been set for those under the age of 18.  While most young adults and teenagers would argue that a set curfew is unnecessary and a violation of their rights, Morron mentions how she has always respected her early curfew set by her mother.  She isn't bias towards not having a set curfew like most her age would be.  Although she gives her opinion and leans towards having a citywide set curfew for teens, she provides thoughts and reasoning from the opposing side as well.  One example is the question of whether or not having a set curfew in New York City would give the government too much power.  Should it really be their choice?  Overall this article includes a very good argumentative subject.   Although it offers thoughts of those who support a set curfew for teens, it also incorporates the opposing side’s views.  I believe this article would be a good topic for not only me but also for many of my classmates.  Most of us are at the age where we want to gain more independence from our parents.  We want to go where we want, stay out with our friends, and arrive back at home as we please.  I am sure that I, along with others, would have some strong thoughts regarding this topic.