Neglecting a child or showing no interest in their well-being can have its consequences as parents of Bobbijean, Stephanie and Rodney learned. Stephanie and Rodney both failed to complete court recommendations and their obligation as parents to care for their own children. Instead of being concerned about the welfare of the children, they endangered them. Both parents failed to care for their children. As a result, their children were taken away and put into foster care. After a few court hearings, Judge Marilyn L. O’Connor ruled that Stephanie and Rodney cannot conceive another child until they are able to care for their own children and when their children are no longer cared for at the expense of the public. Judge O’ Connor’s ruling is acceptable because Stephanie and Rodney need to become responsible enough to care for their children instead of having others do it for them. In this essay, I am going to provide an opposition argument to explain why the ruling is incorrect.
People might disagree with Judge O’Connor’s ruling in many ways. The judge’s decision violated Stephanie and Rodney’s constitutional …show more content…
The right to privacy is also a guaranteed right, even though it is not directly stated in the constitution. In order for the judge to invade the couple’s privacy, she must interfere in their private affairs. The decision of conceiving another child or not is for the couple to decide, not for the judge to order. However, the judge is not allowing the couple to decide on their own. Since the judge is not allowing the couple to decide whether or not they want to expand their family by having more children, she is interfering with their choices. The judge is not leaving the choice to conceive another child to the couple. Judge O’Connor did interfere in the couple’s private affairs by not giving them a choice; therefore, the judge is violating the couple’s right to