Critique of Vita Wallaces Give Children the Vote - Essay Example

Critique of Vita Wallaces "Give Children the Vote" Children’s rights have raised a hot debate among policy makers, practitioners, activists, and scholars. With the numerous human rights children require, particular attention has been directed to the matter. As an activist for children rights, Vita Wallace wrote her article, “Give Children the vote” to present her view on the protection and care that should be accorded to children. Though many believe that children should be denied some rights, to Wallace, the perception is different. Assertively, every individual, irrespective of age is subject to human rights. However, these rights, if not controlled especially to those less than 18 years would eventually be misunderstood turning to be a liability to the society. In her essay, Wallace believes that children under the age of 18 years have the right to vote (Eschholz et. al. 315). To her, the account of age should not be a stumbling block. In her article, she presents her views on the significance of educating children and giving every child the right to vote. Wallace says that in passing the law against child labor and provision for compulsory schooling, the involved, which she refers to as well-meaning people aimed at protecting every child from any form of exploitation. She believes that the decision about schooling I personal. According to her, no punishment should be given in case children choose not to attend school. Rather, she asserts that at whatever age suitable for children to vote, the right should be given. She says, “What I suggest is that children be allowed to grow into their own right to vote at whatever rate suits them individually” (315). The word individually helps eliminate the aspect of generalization. According to her, age limit would hinder capable children from voting. It is from this assertion that Wallace believes that children should have the right to vote. The common believe that if given the chance to vote children will vote in favor of their parents, in effect giving more votes to the parents should, according to Wallace, not be the case (316). Although many of the readers of this article consider Wallace argument thoughtful, I disagree with her point of view. In the entire essay, she presents her opinion. However, the major claim of this assertion could appear as fact or a judgment (Cooper 5). This shows how he overlooks the Toulmin’s theory of argument (Cooper 3). As an activist, she uses an interesting approach, which convinces many readers. Despite her powerful approach, I consider her unsuccessful. Her major claim, giving children the vote, is an aspect cringed about by many children. However, her presentation is form of defense for herself and other kinds. From her view, she was discriminated since she was home schooled, a fact that brings her ideas that children should not be force to attend school, neither should they be punished for choosing not to. In her article she says, “Learning about discriminatory laws preventing high school dropouts from getting their driver’s licenses… (316)” this shows how she how she discusses “Discriminatory laws”. This statement leads to a minor claim when she says, “Punished for exercising one of the few legal decisions they now have (316)”. This is a claim for own defense. Further, it convinces the reader to belief that there is unjust treatment to young dropouts. The fact that she overlooks the personal responsibility involved in dropping out of school and the individual’s self-worth make the claim weak. She successfully uses warrant to convince readers as defined by Cooper (4). Though her emotional pleas are worth listening to, minimal facts in her case and lack of evidence make her argument unpersuasive. Further still, her writing is jumpy and the thoughts are scattered hence the entire case is hard to believe. For instance, the statistics she provides for eligible adult voters is the only strongest evidence she can rely on. From her statistics out of the adults eligible to vote, only 36-40% vote (317). The fact that she believes 25% of the entire population her children below 18 years contributes to her statement, “Although elected representatives are responsible for all of us, they are responsible to only a few of us (317)”. This data is not comprehensive enough to support the claim as recommended in Toulmin’s theory of argument (Cooper 6). Further still, despite the efficiency evident in this claim, it loses weight when she finally calls voters and politicians “selfish”. This is evident use of fallacy, which is a statement grounded on weak logic and misguided belief. The word “selfish” is an Ad Hominem argument, which means that it attacks a person directly instead of attacking the issue in question. In Wallace’s essay, many of the claims are minor and secondary statements that support the major claim. In conclusion, Wallace essay has several minor claims many of which are lost due to poor organization. Despite her use of universal values that sway the reader, her argument failed. As evidence in this essay, many of arguments were not supported by credible evidence. Many claims are argued from a personal experience, but not real facts. In essence, if Wallace supported her argument and focused on real evidence rather than personal experience and opinions, the essay would have possibly been successful. Work Cited Cooper Alisa. (Sep 14, 2008). The Toulmin Model of Argument. Web. 10 March 2012. Eschholz, Paul, Rosa Alfred and Clark Virginia. Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers. Bedford Books, Boston and New York, 2007. 315-318. Print. Read More