Analysis of the Childs Legal Branding at Birth - Assignment Example

Analysis of the Child’s Legal Branding at Birth The argument appeared at one of the articles on New York Times, dated October 20, 2014 by Darren Rosenblum, entitled, “For Starters, ‘Unsex’ the Birth Certificate”. Rosenblum is a visiting professor at Washington College of Law, American University. The article appears at the opinion section, and it talks about the legal concern that may be associated with the child’s legal branding at birth. The author argues that there is a need to ‘unsex’ the child in the birth certificate, and later alter or conform it to the infants’ genitals, for there are some cases by which psychological issues, physical abnormalities, genital and chromosomal factors may play significant concerns on the actual sex of the child, especially at birth. Thus, he finds a loophole in the prevailing sex binary after giving birth to a child then the issuance of birth certificate or what he considers the legal branding of a child at birth, for it might probably ignore what contemporary science actually knows about sex. The main point of Rosenblum is that sex identification may serve some legitimate interests, as far as he believes that masculinity and femininity are specific to an individual. The conformity to either of these roles, according to the author cannot necessarily be determined by placing the child’s sex at birth in the birth certificate, but rather a form of violation of the child’s right in the future may be incurred, especially in the case of the children with no pronounced genitals at birth. Later, they will just be subjected to surgical operations in order to ensure conformity to the written sex identity on the birth certificate. In other words, Rosenblum is suggesting that at birth, children should all be identified as humans, which should be legally written on the birth certificate. As they grow into adults, the law or the state should give them freedom to choose their own notions about who they are, which primarily include their preference for what sex they are comfortable that they would want to be identified with. This basically is the summary of author’s important main points in the argument, but the rest of the discussion in the work at hand covers the analysis on how Rosenblum makes his argument and whether he is successful. The elements of the discussion include the following: logos, ethos, and pathos. Logos Rosenblum clearly uses reasoning associated with scientific and legal matters prior to establishing his main arguments. This is his way of offering evidences and reasons to his target audience. One scientific point goes this way as simply observed in one of his arguments, “Likewise, contemporary psychology tells us that both masculinity and femininity are specific to each of us” (Rosenblum). The author uses this point in order to debunk the idea of placing a yardstick that will measure the conformity of an individual to the set roles associated with “maleness” and “femaleness” that is primarily established during the legal branding with the birth certificate. On the other hand, in the case associated with arguments pertaining to legal issues, the author explicitly cites this, “Over 30 years ago, the Supreme Court said, in a decision called Mississippi University for women v. Hogan, that the law should be devoid of ‘fixed notions concerning the roles and abilities of males and females’” (Rosenblum). The argument with these remarkable evidence and reasoning seems to make sense. In fact, in one of the comments linked to the said article, a concerned citizens points out, “Unsexing the birth certificate is one of many ways our society can begin the task of getting new parents to think more deeply about their views on gender and how they limit their child, whose sexuality they cannot possibly foresee upon birth, from the instant that infant draws its first breath. We do our children a great disservice in boxing them into normed gender behaviours before they, themselves, even know who they are. Laws that have corrected wrongs have transformed age-old beliefs. Such a change would be transformative” (Rosenblum). The statement simply adheres to the scientific and legal evidence or proof that the author explicates in the argument. At least, the author has convinced a reader on the possibility of looking at the issue based on his point of view. Perhaps, the success of this can be attributed to his ability to cite both the areas of scientific and legal proofs in his argument. Ethos Establishing credibility and building authority in a written argument is something that can be linked to the voice of the author. It is a good point to ponder on how Rosenblum establishes credibility and builds authority, or whether he is successful in doing so. One thing for sure why he succeeds is because of the following points. First, it is due to his straightforward point, which means he associates everything based on what every human being can relate with the experience that he is about to reveal in his entire argument. For example, from the introductory part alone, he tries to put it this way, “The moment when a new baby officially becomes a legal person from the state’s view is the filling of a birth certificate. The information on the certificate – the child’s name, parents and sex – stays with a person for life” (Rosenblum). This is a very simple yet striking introduction, because it seeks to connect the audience to the reality or the status quo. This alone creates a fundamental thought that the author has something important to say, or worth of someone’s time to read his point of view on the issue. He then supplemented this by adhering to the authority of science. In his argument, Rosenblum seems to have depicted a very important idea about what contemporary science knows that could be linked to his perspective. For instance, the author remarks, “Choosing a sex using traditional choices sends a child’s life down one or the other path: make or female. But this sex binary ignores everything contemporary science knows about sex, namely that many factors of sex difference – chromosomal, genital and hormonal – make sex a far richer set of possibilities than just male or female” (Rosenblum). This statement is so strong, and there is no hint of sarcasm in it, but rather a strong point of view that is making sense. For this reason, Rosenblum has already established both his credibility and authority right from the beginning of his argument. Pathos Rosenblum tries to use a story as his example. For instance it is primarily depicted in this line, “For example, most would consider me a man, but on my child’s birth certificate, my name appears to “mother” because the state had to put one of her two male parents on that line” (Rosenblum). There is therefore a sense of the authors being descriptive about the treatment of his images. This could not necessarily evoke emotion, but it establishes the basic foundation of forming the entire picture or image of the argument. This means that the moment the author concludes the argument, the impact is more than emotional at some point, but logically speaking, Rosenblum has already established a strong feeling from one’s point of view to fight for his entire argument. That is how effective Rosenblum’s argument especially when he concludes this, “We might then allow our children to be full humans from birth, so they can grow into adults free to develop their own notions about who they are” (Rosenblum). This statement is not just emotionally appealing, but witty. In conclusion, considering the points from logos down to pathos, the entire argument of Rosenblum about the suggestion to “unsex” a child at birth in the birth certificate is appealing and effective at some point, because it allows someone to ponder on the deeper part of the entire issue. Work Cited Rosenblum, Darren. For Starters, ‘Unsex’ the Birth Certificate. 20 Oct. 2014. Web. 21 Oct. 2014. . Read More