The article was a very interesting read in that this was clearly something that was written over 100 to 200 years ago. The article talks about the high birth rate in British Isles and the authors proposed solution. The article stated that most mothers of this time were filthy beggars who were basically homeless. To make matters worse, this mothers generally had multiple kids, who would become mirror images of their mothers except the children would generally turn into theives or common criminals. The authors solution was to offer the kids jobs that would give them some money but also keep them out of trouble.
I thought the article was very interresting. The language was unexpected and tended to make the reading that much more difficult. As for the article itself, I believe it could be considered a flawed arguement. One reason is becuase of the time it was written. 100-200 years ago takes away the relevancy. Another reason is because puttting children to work at a young age is dangerous and potentially harmful to a child. However, the time period was different and standards of these kinds didn't exist. I would say that this article would be good for the past time frame, not the present...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes, you could definitely tell this was a developing story about how far we have come with births of children. This article strictly argued two ideas, abortion or no abortion. One would argue abortion is good because it prevents a un-born baby from being born which is obviously in the mothers favor. This also works if the women has been raped. However, there are many circumstances in which I think abortion is just wrong. Under no circumstances do I think abortion can be used as birth control because it does not show any discipline. I'm not sure if I agree with mothers in Britain were generally poor and could not afford children. I think it was a different time era and was easier to live back then. Her children could support her by working in the farm or getting another job.
ReplyDelete