COM 2204: Write a Refutation for Debate

FIRST, READ THE POLICY ARGUMENT CAREFULLY. From the very beginning you should have a sense of what is convincing and what is not quite persuasive. Begin distinguishing between strong and weak points of your opponent. As we said in class (a month ago or so), you should focus on the most questionable and vulnerable points. For example, is the policy addressing the real causes of the problem? Or, is the policy effective in eliminating (or reducing) the problem?

Please use LABELS for each part of your refutation. HOWEVER, you don't have to spend equal time for each point. If you believe that your opponent is correct on some points, you can acknowledge it. For example, you can make a point that, say, the problem presented by your opponent is indeed serious. You may add that you are not entirely convinced by your opponent's evidence (say why), but you won't question the problem. And then, you can spend more time/space on other points.

Please remember that even if you agree with your opponent, you can still show that she or he did not prove the case. It is a bit like in some criminal trials. We all know that the defendant is guilty but the prosecutor's case lacks evidence to prove it.

Use citations internally and on the reference page. Like you would do in an essay. This means that when you write a claim that you think needs support, you cite the source right there, like here (Martinez 2017). And then you write a full citation on the reference page, for example: Martinez, M. (2017). How to write citations. Cambridge University Press, London 2017. You can use any reference system you wish but be consistent. If you use APA, use APA for all sources. That is especially important when you copy and paste citations written in different styles.

-

My opponent's Policy Statement:

"In the case of emergency removal, the Department of Child Protection Service should provide social workers with a transitioning backpack filled with necessities for children being taken away from their homes and going into the foster care system."

-

Template:

REFUTATION SPEECH OUTLINE TEMPLATE e Your final product will be in an outline format (not converted into a narrative) e The length about 600-800 words, not counting references (single- or double-spaced, font no larger than 12) e Incorporate a minimum of 5 different, credible sources. These sources must be sighted internally and listed on a separate reference page I. Introduction A. Attention Statement B. State the policy you are refuting II. Attack the Problem. Attack / question the harms and their significance A. Main Point 1 (a claim) a. Sub-point: evidence b. Sub-point: evidence C. B. Main Point 2 (a claim) a. Sub-point: evidence b. Sub-point: evidence You may decide how many main points / sub-points are necessary but 2-4 is recommended. II1. Attack the problem causation / Inherency A. Explain that the opponent is incorrect on the question of causes. Either that the cause are all wrong or that the matter is more complicated. B. Show that the policy won't eliminate the problem / solve the problem IV. Attack the Plan: A. Question Workability of the plan B. Question enforcement C. Question practicality of the plan V. Attack Solvency. Does the plan really solve the problem (the harms)? A. Question its effectiveness B. Attack costs/benefits analysis a. the cost of the policy is high b. the benefits are not high enough to overcome the costs VI. Conclusion A. Briefly summarize your key refutation points. B. Closing statement REFERENCES (at least five references listed in the APA, MLA, or Chicago format) REFUTATION OUTLINE EXAMPLE. A STUDENT IN COM 2204. I. Introduction A. Attention Statement When teenagers of the age of 15 and older began to experience change or sexual feelings, their high school should not distribute female and male condoms. High schools distributing female and male condoms can be more harmful than helpful. B. State the policy you are refuting The policy I am refuting is that high schools should distribute female and male condoms to minors, so they can stay protected during sexual activity. II. Attack the Problem. Attack / question the harms and their significance A. High schools distributing condoms might lower the increase of teenagers contracting sexually transmitted diseases at the age of 15 and older, but teenagers practicing abstinence are more effective and convenient. a. Giving out condoms will only make us more curious and expose us to situations we have no business being in, such as getting STDs [sexually transmitted diseases] or having a childproblems that we can avoid totally by saying no to sex (Kanisha 2012). b. Complete abstinence is the only way to guarantee protection against STDs. This means avoiding all types of intimate genital contact. Someone practicing complete abstinence does not have any type of intimate sexual contact, including oral sex. So there is no risk of getting an STD (Hirsch 2019). . However, condom use cannot provide absolute protection against any STD. The most reliable ways to avoid transmission of STDs are to abstain from sexual activity, or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with an uninfected partner. B. Unwanted pregnancies have not increased from minors not staying protected during sexual activities. Teenagers receiving condoms from schools have shown an increase in pregnancies. a. St. Paul and DallasIn two school-based programs that dispensed condoms rather than coupons, the results were even worse than those in San Francisco. Specifically, a St. Paul program that was supposed to reduce annual teenage births actually caused them to spiral upward by one-third (from 22 per 1,000 to 29 per 1,000). An inner-city Dallas school that distributed condoms ended up with an 11.2 percent overall pregnancy rate, 47 percent higher than the 7.6 percent overall pregnancy rate found in an almost identical Dallas school that did not implement such a program (Hartigan 2002). b. San FranciscoEven though students were exposed to "graphic demonstrations" of proper condom use, the Balboa High School condom availability program turned out to be a colossal failure. The percentage of sexually active students using condoms almost doubled, but, despite that supposedly positive change in student sexual behavior, the school's overall pregnancy rate increased by one-fourth (Hartigan 2002). c. We exploit variation across counties and across time in teenagers' exposure to condom distribution programs in schools. We find that access to condoms in schools increases teen fertility by about 10 percent. These effects are driven by communities where condoms are provided without mandated counseling (Buckles & Hungerman 2016). II1. Attack the problem causation / Inherency A. Explain that the opponent is incorrect on the question of causes. Either that the cause are all wrong or that the matter is more complicated. Teenagers of the age of 15 and older receiving condoms from their high school is not helpful for the school or students. The students would benefit more if they practiced abstinence instead of their school-going through the trouble of distributing and buying condoms. The distribution of condoms in high school will actually lead to teenagers having more unwanted pregnancies. B. Show that the policy won't eliminate the problem / solve the problem The distribution of condoms to teenagers in high school may reduce the increase of teenagers contracting a sexually transmitted disease, but abstinence is more reliable or guaranteed to stop sexually transmitted diseases. Giving condoms to students could lead them to have risky sexual behavior which can lead to more unintended pregnancies. IV. Attack the Plan: A. Question Workability of the plan In order for this plan to work, the school needs to find a way to purchase condoms and distribute them to the students. Sex education programs can be hard to create if there are no teachers who have the time or availability to teach the course. No plan is discussed on how the school is going to find the funding to purchase condoms and distribute them to students. B. Question enforcement There can be more enforcement on the plan or policy if a law was created by the State Legislature to enforce school districts to make sure schools are handing out condoms or teaching sex education to students. C. Question practicality of the plan The policy needs a structured plan for how schools will able to find the money to purchase condoms or create sex education programs for students. V. Attack Solvency. Does the plan really solve the problem (the harms)? A. Question its effectiveness The plan can be hard to be effective if the high schools do not have the fund for condoms to give to students. B. Attack costs/benefits analysis a. the cost of the policy is high Fundraisers might be able to help students get access to condoms from schools, but it most likely won't be able to cover the costs of every student being able to receive condoms. b. the benefits are not high enough to overcome the costs The benefits of lowering the chance of getting unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases are not good enough to overcome the cost because the cost is very expensive. V1. Conclusion A. Briefly summarize your key refutation points. High schools should not distribute condoms to teenagers of the age of 15 and older. The distribution of condoms to teenagers will only lead to more unwanted pregnancies. Condoms are not the most effective method to avoid getting sexually transmitted diseases, but abstinence is proven to be better. It can be very rigorous for schools to find the money and provide condoms to students. B. The reality of high schools distributing condoms to students will lead to a disaster. The funding issues are inevitable and it will become more unnecessary labor for the teachers and schools