Adolescents ought to have the right to make autonomous medical choices.

Final Rebuttals: 1: “Decisionally” Pro is right this is awkward. Merriam-Webster, dictionary.com, the Free dictionary, Webster, Oxford, and Cambridge dictionaries represent the top 6 online dictionaries. Not one of them recognize “Decisionally” as a word. (1,2,3,4,5,6) In fact his own source from Stanford.edu does not use the word “decisionally” once….. Awkward!!!! Pro says “This is sort of awkward, because we are now at the second occasion in this debate where my opponent's incapacity to "google" stuff has produced generally unfavorable results on his own end.” Apparently pro feels that if you can google something on the internet… it is reliable. “This is silly…” 2: Straw man pro says “I think another thing CON doesn't understand is how decision making works... as if medical decisions are somehow "over and above" other kinds of decisions.” This is an expertly executed straw man, Pro starts off saying “I think…. CON doesn’t understand how decision making works.” Then he places the straw man in my argument saying “as if medical decisions are somehow “over and above” other kinds of decisions.” He even put over and above in quotes, as if I had said that. I never did. The real geniuses of it come right after when he says “which is silly.” Pro has made an appeal to ridicule on a straw man argument that I did not make. Very clever.... and dispicable. Pro continues with condescending ad hominem attacks saying “The problem is that he doesn't understand how logic works...” It seems pro is relying on a combination of fallacies in this debate. 3: Finally Pro’s actually rebuttals: Pro says “What he has failed, demonstrably, to do is show how(1) prefrontal cortex development to an adult level is necessary to make medical decisions.” Evidence provided in this debate has shown that underdevelopment of the prefrontal cortex “in teen brains, the synapses that are supposed to connect the frontal lobe to the rest of the brain are not working as well as they should. As a result, teens can't access those skills based in the frontal lobe easily.” These skills were summed up earlier, however for convienence… “Since the PFC controls intense emotions and impulses, it is sometimes referred to as the seat of good judgement. As such, a properly functioning prefrontal cortex inhibits inappropriate behaviors " including delaying gratification of needs, for things like food or sex " while encouraging wise, acceptable choices. In part, this occurs because it works to allow humans to balance immediate reward with long-term goals.” This information also demonstrates “(2) that teen prefrontal cortex development -even if less than adults- is not "sufficient" to make medical decisions.” Pro says “that restricting the medical decisions of teenagers only to adults violates adolescents' substantive rights.” Another straw man…. I never said to restrict the medical decision of teens only to adults. I argued the status quo that teens should not have autonomy in such matters. This does not in any way remove teens from the decision making. Pro then misrepresents the data with more appeal to ridicule saying “Even still, insofar as the pre-frontal cortex does not develop until around the mid-20s, his own logic should preclude even legal adults form making their own medical decisions which is (other than violating adult's substantive rights) fundamentally dumb.” As I argued last round… the age of PFC maturity is 25. It is quite clear that adolescents on balance, do not have the mental capability to effectively think abstractly, or rationally, or "to balance immediate reward with long-term goals," due to this scientific truth. This lack of mental capability is generally accepted as a justifiable reason to not allow adolescents to make autonomous medical decisions. More ad hom as pro says “So while CON can make silly pithy remarks like he did in the previous round, his logic is terribly weak. I said why it was weak above, but he just said that explaining the actual reasons that his argument was weak was an ad hom attack.... such disappoint.” Pro can call may remarks “silly pithy or weak” all he wants. However, such observations are not qualitative or appropriate for debate. Pro says “In a free and democratic society, it's not good enough to say that all and only those who are in the best position to make decisions get to make those decisions when that decisional power intrudes on another's right to autonomy.” I do not know where Pro lives, but in the U.S. adolescents are denied autonomy. It is the reality. Also of note, such adolescents have more “autonomy” now then ever before in this country. More ad hom as pro says “other than to put some irrelevant philosophical quotes in that he clearly doesn't understand the meaning of.” Really, I am amazed at pro’s argumentation. So much Ad hom…. Ad hom continued…. Pro says “Like, he literally does not grasp the difference between "liberty" as a general concept and "limited autonomy within the context of making medical decisions." Again, the definitions are synonymous… though my opponent seems reluctant to use a dictionary as shown earlier. 4: Reversing position!? Pro says “To say that an adolescent should be able to decide medical things for themselves is not to entirely remove the parent from the medical decision making process. It means, rather, that even though the parent(s) may still have influence in that process, the person who is actually going to be subject to the decision that's made (read: the adolescent) is going to be the one who makes that call.” For clarity I will submit the definition from round one for autonomous “existing or acting separately from other things or people” Surely influence from parents negates a concept of autonomy. Interestingly enough Pro almost arrives to the conclusion I am arguing for…. That adolescents help make medical decisions, however, due to the nature of adolescents (a underdeveloped PFC) should not do so autonomously. Pro ends with his final ad hom attack “Perhaps CON doesn't get this because his pre-frontal cortex isn't sufficiently developed, so he's not capable of understanding the relevant stakes in place here... like, maybe he lied about being 25. (I kid... I kid... sort of.)” How rude! I really am 25. Closing Statement: Reminder to Pro to waive last round per rules of acceptance. Pro has relied on Ad hom and logical fallacies to make his case. Perhaps this has been done as pro cannot make a reasonable case is to be made to support the resolution. I have been supremely disappointed. I was under the impression that my opponent was a well-respected, quality debater on this website. I was excited he wanted to debate me. In this debate however, he was very condescending, and his arguments full of insults. Color me disappointed. The status quo supports my argument. Society on balance recognizes that adolescents are less capable of making rational decisions. Science supports such an understanding of an underdeveloped brain. As a result autonomy of minors is justly severely limited. Justice demands autonomy of those who are capable. Justice demands that such autonomy is not intended for those not yet able to govern themselves. Due to what has become obvious in this debate, Adolescents ought NOT to have the right to make autonomous medical choices. Vote Con! sources: (1) http://www.merriam-webster.com... (2) http://dictionary.reference.com... (3) http://www.thefreedictionary.com... (4) http://www.webster-dictionary.org... (5) http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... (6) http://dictionary.cambridge.org...