Throughout history parental authority over children has been the norm of western society. The degree and ultimate scope of that power and control however, has varied over time, with a steady move towards state’s rights over those of the family. Today's father can no longer wield ultimate control over his child to the point of legally proscribing life and death as he could under Roman law. He cannot expect full rights to the services and labor of the children regardless of the mother's wishes and the children's best interests as he could under English Common Law. In fact, under modern law, the parent cannot even be assured that he or she will be able to bring the child up in accordance with the practices he or she believes to be dictated by God.
Surely no one would argue that the images from the turn of the century of small children laboring in sweatshops should be revived today. By requiring inoculations, the state has overseen the development of a generation to whom the ravages of smallpox and polio are a mere historical curiosity. Compulsory education has spawned a literacy rate among the highest in the world, and in this arena the state even allows some degree of parental control over the type and content of the schooling.
In clear cases of abuse or neglect the state's intervention may be the best solution, but the inevitable slippery slope arises when the government defines the limits of its own power. Is a child neglected as a matter of law if the parent refuses to consent to a medical procedure that could save the child's life? What if the procedure is cosmetic such as repair of a cleft palate or harelip? Although the Constitution does not expressly countenance a right to a normal life, this bold assertation of this right goes unchallenged in many cases. Thus one can observe how imperative it is that the government not be allowed to stretch reasonable power over children’s health too deeply into encroachment over their general welfare, especially in opposition to the parent’s wishes.
The question asks what the author would be likely to agree with, which indicates this is an inference question. The task of the question is indicated by the phrase likely to agree. The subject of the question is just something the author would be likely to agree with, so find the subjects referred to in the answer choices and use those to refer back to the passage, eliminating any choice which cannot be supported by the text.
Choice A: No. Although this choice may be tempting because the passage mentions cosmetic procedures and a right to a normal life, the assertion that these ideas led the federal government to undermine the authority of parents is extreme language. The author never suggests that these ideas are what has caused the federal government to increase the amount of control they have over a child's well-being.
Choice B: Correct. The text mentions the development of a generation to whom the ravages of smallpox and polio are a mere historical curiosity, meaning that children of the present day are more likely to be free from disease. The text also states compulsory education has spawned a literacy rate among the highest in the world, meaning that children of the present day are more likely to be literate.
Choice C: No. The recycled language State intervention and children's welfare may make this choice seem tempting. However, the assertion that state intervention is a dangerous precedent is extreme language that is not supported by the passage, as is the prediction that it is likely to expand too far.
Choice D: No. Although this choice may be tempting because the passage mentions parenting under Roman law and that the father had ultimate control over his child, the assertion that parents had too much unfettered authority is extreme language. While the author mentions one example of the authority extended to Roman fathers, there is not sufficient discussion of this issue to extend this idea to all instances of authority by Roman parents (mothers and fathers) universally.
Choice E: No. Although this choice may be tempting because the passage does mention a steady move towards state’s rights over those of the family, the assertion that acceptance of this situation will result in a diminishment of the power is extreme language. The author never suggests that acceptance is a cause of parents’ reduced power.
The correct answer is choice B.
A. Changing ideals in our current society's standards of physical and mental well being for children have led the federal government to undermine the authority of parents.
B. Children today are more likely to be free from epidemic disease and literate than those in earlier periods of history.
C. State intervention into children's welfare is a dangerous precedent and without limitation by Congress and appropriate judicial nominees, it is likely to expand too far.
D. Roman parents had too much unfettered authority over their children.
E. Parent's acceptance of the increased role the federal government plays in their children's lives will result in a diminishment of the power parents are able to assume in their children's lives.
The question asks about the use of the second paragraph, so this is a structure question, which asks about the function or organization of the structural parts of the passage. The task of the question is indicated by the phrase best describes the author’s use. The subject of the question is the second paragraph. In order to answer the question, determine how the second paragraph fits into the flow of the passage overall, and how the ideas in the second paragraph connect to the main idea. The primary focus of the passage is stated as to discuss parental authority over children and how the degree and ultimate scope of that power and control however, has varied over time, with a steady move towards state’s rights over those of the family. The second paragraph follows by making a concession that some of the increase of state control has had some benefits with the examples of requiring inoculations and compulsory education. Therefore, the second paragraph provides different, additional examples to show that governmental regulation of children’s lives can have benefits in a few cases. Now evaluate the answer choices, eliminating any choice which does not match the use of the second paragraph.
Choice A: No. Although this choice may be tempting because the phrase benevolent intervention can radically improve seems to reflect the idea that some of the increase of state control has had some benefits, the phrase widely held belief is extreme language. The author never suggests the belief in benevolent intervention is widely held.
Choice B: No. While this choice may seem appealing, since the author defends some aspects of the state’s intervention, the phrase unpopular conclusion makes this choice a reversal. The passage states surely no one would argue that state intervention should be undone in certain cases. The second paragraph gives examples of government intervention that has had beneficial results, and the statement surely no one would argue indicates that the author expects people to agree with the evidence in the second paragraph.
Choice C: No. This choice may seem tempting, since effects discussed elsewhere in the passage may seem to match that the passage is focused on a single topic. However, this choice is a reversal, as the concession in examples do not support either the change in parental authority discussed in the first paragraph or the limits on government intervention discussed in the third paragraph.
Choice D: No. While the phrase nostalgic images may seem to match the positive tone of the second paragraph, the phrase free of overbearing governmental influence makes this choice a reversal. The passage states surely no one would argue that state intervention should be undone in certain cases, and the second paragraph gives examples of government intervention that has had beneficial results.
Choice E: Correct. The second paragraph mentions the examples of requiring inoculations and compulsory education as additional examples that may seem unrelated to the historical examples given in the first paragraph in order to show that governmental regulation of children’s lives can have benefits in a few cases.
The correct answer is choice E.
A. The author suggests multiple supports for the widely held belief that benevolent intervention can radically improve historically neglected areas.
B. The author defends an unpopular conclusion.
C. The author presents empirical evidence of the effects discussed elsewhere in the passage.
D. The author presents nostalgic images from a past free of overbearing governmental influence.
E. The author presents seemingly unrelated examples in order to suggest a positive result of an interventionist agenda.
The question asks about the author's tone, so this is a retrieval question. The task of the question is indicated by the phrase most closely describes. The subject of the question is governmental intrusion. In order to answer the question, determine how the author addresses the idea of governmental intrusion in the passage. According to the passage, the author discusses parental authority over children and how the degree and ultimate scope of that power and control however, has varied over time, with a steady move towards state’s rights over those of the family. The second paragraph provides examples to show that governmental regulation of children’s lives can have benefits in a few cases such as requiring inoculations and compulsory education. Finally, the author states that in clear cases of abuse or neglect the state's intervention may be the best solution, but the inevitable slippery slope arises when the government defines the limits of its own power. Therefore, while there is some recognition that government intervention has had benefits, the author is wary about how far this intervention should go. Now evaluate the answer choices, eliminating answers that are not supported by the text.
Choice A: No. Although ambiguous may be tempting, because the text states that an inevitable slippery slope arises when considering the issue, the author’s stance is clear, so this choice is a reversal. The author states that one can observe how imperative it is that the government not be allowed to stretch reasonable power over children’s health too deeply.
Choice B: No. Although the word condemnatory may be tempting because the passage states how imperative it is that the government not be allowed to stretch its power, the word unequivocally is extreme language that cannot be supported. The author does concede that government intervention has had some benefits, so the tone is not completely negative.
Choice C: Correct. The author suggests many positive effects of the intervention, such as requiring inoculations and compulsory education, but shows some wariness in advising that allowing such intervention may result in an inevitable slippery slope.
Choice D: No. Although the word reproachful may be tempting because the first paragraph states under modern law, the parent cannot even be assured that he or she will be able to bring the child up in accordance with the practices he or she believes, the word uncritically makes this choice a reversal. The passage does indeed offer a critical examination of the proper limits of government intervention, since the author states that one can observe how imperative it is that the government not be allowed to stretch reasonable power over children’s health too deeply.
Choice E: No. While the negative connotation of censorious may make this choice seem appealing, this choice is extreme language that cannot be supported. The author does concede that government intervention has had some benefits, so the tone is not completely negative.
The correct answer is choice C.
A. Ambiguous
B. Unequivocally condemnatory
C. Cautiously approbatory
D. Uncritically reproachful
E. Censorious
The question asks what would most likely, which indicates this is an inference question. The task of the question is indicated by the phrase be disputed by the author. The subject of the question is family decisions, so determine what the passage states about the subject and evaluate the answer choices, eliminating any choice which cannot be supported by the text. According to the passage, under English common law, a father could expect full rights to the services and labor of the children regardless of the mother's wishes and the children's best interests, while under modern law, the parent cannot even be assured that he or she will be able to bring the child up in accordance with the practices he or she believes to be dictated by God. Additionally, surely no one would argue that the images from the turn of the century of small children laboring in sweatshops should be revived today. Finally, in clear cases of abuse or neglect the state's intervention may be the best solution.
Choice A: No. This choice may be tempting because of the phrase state services can have a laudatory effect, but this choice is a reversal because the author agrees with this statement. The third paragraph states that in clear cases of abuse or neglect the state's intervention may be the best solution.
Choice B: No. This choice may seem tempting due to the phrase promote theological conceptualism, which seems unsupported by the passage. However, this choice is a reversal, because the author would not be likely to dispute it. The passage states that under modern law, the parent cannot even be assured that he or she will be able to bring the child up in accordance with the practices he or she believes to be dictated by God. Since the answer choices need to be considered as true statements, if theological conceptualism is a practice that a parent…believes to be dictated by God, and these ideas are promoted at the expense of traditional secular norms, then this choice provides a type of practice with which the author would agree a parent cannot bring…up his or her child in accordance.
Choice C: Correct. The author acknowledges that governmental regulation of children’s lives can have benefits, asserting in the second paragraph that Surely no one would argue that the images from the turn of the century of small children laboring in sweatshops should be revived today. Therefore, the author would disagree that government intervention in traditionally private matters such as intra-familial decision making has had a predominantly detrimental effect.
Choice D: No. Although the recycled language English common law may make this choice seem tempting, it is a reversal because the author agrees with it. The first paragraph states that under English common law, a father received full rights to the services and labor of the children regardless of the mother's wishes and the children's best interests, implying that the author believes the mother’s wishes and children’s best interests should have received more consideration.
Choice E: No. Although this choice may be tempting because of the phrase Governmental intrusion into family decisions is merited, this choice is a reversal because the author agrees with it. The third paragraph states that In clear cases of abuse or neglect the state's intervention may be the best solution.
The correct answer is choice C.
A. State services can have a laudatory effect on members of society without adequate voice and power.
B. Religious teaching tends to promote theological conceptualism at the expense of traditional secular norms.
C. The progression of history has shown that government intervention in traditionally private matters such as intra-familial decision making has had a predominantly detrimental effect on the individual welfare of specific children.
D. Old English common law allowed an inappropriate exclusion of the rights of the mother in decisions relating to the child as basic as its very survival.
E. Governmental intrusion into family decisions is merited in some situations.
close
Updated on: 15 Oct 2019, 04:15
58%
(03:22) wrong 
25%
(medium)
