Can anyone mark my essay? (give advices and tell me where I did good) (1 Viewer)

[[ ]]

Evaluate how effective changes to family law have been in reflecting changing community values.



In reference to changing of community values, the Australian family law system provided a mixed effectiveness of reflection, as it does struggle to provide a response for the emerging replacement of old values by the new community values. Essentially for new community values such as the acceptance of same sex relationships, birth technology and surrogacy and adoption.



Various legislations of the family law which regulates the legal status of same sex relationships can prove to be integral, this is evident through the change of the legal status of same sex relationships. Exemplary, the Marriage Act 1961 is a clear demonstration of the old community values towards same sex relationships, as it demonstrates the old held value that same sex relationships are evil and unethical. With this legislation, the family law demonstrated itself as the protector of the old community values before the emerging of the new and more opening values. However, stepping into the 21st century, various establishments of legislations from the family law is proved to be integral to reflect the changing of community value. Exemplary, the Same Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in commonwealth laws-general law reform) Act 2008 is an effective example to the laws reflecting of changing of community value, as it provided the same legal status for same sex relationships and removed areas of discriminations in the law and programs. This is evident through the Hope and Brown v NIB Health Funds 1994 case where the court ruled that it was discrimination for Hope and Brown when they are not able to access health insurance. In addition, according to the statistics of Australian Bureau of Statistics, there is an increase from around 10000 same sex couples in total in 1996 to around 50000 same sex couples in total in 2016, this shows the rapidly changing of community value. Hence, it is clear that the family law effectively reflects the changing of value in the community towards same sex relationships.



Birth technology and surrogacy legislations is regulated by the family law system as a correspond to the changing of community values towards birth technologies and surrogacy to a great extent as it demonstrated strategies to enforce the social issues surrounding birth technologies and surrogacy. Essentially, the Status of Children Act 1996 NSW can be marked as the sign of the old held community value towards the issues surrounding surrogacy and birth technologies, as it marked out that the parents of the children can only be a man and a woman, this demonstrated the law’s lack of supporting towards same sex couples, this is evident through the Re Patrick Case (2002) where a homosexual man donated his sperm to a lesbian couple, and the donor believed that he would be having contact with the child. However, the Miscellaneous Acts Amendment (Same Sex Relationships) Act 2008 exemplified as the effective reflection of the law’s reflection to the changing values in the community, as it provided female same sex relationships the legal right on the birth certificate as co-mothers and equal status as parents. This is highlighted in ‘Gay Dads Birth Certificate Ruling Welcomed’ (ABC, 2013) “where a male couple from Sydney will become the first same-sex couple in NSW to be named parents on the birth certificate of a child born through a surrogacy arrangement”. Hence, it is clear that corresponding to the changing of community values, the law provides effective means and legislations to correspond with the changing of value as through addressing social issues for birth technologies and surrogacy.



The protection of adoption explicitly is proven to be an integral factor for the law’s effectiveness to response with the changing of community value. According to the statistics from AIFS, about 11% of Australian gay men and 33% of lesbians have children, based on data from a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community survey of 3853 people, this illustrated the acceptance of adoption in the Australian society. Exemplary, the Adoption of Children Legislation Amendment (Equality) Bill 2017 provided a good example for the law’s attempt to comply with this changing of trend of adoption especially for same sex relationships, as it allowed same sex couples to adopt nationally after the Northern Territory change in legislation. Furthermore, this is supported by the Adoption Act NSW 2000 where adoption processes are laid out. The effectiveness is suggested through the Diane Clementson and Jonathan Papalia case where Diane Clementson and Jonathan Papalia are able to adopt a daughter Chantelle who is 10 years old. Thus, it is clearly evident that the family law effectively corresponds to the changing of values of adoption in the Australian society.



The family law provides a well balanced option for people who are in demands of surrogacy and birth technologies, essentially meeting the course in the increasing of demand in the Australian society. According to ‘Community Attitudes to Assisted Reproductive Technology: A 20-year Trend’ (The Medical Journal of Australia, 2003) the approval of the use of IVF for infertile married couples rose from 75% in 1982 to 86% in 2003, approval of the use of donor sperm by single women rose from 18% in 1993 to 38% in 2000 and approval of the use of donor sperm by lesbian women rose from 7% in 1993 to 31% in 2000, this demonstrated the drastic change of the attitudes of the Australian society towards the use of birth technologies in the Australian society. The Assisted Reproductive technologies Act 2007 (NSW) is unclear as a representation for the law’s reflection of the changing of community attitudes, as it provided unclear and ineffective support for the use of birth technologies. This is evident through the Re Michael 2009 case where neither the two people found to be the parents were at all biologically related to the child, and neither of the biological parents were found to be the parents.



On the other hand, in the area of surrogacy, the family law is able to provide reforms in response to the demand of the community, yet it’s own disadvantage on commercial surrogacy demonstrated that the law did not fully achieve as a reflection of the changing of value of community towards surrogacy. The Surrogacy Act 2010 was an effective reflection to the value of the community, due to the fact that it was inquired after the lobbying from the lobby groups from the Australian Christian Lobby and Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby and its clarification on altruistic surrogacy, one of the aim is to provide the best interests of the child, yet these cannot be granted in a commercial surrogacy case. This is proven through ‘Concern Over Complex Laws on Surrogacy’ (SMH, 2013) – “Keeping surrogacy onshore would… provide a far greater opportunity for harm minimization objectives to be pursued”. In addition, the penalties from the banning of overseas commercial surrogacy with a maximum of 2 years imprisonment and $110000 and not providing enough legal protection for the children of such arrangements shows the law is not able to reflect the community values to protect the best interests of the children. This is proven in The Baby Gammy Case where a couple from Western Australia used a surrogate mother in Thailand, who had twins. One was born with Down Syndrome and was left in Thailand, but the couple brought the other one home. Hence, it is clear that in the area of surrogacy, whilst effective legislations are provided in response to the society’s increasing demand for surrogacy, the principle for the ‘best interest of the child’ that is always held in the Australian society is not protected by the Australian family law system.



Following a critical analysis of various legal responses, it becomes evident that the Australian legal system is of mixed effectiveness in reflecting to the changing of value in the Australian community. With the assistance of legislation, the Australian family law is able to cope with the emerging new values of the Australian community and can be proven to be effective for areas such as same sex relationships and adoption. However, the lack of ability to resolve in social and family issues surrounding birth technologies and surrogacies and it’s failure to adhere to the ‘best interest of children’ principle illuminates that the effectiveness is controversial of the family law system as a whole.

 

[[ ]]

crap I contradicted myself for birth technology and surrogacy

 

[Zyphronic]

I don't really have time to read the whole essay but just from looking at the first sentence, I will note that 'legislation' is already a plural as opposed to 'legislations'.

 

[[ ]]

I don't really have time to read the whole essay but just from looking at the first sentence, I will note that 'legislation' is already a plural as opposed to 'legislations'.

oh crap

 

[Adamconnor12]

Evaluate how effective changes to family law have been in reflecting changing community values.



In reference to changing of community values, the Australian family law system provided a mixed effectiveness of reflection, as it does struggle to provide a response for the emerging replacement of old values by the new community values. Essentially for new community values such as the acceptance of same sex relationships, birth technology and surrogacy and adoption.

This isnt really an introduction as you need to establish what your argument is for each issue. For example, with "same-sex relationships", you are arguing that the legal responses have been effective so state that in your intro.
Your intro should be structured more like this:
Thesis (1 sentence): Your overall argument.
Elaborate and Establish (5-7 sentences): What is your arguments for each paragraph and how do these link to your overall argument.
Linking end sentence (1 sentence): Just explicitly link these three paragraphs back to your thesis and argument.

Note: I like putting a piece of international law in the introduction to frame your arguement and show a breadth of knowledge. An example, "Australia has ratified their international obligations under the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) which requires them to protect the individual's right to having/creating a family. Due to unenforcable legislation, Australian law has only been somewhat effective in protecting this right ..."

 

[Adamconnor12]

Also, your structure is confusing. Much better to just have three paragraphs = one issue per paragraph. So this would look like.
1. Same-sex relationships. (275-300 words for all)
2. Surrogacy and birth technologies
3. Adoption.

And these each should have at least 3 -4 parts of evidence with a variety of legal responses (legislation and cases and government organisations) and supporting non-legal evidence (organisations, media articles, reports).

 

[[ ]]

This isnt really an introduction as you need to establish what your argument is for each issue. For example, with "same-sex relationships", you are arguing that the legal responses have been effective so state that in your intro.
Your intro should be structured more like this:
Thesis (1 sentence): Your overall argument.
Elaborate and Establish (5-7 sentences): What is your arguments for each paragraph and how do these link to your overall argument.
Linking end sentence (1 sentence): Just explicitly link these three paragraphs back to your thesis and argument.

Note: I like putting a piece of international law in the introduction to frame your arguement and show a breadth of knowledge. An example, "Australia has ratified their international obligations under the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) which requires them to protect the individual's right to having/creating a family. Due to unenforcable legislation, Australian law has only been somewhat effective in protecting this right ..."

Also, your structure is confusing. Much better to just have three paragraphs = one issue per paragraph. So this would look like.
1. Same-sex relationships. (275-300 words for all)
2. Surrogacy and birth technologies
3. Adoption.

And these each should have at least 3 -4 parts of evidence with a variety of legal responses (legislation and cases and government organisations) and supporting non-legal evidence (organisations, media articles, reports).

Fair enough, I'll try do something about it.

 

[Unknown Scholar]

Agreeing with Adamconnor12, your intro is not a proper introduction. You make a vague judgement about its effectiveness, and should probably elaborate a bit more on what exactly the shortfalls/successes are beyond just stating the areas you are going to argue.
Also, as you are arguing it has mixed effectiveness, you should also recommend or suggest a remedy (can be general) on how the law would be able to improve its effectiveness.


Paragraph 1:
Overall, not too bad, but there are some areas to improve on.

• Maybe it's just me, but usually for legislation, you would want to include the jurisdiction, i.e:
  Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) or Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
  
  
• " This is evident through the Hope and Brown v NIB Health Funds 1994 case where the court ruled that it was discrimination for Hope and Brown when they are not able to access health insurance. "
  Maybe mention how this is a common law response, and how the court's ruling becomes a common law stance on community values? Not very clear that you are arguing that the court case demonstrates the law's changing stance, and although I can infer, most markers would prefer it to be explicit.
  
  
• " In addition, according to the statistics of Australian Bureau of Statistics, there is an increase from around 10000 same sex couples in total in 1996 to around 50000 same sex couples in total in 2016, this shows the rapidly changing of community value. "
  This almost feels like conjecture (correlation does not equate causation), you don't really link it to legislation; in fact one could argue on simply this statement that the general attitude has changed, but that it has no relevance with the law. I think you need to make it explicit as to how it is connected to the changing stance found in legislation.

Paragraph 2:
Overall, it's a good paragraph, but make sure you actually stick to assessing how the law has changed, and link its development to the question, rather than just give a list of amendments/LCM that show acceptance of community values.

• " Essentially, the Status of Children Act 1996 NSW can be marked as the sign of the old held community value towards the issues surrounding surrogacy and birth technologies, as it marked out that the parents of the children can only be a man and a woman, this demonstrated the law’s lack of supporting towards same sex couples, this is evident through the Re Patrick Case (2002) where a homosexual man donated his sperm to a lesbian couple, and the donor believed that he would be having contact with the child. "
  
  This is too much for one sentence. Break it down and chunk it as your idea is easily lost in this excessively long sentence.
  

Paragraph 3:
You have good LCM, but I feel like you don't quite link them to the law, its reflection of community values and the question, which makes it difficult to fully grasp what you are arguing without inferring 'between the lines' logic.

• " According to the statistics from AIFS, about 11% of Australian gay men and 33% of lesbians have children, based on data from a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community survey of 3853 people, this illustrated the acceptance of adoption in the Australian society "
  I would argue this after the introduction of " Adoption of Children Legislation Amendment (Equality) Bill 2017 " as having a statistic does not help further your argument if it doesn't illustrate how the law has changed.
  
  
• " Furthermore, this is supported by the Adoption Act NSW 2000 where adoption processes are laid out. "
  This... doesn't really show anything. Maybe say what exactly this supports? How do processes link to community values?
  
  
• " The effectiveness is suggested through the Diane Clementson and Jonathan Papalia case where Diane Clementson and Jonathan Papalia are able to adopt a daughter Chantelle who is 10 years old. "
  Interesting case, but no evaluation to link the case to how the law is actually responding to community values. Try to make sure that you tell the marker why this is relevant, rather than letting them infer for themselves.

Paragraph 4:
I'm a bit confused as to why this is separate to paragraph 2, since this is solely birth technologies? Also, this paragraph seems a bit aimless in its argument, you're not quite telling me how the law is effective or not, you're providing examples with not much evaluation in regards to the question.

• " According to ‘Community Attitudes to Assisted Reproductive Technology: A 20-year Trend’ (The Medical Journal of Australia, 2003) the approval of the use of IVF for infertile married couples rose from 75% in 1982 to 86% in 2003, approval of the use of donor sperm by single women rose from 18% in 1993 to 38% in 2000 and approval of the use of donor sperm by lesbian women rose from 7% in 1993 to 31% in 2000, this demonstrated the drastic change of the attitudes of the Australian society towards the use of birth technologies in the Australian society. "
  Good info but.... no link to law at all. This feels like a sociological analysis of how Australia's social values have changed over time, but this has no relevance to how the law has actually reflected changes in community values. I would perhaps use this as supporting evidence after demonstrating how the law has responded.

Paragraph 5:
This one is a bit of a mess to be honest... It's not clear how commercial surrogacy reflects community values, and how the law changes is also murky, a bit obfuscated by a weird structure. I'm not going to break it down too much because I'm having a hard time understanding the exact point you're arguing here.


Structure:
I think Adamconnor12's advice on structuring your paragraphs on thematic concerns (surrogacy, birth technologies,...) would make it easier to write and understand.

Effectiveness:
Throughout the essay you toss out effective and ineffective as buzz words. You should probably make evaluations based on the effectiveness criteria (achieving justice, resource efficiency, enforcability, ...).

Hopefully this is helpful!

 

[[ ]]

Agreeing with Adamconnor12, your intro is not a proper introduction. You make a vague judgement about its effectiveness, and should probably elaborate a bit more on what exactly the shortfalls/successes are beyond just stating the areas you are going to argue.
Also, as you are arguing it has mixed effectiveness, you should also recommend or suggest a remedy (can be general) on how the law would be able to improve its effectiveness.


Paragraph 1:
Overall, not too bad, but there are some areas to improve on.

• Maybe it's just me, but usually for legislation, you would want to include the jurisdiction, i.e:
  Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) or Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)
  
  
• " This is evident through the Hope and Brown v NIB Health Funds 1994 case where the court ruled that it was discrimination for Hope and Brown when they are not able to access health insurance. "
  Maybe mention how this is a common law response, and how the court's ruling becomes a common law stance on community values? Not very clear that you are arguing that the court case demonstrates the law's changing stance, and although I can infer, most markers would prefer it to be explicit.
  
  
• " In addition, according to the statistics of Australian Bureau of Statistics, there is an increase from around 10000 same sex couples in total in 1996 to around 50000 same sex couples in total in 2016, this shows the rapidly changing of community value. "
  This almost feels like conjecture (correlation does not equate causation), you don't really link it to legislation; in fact one could argue on simply this statement that the general attitude has changed, but that it has no relevance with the law. I think you need to make it explicit as to how it is connected to the changing stance found in legislation.

Paragraph 2:
Overall, it's a good paragraph, but make sure you actually stick to assessing how the law has changed, and link its development to the question, rather than just give a list of amendments/LCM that show acceptance of community values.

• " Essentially, the Status of Children Act 1996 NSW can be marked as the sign of the old held community value towards the issues surrounding surrogacy and birth technologies, as it marked out that the parents of the children can only be a man and a woman, this demonstrated the law’s lack of supporting towards same sex couples, this is evident through the Re Patrick Case (2002) where a homosexual man donated his sperm to a lesbian couple, and the donor believed that he would be having contact with the child. "
  
  This is too much for one sentence. Break it down and chunk it as your idea is easily lost in this excessively long sentence.

Paragraph 3:
You have good LCM, but I feel like you don't quite link them to the law, its reflection of community values and the question, which makes it difficult to fully grasp what you are arguing without inferring 'between the lines' logic.

• " According to the statistics from AIFS, about 11% of Australian gay men and 33% of lesbians have children, based on data from a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community survey of 3853 people, this illustrated the acceptance of adoption in the Australian society "
  I would argue this after the introduction of " Adoption of Children Legislation Amendment (Equality) Bill 2017 " as having a statistic does not help further your argument if it doesn't illustrate how the law has changed.
  
  
• " Furthermore, this is supported by the Adoption Act NSW 2000 where adoption processes are laid out. "
  This... doesn't really show anything. Maybe say what exactly this supports? How do processes link to community values?
  
  
• " The effectiveness is suggested through the Diane Clementson and Jonathan Papalia case where Diane Clementson and Jonathan Papalia are able to adopt a daughter Chantelle who is 10 years old. "
  Interesting case, but no evaluation to link the case to how the law is actually responding to community values. Try to make sure that you tell the marker why this is relevant, rather than letting them infer for themselves.

Paragraph 4:
I'm a bit confused as to why this is separate to paragraph 2, since this is solely birth technologies? Also, this paragraph seems a bit aimless in its argument, you're not quite telling me how the law is effective or not, you're providing examples with not much evaluation in regards to the question.

• " According to ‘Community Attitudes to Assisted Reproductive Technology: A 20-year Trend’ (The Medical Journal of Australia, 2003) the approval of the use of IVF for infertile married couples rose from 75% in 1982 to 86% in 2003, approval of the use of donor sperm by single women rose from 18% in 1993 to 38% in 2000 and approval of the use of donor sperm by lesbian women rose from 7% in 1993 to 31% in 2000, this demonstrated the drastic change of the attitudes of the Australian society towards the use of birth technologies in the Australian society. "
  Good info but.... no link to law at all. This feels like a sociological analysis of how Australia's social values have changed over time, but this has no relevance to how the law has actually reflected changes in community values. I would perhaps use this as supporting evidence after demonstrating how the law has responded.

Paragraph 5:
This one is a bit of a mess to be honest... It's not clear how commercial surrogacy reflects community values, and how the law changes is also murky, a bit obfuscated by a weird structure. I'm not going to break it down too much because I'm having a hard time understanding the exact point you're arguing here.


Structure:
I think Adamconnor12's advice on structuring your paragraphs on thematic concerns (surrogacy, birth technologies,...) would make it easier to write and understand.

Effectiveness:
Throughout the essay you toss out effective and ineffective as buzz words. You should probably make evaluations based on the effectiveness criteria (achieving justice, resource efficiency, enforcability, ...).

Hopefully this is helpful!

Thank you

 

[[ ]]

thanks for the advice, I've sent this to my teacher and its almost a week and she didn't give me any reply... (she just said she didn't have time), posting on this forum is so much better than asking my teacher to mark it.

 

[Adamconnor12]

thanks for the advice, I've sent this to my teacher and its almost a week and she didn't give me any reply... (she just said she didn't have time), posting on this forum is so much better than asking my teacher to mark it.

All good - I wish you the best of luck with your essay and everything.

 

[[ ]]

All good - I wish you the best of luck with your essay and everything.

Thank you and Unknown Scholar