2. 外语
  3. Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring

Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring

admin2020-12-14  49
问题    Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave up the dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I wasn’t surprised when this didn’ t make the news here in the United States—we’ re now the only wealthy country without such a policy.
   The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical Leave Act, passed in 1993. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks’ unpaid leave for ease of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought it bitterly, describing it as "government-run personnel management" and a "dangerous precedent". In fact, every step of the way, as (usually) Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the law, business groups have been strongly opposed.
   As Yale law professor Anne Alstott argues, justifying parental support depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents, she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives: there is "no exit" when it comes to children. "Society expects—and needs—parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual, emotional and moral capabilities. And society expects—and needs—parents to persist in their roles for 18 years, or longer if needed."
   While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not providing care. What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state, for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children’ s welfare, yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parenting as a personal choice for which there is no collective responsibility is not merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those benefits because they accrue (不断积累) to the whole of society as today’ s children become tomorrow’s productive citizenry (公民). In fact, by some estimates, the value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money (including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these investments generate huge social benefits—as they clearly do—the benefits of providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer.
What does the author think of America’s large body of family laws governing children’ s welfare?
选项 A、They fail to ensure children’ s healthy growth.
B、The fail to provide enough support for parents.
C、They emphasize parents’ legal responsibilities.
D、They impose the care of children on parents.
答案B
解析 推断题。根据题干中large body of family laws governing children’s welfare可以定位到文中第四段第三句The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children’s welfare，yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes(国家认识到了这一点，通过一系列保护儿童权益的家庭法就可见一斑，但是当社会把这项影响孩子命运的重担强加到父母身上时，他们得到的帮助却少得可怜)，由此，可以推断出美国的家庭法没有为父母提供足够的帮助，A、C选项在文中没有直接涉及，D项所讲的是众所周知的一般情况，而非作者的看法。因此，正确答案是B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/RfP7777K
0

大学英语六级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)