2. 外语
  3. Family Matters This month, Wyoming passed a bill that would give legal teeth to the moral obligation to support one’s parent

Family Matters This month, Wyoming passed a bill that would give legal teeth to the moral obligation to support one’s parent

admin2013-04-25  28
问题             Family Matters
    This month, Wyoming passed a bill that would give legal teeth to the moral obligation to support one’s parents. Called the Maintenance of Parents Bill, it received the backing of the Government.
    That does not mean it hasn’t generated discussion. Several members of the Parliament opposed the measure. Others who acknowledged the problem of the elderly poor believed it a disproportionate response. Still others believe it will subvert relations within the family, cynics dubbed it the "Sue Your Son" law.
    Those who say that the bill does not promote filial responsibility, of course, are right. It has nothing to do with filial responsibility. It kicks in where filial responsibility fails. All the law can do is to provide a safety net where this morality proves insufficient. Wyoming needs this bill not to replace morality, but to provide incentives to show it up.
    Wyoming faces the problems of an increasing proportion of people over 60 years of age. Demography is inexorable. In 1980, 7.2% of the population was in this bracket. By 2030, the proportion is projected to be 26%. The problem is not old age persen. It is that the ratio of economically active people to economically inactive people will decline.
    But no amount of government exhortation or paternalism will completely eliminate the problem of old people who have insufficient means to make ends meet. Some people will fall through the holes in any safety net.
    Traditionally, a person’s insurance against poverty in his old age was his family care and support for one’s parents is a universal value shared by all civilized societies.
    The problem in Wyoming is that the moral obligation to look after one’s parents is unenforceable. A father can be compelled by law to maintain his children. A husband can be forced to support his wife. But, until now, a son or daughter had no legal obligation to support his or her parents.
    In 1989, an Advisory Council was set up to look into the problems of the aged. Its report stated with a tinge of complacency that 95% of those who did not have their own income were receiving cash contributions from relations. But what about the 5% who aren’t getting relatives’ support? They have several options:
(a) get a job and work until they die;
(b) apply for public assistance (you have to be destitute to apply); or
(c) starve quietly. None of these options is socially acceptable. And what if this 5% figure grows, as it is likely to do, as society ages?
    The Maintenance of Parents Bill was put forth to encourage the traditional virtues that have so far kept Wyoming from some of the breakdowns encountered in other affluent societies. This legislation will allow a person to apply to the court for maintenance from any or all of his children. The court would have the discretion to refuse to make an order if it is unjust.
    Those who deride the proposal for opening up the courts to family lawsuits miss the point. Only in extreme cases would any parent take his child to court. If it does indeed become law, the bill’s effect would be far more subtle.
    First, it will reaffirm the notion that it is each individual’s—not society’s—responsibility to look after his parents. Wyoming is still conservative enough that most people will not object to this idea.
    Second, and more important, it will make those who are inclined to shirk their responsibilities think twice.(A)But to be sued by one’s parents would be a massive loss of face. It would be a public disgrace.(B)The hand of the conciliator would be immeasurably strengthened.(C)It is far more likely that some sort of amicable settlement would be reached if the recalcitrant son or daughter knows that the alternative is a public trial.(D)
    It would be nice to think Wyoming doesn’t need this kind of law. Those of us who pushed for the bill will consider ourselves most successful if it acts as an incentive not to have it invoked in the first place.
The word subvert in Paragraph 2 is closest in meaning to ______.
选项 A、influence
B、destroy
C、maintain
D、escape
答案B
解析 本题为词汇题，主要考查考生根据上下文对单词subvert的理解。该词所在句子“Still others believe it will subvert relations within the family: cynics dubbed it the ’Sue Your Son’ law”的意思为：其他人仍然相信这个法律会subvert家庭关系，那些愤世嫉俗者称之为“状告儿子的法律”。根据上下文尤其是下文中的“Sue Your Son” law可以判断出subvert的意思是“破坏”。选项A(影响)、C(保持)和D(逃离)都不符合题意，因此选择B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/LYlYFFFM
0

托福（TOEFL）

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)