Ashley+M.+-+NHD+MEMO

Home STUDENT NHD MEMOS ESSENTIAL QUESTION:

//REVOLUTION, REACTION, REFORM--//

//HAS THE SEXUAL REVOLUTION GIVEN WOMEN MORE OPPORTUNITIES AND IMPROVED FAMILY LIFE STYLE?//

Position Statement: The sexual revolution improved womens' lives because it opened opportunities in the public sphere, but the revolution went too far in the private sphere as it has undermined families and forced children to grow up too fast.

ASHLEY M

__ ** Memo One ** __ Since the 1950s, sex has become a more common topic as decades go on. According to Arthur D Hlavaty, from Salem History, before the 1950s, the two major things keeping sexual morality were STDs and unwanted pregnancy. At that time, unwanted pregnancy was usually because some families could not afford many children. When some STDs became treatable and birth control came into affect during the 1950s, sexual morality began to weaken. Women's appearance began to change at the same time because sex was more often accepted and desired. Sex appeal was popular in women because it made them feel more youthful. "One of the first changes in dress, especially for women, came about because of the British-based youth revolution, which redefined the idea of feminine beauty emphasizing youth and sex appeal." (Sue Bailey) The sexual revolution became popular rapidly because over time, it became more that just about sex.

Has the sexual revolution given women more opportunities and improved family life style?
 * Research Question: **

**Thesis Statement:** The sexual revolution improved women's lives because it opened new opportunities in the public sphere, but the revolution went to far in the private sphere as it is undermining families and forcing children to grow up too fast.

How far should premarital sex be expanded in today's society? How sex is used today has changed people, has been changed by people, is still changing, and is continuing at an unfortunate rate. This is because of the sexual revolution; the time when premarital sex became accepted for men and women, and when it was okay for women to have personal responsibilities, and depend on themselves, rather than another man. Has the sexual revolution given women more opportunities and improved family life style? That was it's goal, by women, to expand freedoms and modernize the US. But, once it began, it's fait could not be determined or controlled. Over all, the sexual revolution improved women's lives because it opened new opportunities in the public sphere, but the revolution went too far in the private sphere as it is undermining families and forcing children to grow up too fast.

The sexual revolution started during the 1960s and 70s as people started waiting longer to get married. Sex became more recognizable in everyday life. Fore women to prove their interest, they had to dress the part. "Women's clothing took on a sexy, carefree look, and women began to wear less restrictive and fewer undergarments, donning garments such as bikini panties, pantyhose, and stretch, seamless bras. They worse see-through blouses with miniskirts and garments decorated with large, prominently placed zippers and buttons to create a message of easy access" (Bailey 1). Women were trying to prove that they didn't want to be viewed as something controlled by society. They wanted to prove that they could rebel as much as a man could. Women were affected the most by the revolution because of the new sexual liberalism and the common interest in women's rights. According to McAnulty, from Salem Histroy, the women's liberation movement, what we know as Feminism, was also a factor of the sexual revolution because feminists believed the sexual revolution was the upcoming of women's total freedom, "Mainstream feminism advocated political, social, and sexual equality for men and women." (McAnulty) This was a time when women were searching for equality, and their determination strengthened the revolution over time.

Popular culture was also a large influence on American society during the sexual revolution. Media was containing more sexual content in the 60s and 70s; when, before that time, it was closely monitored. "The trend toward allowing printed matter to be sold regardless of its sexual content continued and escalated" (Hlavaty 1). Hlavaty explains that novels, movies, and music began to use "forbidden words" to draw attention. Media was challenging traditions, when not even a decade ago such words as "virgin" or "seduction" were dared to be used. There were many opposers to the sexual revolution, but it continued to become more popular as getting involved in the revolution became too easy. According to McAnulty, from Salem History, the consequences of premarital sex were forgotten with the improved methods of birth control and STD treatments. This made it more common and gave young people more freedom to "experiment" when not under parental control. They question of the decade became: "Why not?" Sex became an extremely common lifestyle choice during the 60s and 70s. It was highly influenced upon Americans and continued to impact the rest of the 20th century.

The sexual revolution evolved from numerous conflicts and disagreements. The 50s and 60s signals a dramatic change in American society; it was the breaking free from the traditional, conservative ideas of the early century. The youth revolution in Britain was one cause of this. "As the youth revolution matured, an emphasis on being single, having fun, and enjoying freedom from responsibilities emerged" (Bailey). But, trend of lack in responsibility led to an even greater rebel on the conservatives. It began with The Pill. The Pill changed women's lives not only scientifically, but how they were looked at by society. According to Hlavaty, The Pill was first invented by John Rock in May, 1960. John Rock was ironically a Roman Catholic physician who expected the church would accept his contraceptive. The original goal for The Pill was to "allow married women to limit the number of children they bore so that they would not be worn out by year after year of childbirth and to space their children so that they could give each on enough attention" (Hlavaty). Therefore, the idea for the oral contraceptive was not originally to promote premarital sex. But, that's what some believed The Pill was going to lead to. "The Pill's revolutionary breakthrough, that it allowed women to separate sex from procreation, was what conservatives feared most" (PBS). According to PBS online, the conservatives thought that the risk of pregnancy was what kept sexual lives civil. With the contraceptive, women could have premarital sex and have affairs "anytime, anyplace." Although The Pill was a fantastic scientific advancement, many disagreed with it. Many people fought the revolution, yet it still made a huge impact.

There were many groups of people constantly working against those promoting the sexual revolution. According to McAnulty, the "older generations" did not support the revolution because they felt it was a threat to marriage, families, and religion. During the 1950s, prostitution and pornography was said to be blamed for the total breakdown of "traditional morality." "Prostitutes in particular became the symbol of degradation and sin..." (McAnulty). These generations thought that the revolution was influencing the new generation to become involved with activities even more immoral than premarital sex. A group promoting the sexual revolution was the hippie movement of the 1960s and 70s. According to Hlavaty, hippies followed "free-love" ideals. "They felt that the sexual revolution could be both personally and socially transformative" (Hlavaty). This became a respected group for many because of their non-judgemental lifestyle and relief from "gender stereotyping," or homosexuality. By the 1980s, changes were finally starting to be made against the sexual revolution. According to Martinson, from Salem History, these changes occured as Ronald Reagan became president. "Ronald Reagan's election as president of the United States signaled a shift from the "anything goes" attitude that seemed to characterize those [the 1960s and 70s] decades" (Martinson). Reagan wanted to shift the country back to the their traditional ways of living. A great leader was finally involved to represent the ideas of conservatives against the revolution. Even though the sexual revolution had a strong opinion that lasted decades, the fighters of the revolution never gave up.

The sexual revolution had the strongest impact on women as individuals and as a group. In recent history, women have been fighting for equality from society. The sexual revolution gave women an opportunity to make a difference for themselves; to have sexual equality. According to McAnulty, around the 1970s was when improvements in economics, social customs, and "gender roles" were being made. "For the first time, women were going to work in factories, offices, and retail stores or going to college in order to pursue professional careers" (McAnulty). Since this was a time that women became more independent, they did not necessarily need a husband, so they wanted to run their sexual lives the same way as men did. But, not everyone respected these desires of women. "[In society], a man with a rich and varied sex life was to be envied, but a woman with the same number of partners was a slut" (Hlavaty). To a degree, this statement is still true in today's society. Women are more often less respect for participating in sexual activity than men. Either way, there have always been people against women's equal rights, and women have gone through a lot to overcome these opinions. A major problem with equal rights in the beginning of the sexual revolution was women controlling their own bodies. Birth control became a way for women to take control themselves. According to PBS, when The Pill was first used, it was nearly 100% effective. After many complaints of side effects from women, nothing was done to improve the product--not even when there were reports of blood clots, strokes, and possibly cancer. The producers of The Pill and the FDA assured doctors that it was safe, but they only did this for profitable purposes. Soon, more problems emerged. Eventually, after non-reproductive problems, there was media and advertisement informing people of the danger in the contraceptive. So, only then, were there investigations and hearings toward the topic. But, at this time only men were leading the hearings and they denied women's presence. So, even though there were changes being made to improve the health of women using the product, they didn't have any say in how that was going to be done. The build-up of the constant rejections toward women and their health was, to them, completely unacceptable; they were not going to allow it anymore. Women protested for control of their bodies. This eventually led to professional respect for women as pharmacies and others involved with The Pill distribution became more cautious. Therefore, women earned their part in the sexual revolution, and they made a heavy impact on sexual equality.




 * Feminists started the sexual revolution. They changed themselves and their behavior, but they changed men and the rest of society as well; critics are afraid this is not for the better. "Feminists may have destroyed the chastity of women, but they certainly destroyed the security of marriage" (Erin McBride). The sexual revolution improved women's lives because it opened opportunities in the public sphere, but the revolution went to far in the private sphere as it is undermining families and forcing children to grow up too fast. Thanks to the sexual revolution the divorce rate in the US has increased drastically. This is putting more children into a home with only one parent. Because of divorce, children are more often times by themselves. This was a negative turn to the revolution. These children need child care or after school care so they are not forced to fend for themselves at too early of an age. We need to preserve their innocence while they can still be persuaded to stay clear of drugs, alcohol, violence, and sex. If these things are introduced at a young age, the kids may not know how to handle them due to lack of knowledge. Children would also be taken better care of if women's jobs were more generous and understanding with the time they need to put aside from work for their families. Women could be more successful with their family life if they did not feel under pressure within their workplace. **


 * The overall effect of the sexual revolution was both positive and negative for women; they acquired equal rights, but this was because of the exponential immorality they displayed over the course of generations. This immorality negatively impacted women as their desire for a "family" corrupted. Sex distanced itself from marriage overtime, which made traditional families less common and less important, "Sex became casual. It no longer was proceeded by a long period of dating, going steady or being "pinned." Sex became a date activity like going to a movie. Eventually with the present-day "hook-up," sex was divorced from dating altogether" (Majority Rights). Women are now now often getting divorced and supporting a "broken family" because of the trends that have be shown over the last few decades. Broken families are considered those with divorced parents, or only one prime parent. According to Knoji Knowledge Network, children with divorced parents tend to be insecure and lack self-confidence. These mentalities are often denied by the kids, so they aren't visible to others. Often, if they don't ask for help, over time, these insecurities can make the kids vulnerable to anger, depression, revenge, alcohol, crimes, drugs etc. more so than kids with the traditional family. Therefore the mother's lack of interest or inability to give their kids as much attention as possible can end up negatively affecting them. The sexuality of these women; divorced, possible affairs, multiple boyfriends when not married; are all influencing their children. Which is why the sexual revolution has increased how common sex is for every generation. If people became more aware of this, children could be protected from these influences, and let children be children. **


 * According to Erin McBride, its a domino effect. Over time, women have degraded themselves to a point where men believe they can "get with" them, without ever having a relationship. So, women are caught between choosing one of these men, or trying to wait for a respectable man, whom is becoming harder and harder to seek. This has led to more "friends" than "couples." I believe in equal rights, and I believe that men should not be superior to women, but a woman should not be given more responsibilities than a man either. Because of the recently frequent divorce, there have been more battles over custody of kids; which is often times, when women are have more "rights" or responsibilities than men. frequently, "If a husband fights over custody of children or visitation rights, the wife simply tells the police that he has threatened her and gets a restraining order or she reports him to Child Protective Services as a child abuser" (Majority Rights). This is suggesting that women have more rights than men when it comes to their children and families. But, if they are going to be given these obligations over men, they should receive exceptional understanding in the work place. Single mothers need to juggle their kids, and work to support their kids. Companies need to understand that the children are the future, and family needs to be most important. Sometimes women are denied this understanding. Although women have the legal rights to a maternity leave, it can still affect their jobs negatively when they have to take one. According to Daily Mail, multiple women in the US and European countries said "returning to work after having a child [puts up] an invisible 'maternal wall' in the workplace that reduces their chance of promotion." These women also said they found it harder to take off work or return from taking off work when needing to care for their child at. Work places should be more cautious of the struggles women have with responsibilities to both kids, and a job. This way their children can be properly raised and cared for so they have as many opportunities as children of a traditional family. **


 * Some researchers of family relations believe that children with single parents are not deprived of opportunity more than other kids with traditional families because the most involved parent is always the mother. The mother always spends more time with the children than the father. According to Caroline Wilbert, "Children have the same amount of time with their biological mothers, regardless of the type of father figure in the household." Another type of nontraditional family are those with only one biological parent with a step-parent. Wilbert goes on to say that when the mother has remarried, the child gets the same amount of attention from these two parents as they would with two biological parents. "[There is] no significant difference in time spent with remarried biological fathers, cohabiting biological fathers, or cohabiting stepfathers compared to first-married biological fathers." Therefore, as long as there is a father figure, children are not necessarily "better off" having a traditional family because they receive the same amount of attention and influence from their families. **


 * Specialists on children's behavior believe it's not how much attention each child gets that contributes to children not reaching their full potential. There are many other negative effects of having unmarried parents. Unstable mentality has been previously mentioned, but growing up with single and/or divorced parents can also lead to instability of income in their futures. According to Patrick Fagan, Ph. D., "Whether or no a child's parents are married and stay married has a massive affect on his or her future prosperity and that of the next generation." This could be because of some of the ideals that people living in poverty or in poorer areas are promoting. Fagan goes on to explain, "Today, the economic and social future of children in the poor and the middle class is being undetermined by a culture that promotes teenage sex, divorce, cohabitation, and out-of-wedlock birth" (Fagan). Therefore, children of single parents are more likely to live off of an unstable income in the future because it often opes them up to an irresponsible lifestyle. This is because it is harder for their single parents to provide and set a good example for them, versus a traditional family that has the time and often, more money. **


 * There has always been a controversy debating whether or not women are treated equally in the workplace. Christina Hoff Sommers, from New York Times, admits that the government is aware of the wage-gaps in the US. "The 1963 Equal Pay Act, which bans sex discrimination in the workplace, has failed." But, Sommers argues that there are other reasons for the pay-gap that are related to men as well, so it is not a result of sex discrimination. "There are lots of other reasons men might earn more than women, including differences in education, experience, and job tenure" (Sommers, New York Times). This New York Times article debates that women want different things and make different choices toward their occupation, which is the main factor exhibiting a lower pay. There has been a lot of talk based on these pay-gaps and unfair treatment in the workplace, but these problems are not based off of discrimination toward women. **


 * As the divorce rate continues to increase, single women responsible for children are more common. These women have different necessities than men, and when given maternity leave, it is their right to come back to the workplace given their original place. As mothers, there are different responsibilities that may affect their jobs that their workplaces need to respect and understand. Even when married, women still require time off for sick children etc. over married men. But, the lack of support and sympathy from their jobs are restricting their rights. According to Claire Ellicott, from Mail newspaper, real women are feeling discriminated against when juggling a child and an occupation. According to Claire Ellicott, women fear they can't hold a job with a child without risk of pay-cut, and/or with no advancement in their career. Women are being discriminated against in this category because they have extra responsibilities that men don't have. There are very few men who have children that interfere with their jobs. **


 * There are many children with working parents in the US today. But whether the child should be left alone after school or go to an after-school care has often been questioned. Darcy Olson, from SIRS Discoverer believes that after school programs are just a way for the government to increase their investments from schools. She agrees that children shouldn't be left alone when that can be controlled, but she doesn't think that after-school cares have an impact on the kids worth counting. "No more than 12% of children aged five through 12 ever care for themselves, and those who do are alone for about one hour a day average" (Olson). She explains that she doesn't believe there are enough reasons or influences factoring towards the children negatively that have to do with being home alone. "Research shows that simply opening more after-school programs is extremely unlikely to reduce crime" (Olson). Olson doesn't imagine that giving parents more opportunities to have their children taken care of will better prepare them for the future, or keep them away from drugs, alcohol, crime, etc. Therefore not everyone views after-school child care as "help;" it doesn't have positive or negative influences on children, it is nutral. **


 * Parents who are not around to take care of their children after school feel it is common knowledge not to leave them home alone. It's wrong to leave children to fend for themselves and forces them to grow up too fast. The children who are not given the option of after-school care are those of less wealthy areas who's schools cannot afford the daycare. Isn't it these less wealthy areas who have higher crime rates and drug and alcohol use rates within teens? According to Marilyn Gardner, from Christian Science Monitor, parents are urgently searching for available, affordable daycare. Some struggle to find other kids' houses to go to or leave them with responsible adults. "Millions of working parents share similar concerns as they watch the clock and hope that their after-school arrangements are in place" (Gardner). Parents from these schools know the consequences of leaving their children to raise themselves, and it is their goal throughout the day for their children to never be lonely, since they, themselves cannot spend time with them. According to Camp Depot, an educators' website for extracurricular activities, there is a never ending number of benefits toward after-school programs. Among the most important are that it does keep all children out of trouble. "The after-school hours are the time when juvenile crime hits its peak" (Camp Depot). Being in an after school program protects younger children of this criminal activity, along with becoming involved with the criminal activity. It is also proven to help kids with their academics because there is always someone to help them with their school work who better understands it. "For many children, their reading and math scores have improved in large part because after-school programs allow them to focus attention on areas in which they are having difficulties" (Camp Depot). Therefore, there is no reason to bring the kids home if it would be more beneficial in school to give them the extra help. And, if the parents aren't home, after-school programs would protect them from themselves and others. **


 * The ways every new generation is raised is the product of the sexual revolution. The sexual revolution changed the lives of Americans in the 60s, and the generations of our grandparents, our parents, and those following have all been forced down different paths because of the revolution. But the resulting effect today has ended up being less beneficial to americans than it has been completely degrading of our morals and traditions. The revolution started because women wanted equal rights, and they figured if their duties toward sex were the same and they held similar responsibilities, the could eventually acquire equal treatment. Although women achieved equal treatment, they sacrificed things that may not have been worth it. The importance of a family was forgotten. Sex went from being a sacred action held between dedicated partners to just a simple date. Relationships have become harder to maintain, which has led to about one out of every three children being raised by a single/divorced parent. Children often raise themselves because of their mother's unforgiving job or unavailability; this is when the kids become "grown up" before it is even physically noticeable. At this rate, the presence of negative situations within the family will never improve. Children look to their parents as role models, and it is obvious when sex is one of the biggest parts of their lives. This is the example that the kids follow; earlier and earlier as generations go by. "Parents often talk about the younger generation as if they didn't have anything to do with it." ~Haim Ginott **** It is the parent's job to preserve their child's innocence, and they need to recognize the problems at hand, so we can make a difference. **

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY **

Bailey, Sue. "Fashions and Clothing." Salem History. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Apr. 2012. <http://history.salempress.com/doi/full/10.3331/ This web article is a secondary source; the author is credible because her research is put toward an online database collection. This article explains the fashion styles of the 1950s and 1960s, and how the affected the sexuality of women at the time. I will use this information to compare how the clothing of American women affected the sexual revolution and vice versa.

Chavez, Marky. "Effects on Children of a Broken Family." Knoji Knowledge Network. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2012. <http://divorce-separation.knoji.com/ This secondary source is a web article; this author is credible because on this website, he is considered a "knowledge source" being a researcher. He has researched for and published almost 1,000 articles on this network. This source talks about the struggles children with broken families or divorced parents go through, and the possible negative affects of receiving limited attention as a child. I will be using this information to back up my opinion that women are potentially putting their families in danger when they do not have a healthy relationship with their spouse.

Ellicott, Claire. "Maternity leave 'is wrecking women's hopes of promotion.'" Mail Online. Daily Mail, 30 Nov. 2009. Web. 18 Apr. 2012. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1231901/ This primary source is an online newspaper article; the author is a regular writer published in the //Mail Online// newspaper, therefore she is credible. This article explains the uncomfortable feelings of working women who have been on maternity leave along with US and European countries' statistics of women's positions in their line of work. I will be using this information to prove that women leaving for maternity do not always get equal treatment, even though, legally they should; this will back up my opinions about what single mothers can provide for their children.

Fagan, Patrick, Ph.D. "How Broken Families Rob Children of Their Chances for Future Prosperity." //Heritage Foundation//. N.p., 11 June 1999. Web. 20 Apr. 2012. . This web article is a primary source because the author has statistics that support his opinion; he is interpreting the data. The author is credible because he is a specialist on his topic; he has a Ph.D. The article shows that children growing up with broken families tend to have a smaller income in their futures. I will be using this data to back up my opinion that children are affected negatively by broken families versus the traditional family.

Gardner, Marilyn. "An After-School Struggle to Juggle Kids and Work." SIRS Discoverer. N.p., 2007. Web. 26 Apr. 2012. <http://sks.sirs.com/ This SIRS database article is a secondary source. The author is credible because her research was published on a reliable database. The article reports the actions taken by worried parents who are not given the option of after-school care when they are not home to take care of them. I will be using this information to back up my opinion that children need after-school care (if their parents are not around) to keep them out of trouble.

Hlavaty, Arthur D. "Sexual Revolution." Salem History. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Apr. 2012. <http://history.salempress.com/doi/full/10.3331/ This web article is a secondary source; the author is credible because his research is put toward an online database collection. This article explains how advancements in technology, pop culture, and the arts lead to the sexual revolution in the 1960s. I will use this information to explain why some Americans were persuaded toward the sexual revolution.

Magunson-Martinson, Scott. "Marriage and Divorce." //Salem History//. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Apr. 2012. <http://history.salempress.com/action/ This web article is a secondary source; the author is credible because his research is put toward an online database collection. This article explains the differences in marriage and divorce after the sexual revolution in the 1960s versus before. I will use this information to explain the outcomes of premarital sex.

McAnulty, Richard D. "Sexual Revolution." Salem History. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Apr. 2012. <http://history.salempress.com/doi/full/10.3331/ This web article is a secondary source; the author is credible because his research is put toward an online database collection. This article explains how sexuality became a freedom in the 1970s aka. sexual liberalism. I will use this information to relate sexual liberalism to later freedoms and rights it may have lead to.

McBride, Erin Ann. "How the Sexual Revolution Killed the Common Date." Meridian Magazine. N.p., 8 Mar. 2011. Web. 17 Apr. 2012. . This online magazine article is a secondary source; the author is credible because she is a common writer and social media engagement marketing consultant, therefore she regularly studies human behavior which is relative to my topic. This article is about the past trends of sexuality between man-and-woman relationships. She explains why some relationships are good and why some end up bad. I will be using this information to compare "love" to current relationships and why some relationships are only based on "sex."

"Men are the Losers of the Sexual Revolution." Majority Rights. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Apr. 2012. <http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/ This secondary source is a web article, but it could also be considered a blog because readers can post comments; I think it is credible because a lot of the information found in it matches other information I found on the web and databases. Also, the website in which it is found is based on women equality, which was one of my focuses. The article explains how sex became more common over time, and how it has affected family life present day. I will use this information to prove how the sexual revolution impacted the morality of the traditional family.

Olson, Darcy. "Government Should Stay Out of After School Care." SIRS

Discoverer. N.p., Sept. 2000. Web. 26 Apr. 2012. . This SIRS database article is a secondary source. The author is credible because her research was published onto a reliable online database. This article explains the authors reasoning as to why after-school programs are pointless and do not benefit children at all; it is just a government scam. I will be using this information to argue my opinion that do children need after-school care.

"The Pill." //PBS//. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2012. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/ This web article is a secondary source; it is credible because it was published online through PBS. This article goes into detail about human social behavior during the sexual revolution, along with events that lead to it and problems it caused. I will use this information to explain the downfalls of the sexual revolution along with the social controversy.

Sommers, Christina Hoff. "Fair Pay Isn't Always Equal Pay." New York Times. N.p., 21 Sept. 2010. Web. 23 Apr. 2012. <http://nytimes.com/2010/09/22/ This New York Times article is a secondary source; this author is creditable because she is a regular reporter for New York Times, and has done multiple studies on women's rights; she considers herself an anti-feminist or equity feminist. This article argues that women are equal in the workplace; that women receive a lower pay for the same reasons that men do, and it is only more common because of decisions that women make for themselves. I will be using this information to argue against my opinion that women are discriminated against in the workplace, and that they need to have equal rights for the benefits of their children.

Wilbert, Caroline. "Kids in Non-Traditional Two-Parent Families Not Shortchanged on Parental Involvement, Researchers Say." //Web MD//. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Apr. 2012. . This web article is a secondary source. The author is credible because I have matched some of her information with other cites, I am just using her as an opinion of "other researchers." This article explains the perspective of broken families not really affecting the children, that they are influenced and make decisions the same way as children of traditional families. I will be using this information to argue my opinion that divorced parents/broken families have a negative influence on the children and their future.

"Working for Children and Families: Safe and Smart After-School Programs." Camp Depot. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2012. <http://www.campdepot.com/ This online article is a secondary source. The website is credible because it was produced by educators, who have a respected opinion toward school-related care. The article explains the benefits of after-school programs, and how they positively affect students. I will be using this information to back up my opinion that after-school care does have an influence on children, and that it is positive.