I do not feel the opposing viewpoints have been stated clearly. For example, is the cost for employers an issue, or even government regulations?
Within the second paragraph, I found that the following sentences were lacking explanation, "Some potential issues I will face are making my point clear and concise enough to change someone’s mind while providing enough information supporting my claim." I feel that the potential issues were not stated clearly since I'm not really told an issue. Personally, this is where I would write details as to what exactly needs to be proven to the opposing …show more content…
Collins is credible as she is a journalist that mainly writes about family issues for national and news sections. S. Pressman and R. H. Scott III have several articles on economic issues. M. Shepherd-Banigan and J. F. Bell have many articles pertaining to mother's who work. These all appear to be credible and useful.
The sources described do connect to the argument. In the description for, Why Americans like paid family and medical leave but can't agree on the details, because it has information about how it's beneficial but no one knows who should pay for leave. In, Paid Parental Leave and America's Youngest Poor, it describes how the FMLA isn't enough because of the restrictions that apply. In, Paid Leave Benefits Among a National Sample of Working Mothers with Infants in the United States, talks about how restricted paid time off can decrease mother and child's health. All of these I feel directly relate the argument.
Pertaining to the article, Why Americans like paid family and medical leave but can't agree on the details, Justina wrote, "It seems that Collins is arguing the fact that the issue with paid parental and family leave is not that it isn't beneficial, but that no one can agree on how to properly fund it," as a counterargument. As a rebuttal, it is stated that she believes there should be a nationally funded program for paid parental