In the essay Licensing Parents, LaFollette argues that the state should require all parents to be licensed (182). Although LaFollette examines some theoretical and practical objections to his assertion, he pays no particular attention to how parenting could be precisely defined as potentially dangerous for children, what specific skill would be required for parenting to be exercised safely, and how reliable such skill could be. determined. In this article, I maintain that since LaFollette's argument does not provide adequate clarification of the definition of harm and the attributes of jurisdiction, his argument must be seriously revised. After describing LaFollette's basic rationale for licensing parents, I will indicate that LaFollette's ambiguous explanations of harm and competence attributes are problematic. Furthermore, I will show that even if parenting satisfies LaFollette's criteria, there are particular reasons why it should not be permitted. While this does not prove that LaFollette's idea is wrong, I will suggest that if LaFollette offers a better definition of harm and an adequate explanation of jurisdiction, his argument will be stronger and more feasible. LaFollette begins his argument by presenting the fact that "our society normally regulates a number of activities" such as driving, practicing medicine, law, pharmacy, etc. (182). Furthermore, the decision to restrict such activities stems from a plausible, but inexplicitly worded, justification that the restricted activities could be "potentially dangerous to others", "the safe execution of the activities requires a certain skill" and “we have a moderately reliable database”. procedure for determining this competence” (183). Accordingly, it is theoretically desirable... middle of article ...... to avoid LaFollette's conclusion, it is a matter of finding particular reasons why licensing parents n While it is not theoretically desirable, I have demonstrated that it is actually possible to find such compelling evidence to disconfirm its conclusion, because it does not take into account the distinct nature of parenting. Therefore, licensing to parents seems to be LaFollette's creative approach to looking at our society from a non-intuitive perspective. Although this article does not prove that LaFollette's argument is false, the shortcomings discussed in this article could lead to various misinterpretations of his argument. Therefore, if LaFollette could offer a clearer argument to clear up the misunderstanding about what he actually meant by prejudice and jurisdiction, his argument would garner more support than objections. Works Cited LaFollette, Hugh. 1980. “Parental Permission.” Philosophy and public affairs 9:182-97.