It’s terrible whenever children go missing and it’s something no parent should ever have to go through. For every high-profile missing child case that attracts huge amounts of media attention, there are loads of other cases that barely get reported at all. Without a doubt the best known case is that of Madeleine McCann, the three-year-old who went missing while on holiday with her family in the Portugues town of Praia Da Luz. Some 12 years later and she’s still not been found, despite some £11.75 million being spent on trying to find her. The huge amount of money spent on the Madeleine McCann case has frustrated a lot of people, while others seem to think it’s justified. Is it right that so much money has been spent on finding one child, or should there be a cap of some sort?
Yes, there should be a cap
The most obvious argument for a cap is that money can be spent trying to find other missing children. The fact remains that, despite millions being spent on trying to find Madeleine McCann, she still hasn’t been found and the police seem to have no significant leads. Basically, it looks like the chances of finding her now, unfortunately, are slimmer than ever before. Why are those working on the case continuing to receive more funding when the chances are that the funding isn’t going to result in Madeleine being found? Surely it’s better for the money to be spent on other cases. Would you rather millions be spent on not finding one child, or millions be spent finding even just a few other children? Surely anyone would prefer the money to be spent on finding other children.
No, there shouldn’t be a cap
But then, you’ve got to think of the parents. No parent would want the search for their missing child to end, so of course the parents of Madeleine McCann are going to keep accepting money and keep pushing for the investigation into her disappearance to continue. The chances of finding her now may be incredibly slim, but they’re her parents and even after all this time, they’re never going give up – how can they? Some might say it’s selfish for parents to allow so much money to be spent on finding their own missing child, but surely you can’t blame the parents for wanting their child to be found at whatever cost?
What do you think?
Ideally, for every missing child there would be enough money to keep the search going until that child is found. However, this isn’t an ideal world. There simply isn’t enough funding to keep the search going for lots of missing children. But then when you hear of millions and millions being spent to find one child, who still remains missing despite all the money spent, it’s reasonable to suggest that money could have been better spent potentially finding a number of missing children. If we look at the Madeleine McCann case, should there have been a cap? If there had been, who knows how many other missing children could have been found by now with the money. It’s a tricky issue. Ultimately, you want as many missing children as possible to be found. But how can you stop funding when there’s a chance a missing child could still be found?
