Education of the girl child is a burden. I am going to speak against this motion. How can educating the girl child be a burden when girls have proved themselves equal or even better than boys in all spheres of life? Girls are not remaining uneducated by their own will but they are being forbidden from receiving education because of the patriarchal families in our society. They are considered to be ‘temporary property’ as they have to move to their husband’s home after marriage, so it is not thought to be economically viable to spend on their education. It is considered more useful to spend money educating a son who will remain at home and earn and take care of parents in their old age, than to expend hard earned funds on a child who will leave. Also later on the parents have to spend a huge amount towards the dowry on the marriage of a girl. But, are these solid reasons to deprive a girl child of education? Agreed that a woman has to move to her husband’s home after marriage but if she will be educated, she will be able to up bring and educate her children better and even provide FINANCIAL support to her family if needed thereby contributing to a better society and overall development of a nation.