There are split opinions about actions of children should be restricted. Guardians and educators have a responsibility of thriving a child. Former group of individuals support to be strict. On the other hand, latter group believes to give a freedom. Ahead of my opinion, both views must be critiqued in the ensuing paragraphs.
Discussing the former view, the supporters states that the behaviour of a growing child should be strictly controlled. As a parent and teacher, they have a pressure of growing a child properly. For an instance, several pupils have been given a freedom by their guardians, In a result, they misbehave with others, the things are been stolen by them and they don't respect their elders. Thus, parents and teachers need to be strict for making a child well mannered as well as a great person and a obedient child. A growing child is not mature enough to distinguish between good and bad, therefore, it is better for them to thrive in a strict environment.
Contradictorily, the counterparts believe that giving a freedom to children rather than restrict them is more desirable. Taking an example, a child is growing in an environment where there is no restrictions, thus, he can do all the things in his own way, moreover, overall development of that child would be always greater than the restricted one. Thereby, a child should never be pressurised by their parents or faculties. It will constrict the growth of that child. The children shall be allowed to live their life, additionally, they should have an allowance to decide satisfactory career for themselves. Lastly, for the desirable development and growth of a children, the freedom should be given by their parents and educators.
Overall, after discussing both views, each of them have several advantages and disadvantages. However, I opine that any child should be grown in a friendly environment. Thus, I go with the latter view because it is essential for their better future.
There
are split
opinions about actions of
children
should
be restricted
. Guardians and educators have a responsibility of thriving a
child
. Former group of individuals support to be strict.
On the other hand
, latter group believes to give a
freedom
. Ahead of my opinion, both
views
must
be critiqued
in the ensuing paragraphs.
Discussing the former
view
, the supporters states that the
behaviour
of a
growing
child
should be
strictly
controlled. As a
parent
and teacher, they have a pressure of
growing
a
child
properly
. For an instance, several pupils have been
given
a
freedom
by their guardians, In a result, they misbehave with others, the things
are been
stolen by
them and
they don't respect their elders.
Thus
,
parents
and teachers need to be strict for making a
child
well mannered
as well
as a great person and
a
obedient
child
. A
growing
child
is not mature
enough
to distinguish between
good
and
bad
,
therefore
, it is better for them to thrive in a strict environment.
Contradictorily
, the counterparts believe that giving a
freedom
to
children
rather
than restrict them is more desirable. Taking an example, a
child
is
growing
in an environment where
there is no restrictions
,
thus
, he can do all the things in his
own
way,
moreover
,
overall
development of that
child
would be always greater than the restricted one. Thereby, a
child
should never be
pressurised
by their
parents
or faculties. It will constrict the growth of that
child
. The
children
shall be
allowed
to
live
their life,
additionally
, they should have an allowance to decide satisfactory career for themselves.
Lastly
, for the desirable development and growth of a
children
, the
freedom
should be
given
by their
parents
and educators.
Overall
, after discussing both
views
, each of them have several advantages and disadvantages.
However
, I opine that any
child
should
be grown
in a friendly environment.
Thus
, I
go with
the latter
view
because
it is essential for their better future.