Some argue that all young children should be required to stay with full-time education until they are at least 18 years old. Do you agree or disagree? v.2

It is claimed that teenagers should become full-time students until they reach at least 18 years old. In my opinion, I disagree with this point of view. Those proponents in favor of such view do believe that the main reason why schoolchildren should learn at school all day long is that the more time they spend on studying, the more useful knowledge they could gain, the more success they have once they enter the world of works. Nevertheless, I refute this perspective, seeing that besides knowledge gained at classroom context, other hands-on experience and social skills, which are seldom attain if children take so long to stay at school, are much more crucial. For instance, it is true that managers wouldnot recruite those job hunters who have no team spirit and public speaking skill, in spite of the fact that they have vast knowledge in their field. Moreover, apart from school career, children have right to indulge in their favourite hobbies and appreciate sentimental value. It stands to reason that more and more students in this day and age have been put under enormous pressure, including from school, peers, and even their parents' expectations. Consequently, they could easily suffer psychological problems in default of leisure time, when they could put their mind at ease and their interpersonal relationship could be lost gradually. If, for example, schoolchildren are forced to learn all day long without any spare time for spiritual comforts, then it is highly likely that they would suffer from stress or even intend to commit suicide and their special bond with other family members could be undermined due to the lack of family time. In conclusion, I disagree with the stance that full-time education until children are at least 18 years old ought to be required in educational settings.