It is important to instill the disciplined way of life in children, for their betterment. People usually formulate and lay certain rules to ensure that children remain disciplined. But in some countries there are very strict rules, while in others, there are very lenient rules. For the most effective results, the rules should be neither too strict, nor too lenient, so as to not make children feel burdened our bound, let them make independent choices, and to inspire them to be more creative.
By having stricter rules, the children feel burdened to follow only the laid guidelines, or leading only the established lifestyle. They feel as if they are bound by shackles. On the other hand, if the rules are not at all strict, children fail to understand the importance of discipline in life. For example, in India, children respect their elders and teachers, while in western world, they don’t. Hence, mildly strict rules, like in India are most suitable for children’s’ development.
When children are overburdened with rules, they lose the ability to make decisions in life, wherever and whenever necessary. They are not able to think independently. On the flip side, when there are almost no rules, children do not possess the maturity to make the right decisions or choices in life. For an instance, in countries like USA, with very lenient disciplinary policies, a huge number of children fall prey to numerous addictions – alcohol, smoking, drugs - to name a few, at a very young age. Hence, rules with average strictness are most effective for children’s well-being.
When the children are under a compulsion to obey only a particular set of rules their potential to being creative and imaginative keeps on decreasing with time. While, on having no compulsion, the children experience everything and have no need for imagining or creating. For example, in Saudi Arabia, where there are very strict rules, the children have very less imagination power and creative skills compared to children of other nations. Hence, mildly lenient rules can help children develop all the required skills while maintaining the discipline needed to acquire them.
Therefore, to conclude, it can be said that neither of the extremities are helpful for the holistic development of children. They have to be in a tactical environment which adjusts the level of strictness as per the needs, so as to give them an essence of freedom, while still understanding the importance of discipline in life. Only in this way can children develop most effectively. So, what are your views on this?
It is
important
to instill the disciplined way of
life
in
children
, for their betterment.
People
usually
formulate and lay certain
rules
to ensure that
children
remain disciplined.
But
in
some
countries there are
very
strict
rules
, while in others, there are
very
lenient
rules
. For the most effective results, the
rules
should be neither too
strict
, nor too
lenient
,
so as to
not
make
children
feel burdened our bound,
let
them
make
independent choices, and to inspire them to be more creative.
By having stricter
rules
, the
children
feel burdened to follow
only
the laid guidelines, or leading
only
the established lifestyle. They feel as if they
are bound
by shackles.
On the other hand
, if the
rules
are not at all
strict
,
children
fail to understand the importance of discipline in
life
.
For example
, in India,
children
respect their elders and teachers, while in western world, they don’t.
Hence
,
mildly
strict
rules
, like in India are most suitable for
children’s’
development.
When
children
are overburdened
with
rules
, they lose the ability to
make
decisions in
life
, wherever and whenever necessary. They are not able to
think
independently
. On the flip side, when there are almost no
rules
,
children
do not possess the maturity to
make
the right decisions or choices in
life
. For an instance, in countries
like USA
, with
very
lenient
disciplinary policies, a huge number of
children
fall prey to numerous addictions
–
alcohol, smoking, drugs
-
to name a few, at a
very
young age.
Hence
,
rules
with average strictness are most effective for
children’s
well-being.
When the
children
are under a compulsion to obey
only
a particular set of
rules
their potential to being creative and imaginative
keeps
on decreasing with time. While, on having no compulsion, the
children
experience everything and have no need for imagining or creating.
For example
, in Saudi Arabia, where there are
very
strict
rules
, the
children
have
very
less imagination power and creative
skills
compared to
children
of other nations.
Hence
,
mildly
lenient
rules
can
help
children
develop all the required
skills
while maintaining the discipline needed to acquire them.
Therefore
,
to conclude
, it can
be said
that neither of the extremities are helpful for the holistic development of
children
. They
have to
be in a tactical environment which adjusts the level of strictness as per the needs,
so as to
give them an essence of freedom, while
still
understanding the importance of discipline in
life
.
Only
in this way can
children
develop most
effectively
.
So
, what are your views on this?