The idea that students and young children have to learn about this is repulsive. Not for the fact that book makes them repulsive, but that these horrible things happen in the real world. The sooner that children identify the problem in these topics at an early age, the sooner they can be addressed, and therefore hopefully prevented. Some parents may argue that they want to prolong their child’s exposure to these ideas to keep their youths; in contradiction reading about these controversial issues do not differ from the state regulated programs such as the D.A.R.E program that teaches students about drug and violence awareness with the same idea that the sooner society teaches children the difference between right from wrong the better their chances. As long as the reading material is being taught, the instructor should identify the problem with a solution on how to fix it, just like in the war against drug and violence in schools.
Most teenagers find their time of seclusion when they are on their phones. Once their privacy is limited, teens are willing to do anything to gain it back, which can lead to rebellious actions and possibly illegal activities. There are many dangers on the web that can harm them so yes, you should apply spyware, but make your child aware or he/she might feel as though you don’t trust them. Let your child know that you trust them, but you want to make sure that they’re safe while surfing the web
First I will go on to state each opponents strongest argument and then I will go on to discuss who I feel won the debate putting my personal basis aside. Corissa’s strongest argument was that exposure to violence can cause aggression in children. Children will grow up to imitate what they see and think that violence is the norm. She justified her argument by stating the statistics of children who watch media violence compared to those who do not and stated that their long-term aspirations included being criminal or “thugs” instead of doctors a more socially expected profession. This went against Kara’s argument that there is no link between violence and children unless we were to look at other variables including mental illness or children who are exposed to
I believe sheltering children from violent media with the fear of them becoming violent or desensitized is the wrong thing to do but we should educate our children on the difference between right or wrong then exposing them to something that fake Therefore Gerard Jone doesn’t prove that violent media is actually good for children. Although people need to know and realize what actually doing to their child. He use logos in his article to convince his reader of his side of the argument. For example, he use a trouble girl that uses rap music for inspiration in expressing herself. He makes a point that nobody should ever deny a child to express themselves in any way
Harlan Coben’s editorial article “The Undercover Parent” (March 16,2008) suggests that putting spyware on your child’s computer is a good idea. Throughout the article Coben supports his thesis by first telling a short story, then listing different counterarguments throughout his paragraphs. Coben says that “Most parents won’t even consider it.” I agree with most of his points, but also disagree with a few. Here is my response. I agree with Coben on how we have to be wary on what kids do online.
Catcher in the Rye is a book about a teenager discovering himself, and shouldn’t be censored as it can be very useful and insightful for teenagers or people of the right mental capacity, as to appreciate the book. Blei’s argument, as to why banning the book is counter productive, is very insightful. While other critics argue that the profanities in the book should be ignored when considering banning the book, Blei accepts the profanities and points out that there are a multitude of other ways for kids to be exposed to such things in their
Spanking can be effective when a child is not listening to a parent. If a child isn’t following proper rules and disregarding their parents’ statement, then a spanking can enforce a form of respect that the child has to follow (Jasmine, 2015). It can be an awakening to reality as the child could now think of how their actions are deviant. Parents that don’t resolve to spanking as the first and only method of discipline is essential for both the parents and the child. I believe a parent should always try to enforce rules by talking and showing examples of how deviant actions are frowned upon.
This action, while deemed inappropriate for school, plays a huge role in furthering the themes of fascist and tyrannical governments, rebellion, and human desires. These themes are critical to the civic and moral discussion when choosing how far the government’s should reach, and 1984 excellently phrases the dilemma into an understandable scenario. While introducing these themes to elementary school students is understable, high schoolers approaching adulthood need to have insight into this discussion. Isolating students from the problem does not solve the problem that they are eventually going to encounter later
There is a real threat to the victim’s future being brought by self-defeating behaviour which is subtle and usually hard to notice. The effects of social exclusion should be explained to children early and in simple terms, so that they would understand the consequences and not behave in that manner. If children are brought up to condemn ostracising behaviour, they would grow up with the same mindset which would eliminate social exclusion between adults at work. It could even increase productivity of companies if people started talking about what they dislike instead of ostracizing the
However because Plato 's position and defense of censorship only takes into account the prevention of ideas that may morally corrupt the children of society, it does not account for the other problems that may be raised with the idea of censorship. As aforementioned, the many problems with censorship, such as the lack of freedom, and imposed biases, now become valid. Because the party at hand is no longer just children (may be possible young adults or adults). The said party now possesses such an intellectual capacity to properly evaluate such ideas, and censoring said mediums of art and literature take away the action of evaluating such ideas. Regardless of whether or not the idea is correct or wrong, just or unjust, it can be argued that every party possesses the right to evaluate the ideas in the first place.
Banning books would deprive children of a real education about the world. If children don 't know about the world and what other people say and think or what others ' cultures and beliefs are how could they possibly grow to be informed, intelligent, and well-rounded individuals? True, some texts may promote damaging lifestyles to young minds, but again parents and teachers are more than capable of teaching their children what is right and not allowing their children to be exposed to harmful content with age restrictions. You can always teach your kids to be smart and make right choices. If they grow up believing certain things because they only have one narrow perspective, how will they be able to learn who they truly are as a person or what they really believe as a person?
Is privacy really important?Do kids have a choice?According to Harlan Coben teens and kids who have access to the internet should be monitored by parents or by spyware.I agree with Mr.Coben because we should know what teens or kids of today go on while not being monitored. Parents should monitor their kids use of the internet even with spyware.I think spyware is a good thing to be used on kids.According to Harlan Coben ignoring your kid is negligence cause then that shows your kid that they could do or go on anything without being caught. Therefore,Harlan Coben has found that some will say that it 's better just to use parental blocks.But the truth is parental blocks don 't work,people can easily change the parental
In conclusion Leo’s argument has great examples of comparison and a great appeal to the reader’s emotions. Without a doubt, the Littleton massacre has viciously scared American society; however it was not violent video games that led to their crimes, but rather a combination of neglect, isolation, and environment. Awareness relating teenagers’ surroundings, ideology, and family or youth deviance, among all, may explain these crimes. Throughout the essay Leo utilizes various strategies to increase the emotional impact on a reader. His concern for society’s children overlaps his more vital concern that is the extent of violence exposed in video games.
Social theory implies that criminal behavior is learned through close relations with others, it asserts that children are born good but learned to be bad. This theory states that all people have the potential to become criminals because modern society presents many opportunities for illegal activity but one has the choice to not engage. If a child is raised in a clean community that has strong morals and if that child has positive role models at home and in the community, they more likely to grow up achieving her goals. In all while it maybe true that your surroundings and the people around you can be the reason behind someone becoming apart of the criminal justice system, but in my oppioin I believe it the person themselves. Whether we like it or not we know right from wrong, we may not see it when we are young but as time progresses we become
“ We rely on the real world or teachers and parent to guard against bullies- do we just dismiss bullying on the internet and all it entails because we are entering difficult ethical ground?” (Paragraph 8). With bullies i the real world we can stop them because we see who it is. With bullies at school o another physical place they can or will physically harm the child, but mental trauma from cyberbullies is even harder to cope with. We need a law against the cruelty towards others in all states if it 's for children or adults. Cyber bullying can end a child as easily as adults can destroy a child hood.