In the past decade democracies around the world have evolved and are continuing to dominate in the political spectrum as the most suitable type of governance for the sustainability of the market economy that we all live in. One of many rights that democracies seem to prioritize on is the right of any human being to freedom of choice, children in particular. Many believe that this given by birth liberty also entails freedom of leisure activities, however some people tend to opt for what their offsprings are ought to do in their free time or not themselves as they opine that younger generations have not reached enough maturity to be able to make their own decisions. Although these concerns are justifiable, in my personal opinion, there should be enough room for both sides of the argument, as claiming one point of view to the full extend could induce some challenges, namely one’s mental seclusion or, on the contrary, hazardous outcomes for one’s physical well-being.
On the one hand, proponents of parents’ involvement in child’s free time planning opine that such resolution is reasonable, because it insures control over things the youngster is exposed to, therefore, allowing his nurturing stage stay as progressive as possible. To clarify, having enough control over what the person growing up watches in his free time provides parents with an opportunity to limit entertainment to video lectures or documentaries or reading material in the form of classical books, which would pay dividends to the child in the long run by improving his erudition and mental development. Furthermore, parental control could also span over the social environment. To expand on this, older generations, if given organizational rights to the youngster’s free time, could restrict access to peers that seem confrontational and having potential for bad influence on the child, this way paving a way for a healthy social life of the individual. Thus, there’s a strong sentiment leaning towards imposing curtailments on the child’s leisure time as it proves to be possessing numerous advantages that benefit parents as well as the child himself.
On the other hand a considerable part of the public claims that lack of parental control over what the offspring is indulging into proves to be very positive as it promotes ones democratic and active lifestyle that can contribute to the development of social features that are in high demand in our fast-paced society. It is believed that having exposure to any type of content allows human to absorb as much controversial information as possible, therefore nurturing critical thinking abilities from a young age. This, in its turn, would allow a young person perceive various world concepts in a multifaceted manner, giving room for experimental and creative thinking that is highly regarded in problem solving. Hence, absence of control over the child’s free time allows a person to become an easy-going and open-minded adult in the future, which, same as before, could bring a heap of advantages both to parents and their offsprings.
In conclusion, it is once again important to highlight the importance of both parental involvement and a lack thereof in youngster’s leisure time and the balance between two. Without watching over immature adolescents could mean that they might commit unreasonable and harmful acts that endanger their physical and mental well-being, while the total control may result into the child developing into a narrow-minded and very secluded character. Therefore, it is important to compromise and not go to the extreme as child’s upbringing is a very subtle matter that is needed to be treated with utmost diligence and thought.