It is suggested that doing community services without being paid should become a compulsory activity among the young. While this has admittedly certain benefits, I would contend that these are overshadowed by the drawbacks.
One argument advocating for volunteer work for the community revolves around individual benefits. Chief among these is that youngsters may utilize this activity to sharpen their interpersonal skills. Besides academic and professional knowledge acquired at school or university, soft skills, such as emotional intelligence and adaptability, are integral for their career paths. Therefore, this unpaid work warranting the aforementioned skills should be required. Working without profits, however, is likely to put a financial strain on the young. This is
because that they have not already been financially stable, and community services involving some additional expenses, for example, buying food and essential facilities for under-the-poverty-line people, driving them to overstretch themselves.
Another benefit could be postering solidarity among residents. Available assistance reassures people in difficulty, alleviating their sense of isolation, while volunteers are inclined to create, maintain, and strengthen social connections. As a result, this activity may bolster the robust community spirit. Yet it is crucial to recognize that obligating young people to do unpaid work goes against the values of a free and fair society to force a group of people to do something against their will. Worse still, this policy may breed the resentment as they would feel being used.
In conclusion, while forcing young people to aid the community without financial benefits presents undeniable advantages in terms of individual and societal level, I am convinced that these are eclipsed by the drawbacks associated with financial burdens and personal ethics.