Friday, December 19, 2008

“Children should be able to decide what their futures are without interference from their parents.”

I think that children should have a free reign regarding their future. After all, they are the ones experiencing it. At the same time, there are many disadvantages regarding a free reign as well. What if a child decides that he wants to have a dangerous occupation? Surely he will get hurt in the future. The parents have to grieve at this point. My reaction towards this topic is mixed; I feel that there is no sure answer. However, perhaps by listing out the points for each argument, I may be able to make up my mind.
Should children have a free reign? Perhaps if they are sensible enough at an early age, the parents may trust the child to make the right decision. Children deserve the right to choose their future. They may have toiled their entire life, secretly dreaming of becoming a fashion designer, when suddenly the parents say that the child must be a doctor. The dreams of these children get crushed. They think that their parents do not expect them to shine as a fashion designer. Their self-confidence vaporises like smoke. Children should probably have a free reign. They may be sensible enough to know that being a roller coaster engineer is probably not very profitable; but rather being an interior designer may be quite invigorating after all. In serious cases, children even take their own life as a sign of desperation. A college first year took his life after finding his parents’ dream job of being an IT professional wasn’t what it was cut out to be. In his departing note, he said that all his life he had wanted to be a professor of Political Science. His parents had denied him this opportunity, and he in turn denied them a happy life. On a rather sad note, I must conclude this paragraph by saying that it may be better if children decided their own futures. Should parents have a say in their children’s future? Perhaps if the parent understands the child well enough to know his true ambitions, the parent could have a say in the matter. Parents who do not encourage the child; do not drop them off at soccer practice, ballet class and parties; do not attend PTA meetings; and tuck the child into bed, are completely and utterly missing the point of being a parent. At this rate, the parent would not know what class the child is in. However there are many parents who live for their children; and I believe that these are the people who should have a say in their child’s future. They will understand fully well that the child’s ambition is not to be traffic conductor but rather a lawyer. If the child says, “Mommy, I want to be a pirate!” a parent who has no idea how old the child is would probably say, “Ok, but pirates have to brush their teeth too!” However, if a child says, “Mommy, I want to be a lion tamer!”Then a caring parent who has a right to make a difference in their child’s future would probably say, “Ok, but don’t you think that it’s too dangerous? Why not a writer? You can write about lions and lion tamers!” These sorts of parents are the kind who I feel are required to have a say in their child’s future. These parents know what is best for their children.
I was very wrong when I said that after listing out the points for both for and against the topic, I would make up my mind. I still haven’t. But, maybe I have; in a distant way- children SHOULD be able to decide their futures, but parents should always be there to guide the child one step at a time. This probably explains the phrase, “Two sides of the coin” Without two sides of the argument; we wouldn’t have a complete coin, would we?

OH FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!!! But the people reading this may get frustrated-why is this beautiful, brilliant, understanding author criticise herself so much? Well, its because-
Um...if you know the answer, could you, er, please tell me? I think I know why, but I just need to double check.

1 comment:

Sasнiиi said...