JONATHAN GRUPENACHER ESLL 26 HOLLY CROWER ESSAY 2 DRAFT 1 CHILDREN NEED TO PLAY, NOT COMPETE Competing between the ages of six and twelve can affect the physical and psychological development of a child and provide wrong thoughts to people. As Jessica Statsky mentions in “Children Need to Play, Not Compete,” the expectation of always winning and the fear of being hurt can depress and discourage children. Also, competing can be considered counterproductive, since players are eliminated before being ready to enter into contest. Additionally, even though the risk of injury is very small, children are not yet physically prepared to crash into others. Finally, competing involves a lot of pressure, which unconsciously makes kids focus only on winning.
If I could change one thing in my community it would be to offer parenting classes. I listen to my friends complain about their relationship with their parents and the lack of communication between them often. What I have come to realize is that both parties don’t know that the relationship is broken and they need to change the way they are talking to each other because obviously it is not working. I believe that if parents knew different ways to talk and help their kids then more could get done in the relationship. It is hard raising kids and hurtful things can be said, but I just don’t think a parent should react in a hurtful manner.
Parents undermined that spanking is a form of abuse. This is not only physical abuse, but also mental abuse. What parent’s don’t realize is that spanking contradicts the values they try to instill on their children. Instead of using the method of spanking parents that cause damage to children, parents should really consider some alternative ways. Better and healthier ways of remanding a child is talk to them, and if that doesn’t work you can resort to punishing them.
Parents should definitely have a right to say what their children can and cannot read, but they do not have the freedom to say what other children can or cannot read. Once a parent complains to a school, the school can’t do anything except pull the book out of the curriculum, and that is not equitable to anyone. There are plenty of reasons that people have come up with to justify banning a book. For example: “they teach children to spy” or “it encourages children to break dishes so they
Many parents around the world do not understand that it is not healthy to over control their children. Parents should put minimal pressures on their children to be exactly the way they want their children to behave, because if they do not, there is a greater chance that their child may develop social anxiety. In many cases the children who end up developing a social anxiety is because their parents made their child believe they are at a great deal of threat, and cannot protect themselves if threatened (Bruggen, Stams, & Bogels 2008). They also were not allowing their child to explore new experiences. The researchers also believe that parents that have a Judd 2 child with a social disturbance try to put more pressure on them to not behave like that, which in most cases results in just progressing the disturbance.
The case of David Reimer highlights many of these issues and helps explain why they need to be addressed fully. A child does not have the ability to make an informed decision on their gender and the decision is passed to the parents. The parents would be thoroughly briefed before deciding on the gender they wish their child to be changed to, suggesting it is somewhat ethical as parents hold responsibility over the child so have made a informed decision and consent. However, as David Reimer showed, the decision of the parents is not always right and can cause great problems in later life when the child grows up and realises who they are. It is also evident that in some cases parents would be deceived.
There might be some benefit keeping the students around until they turn 18, but the cons outweigh what’s the best interest to these kids. They disrupt other students, teachers, and are unmotivated to reach their potential, often find themselves stuck on a daily basis. Dropping out is the only choice they can have and limiting this very choice only makes things worse. Although I agree with Chapman, I think that Obama serves good intentions with this proposal but the idea may be thought not well enough. I believe that you cannot force kids into learning and even doing so, they will have a harder time attending classes than before.
Children are not learning self sufficiency. When a child is faces a crisis situation, he or she does not comprehend how to cope with the situation. Programs need to be implemented back into the school system to not only to help the children cope, but to prevent the crisis situation in the beginning (Gentry, 1994). The idea is to teach children and adults how to recognize danger signs and prevent the crisis from happening. Teach skills to cope with the situations before the situations reach the crisis stage (Gentry, 1994).
Testing positive for a disease would restrict these opportunities. In this paper, I argue that genetic testing for late-onset disorders shouldn’t be allowed. I acknowledge that this may worsen the relationships within the family, but show that there are more beneficial consequences than come with allowing the child to make their own personal decisions. Dina Davis believes that genetic testing for late-onset diseases violates the child’s rights. First, it disrespects the child’s right to make her own decisions.
I feel like the performance on one test should not dictate whether you do or do not advance a grade. The act also places too much stress on the teachers. If their students do not meet the standard set forth, they risk losing their career. The job of a teacher is to teach and help students learn, not pass a test. Eliminating