Some parents buy their children whatever they ask for, and allow their children to do whatever they want. Is this a good way to raise children? What consequences could this style of parenting have for children as they get older?
It is very common that most parents spoil their children by fulfilling children’s needs and allowing their children do things they want. Personally, I do not agree that it is beneficial to raise children. I think this kind of family education can have detrimental long-term consequences.
There are several reasons why I disagree that it is not a good way of upbringing for children. Firstly, such a method have a negative influence on children’s characteristics. To pamper children can easily enable them to become arrogant. They might feel they are able to do everything and not blamed by others. Secondly, spoiling children is also harmful to their value of spending money. Children are attracted by the advertisements of the latest toys and video games which are not necessary. Parents often buy these things in order to make their children happy. As a result, parents indirectly teach the wrong opinion of using money and children might not aware that they are wasting money.
The children of indulgent parents are likely to have a range of negative long-term consequences and personality traits. People who are indulged by their parents can become self-centered. As a result, they are not adaptable to work because they are not used to following instructions of the supervisors. Also, children spoilt in their youth might have violent behaviors as they become adults. It is reported by research of National Taiwan University that a large number of criminals committing serious crimes have violent and aggressive traits in their young age.
In conclusion, I strongly believe that such a parenting style can be harmful to children’s mental development and result in the negative personalities in both short-term and long-term.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 455, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...arch of National Taiwan University that a large number of criminals committing serious crimes hav...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ies in both short-term and long-term.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, second, secondly, so, i think, in conclusion, kind of, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 24.0651302605 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.3376753507 36% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1482.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 279.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31182795699 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0865272524 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 176.041082164 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548387096774 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.49998815 49.4020404114 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.1764705882 106.682146367 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4117647059 20.7667163134 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.17647058824 7.06120827912 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.510519379893 0.244688304435 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.162034290576 0.084324248473 192% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0898124359476 0.0667982634062 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.310295273713 0.151304729494 205% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131673987674 0.056905535591 231% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.0946893788 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 50.2224549098 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.22 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 78.4519038076 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.