Parents should be held legally responsible for their children’s acts. What is your opinion?
Support it with personal examples.
The substantial influence of family responsibilities has sparked a controversy among the people around the globe. While specific argument claimed that family responsibilities for children are critical, a group of intellectuals debate otherwise and hold an opponent's view. I am highly inclined to believe that parents must take child's responsibilities legally. The agenda of this article is to refine both sides of the arguments, which clarify how it impacts pupils, family, as well as social communities, and will lead to a legitimate conclusion.
At the outset, there are numerous reasons why family-support legalization is vital. The most remarkable one lies in the fact that it could lead to social and child equality. Besides, recently it is alleged that child achievements have a positive correlation with their background. An outcome of prominent university's study uncovered that family activists have positive effects on social justice. Hence, legalizing of family's responsibilities over children related to child needs, child outcomes, child interaction, child education, as well child interactions.
Nevertheless, there remain drawbacks, which can unquestionably overwhelm the influence of the family social responsibilities, but the most alarming one is rooted in the fact that the family crisis and a single-parent family might lead to social crisis and social corruptions. From my own experience, I have been suffered significantly from my family poor-outcomes which lead to my lower achievements at a university. Therefore, the lack of legal support for family children and its outcomes which may have adverse effects on social justice, social welfare, social family, as well as social responsibilities, is notable.
To recapitulate, while there are several compelling on both sides, my sentiment is that the benefits of legalized and supported family responsibilities on our future children far outweigh its drawback
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-11-24 | raminhafezi@yahoo.com | 80 | view |
| 2017-11-24 | raminhafezi@yahoo.com | 77 | view |
| 2017-11-24 | raminhafezi@yahoo.com | 80 | view |
| 2017-11-24 | raminhafezi@yahoo.com | 77 | view |
| 2017-11-24 | raminhafezi@yahoo.com | 80 | view |
- The ownership of cars should be restricted to one per family in order to reduce traffic congestion and pollution. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 85
- In some countries around the world, voting is compulsory. Do you agree with the notion of compulsory voting? If voting is compulsory in a democratic society, what are some conclusions we can draw about the nature of democracy? 85
- Law can change human behavior. Do you agree or not? 77
- Are the cars damaging the environment? Should the number of cars be restricted to one for one family? Give your views and support your views with appropriate examples 67
- Law can change human behavior. Do you agree or not? 85
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 475, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
... clarify how it impacts pupils, family, as well as social communities, and will lead to a ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, hence, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.5418719212 95% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 31.9359605911 97% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.75862068966 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1652.0 1207.87684729 137% => OK
No of words: 288.0 242.827586207 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.73611111111 5.00649968141 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.45361681948 2.71678728327 127% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 139.433497537 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559027777778 0.580463131201 96% => OK
syllable_count: 531.0 379.143842365 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.6157635468 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 1.56157635468 384% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.65517241379 82% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 12.6551724138 103% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.5024630542 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.8626040709 50.4703680194 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.076923077 104.977214359 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1538461538 20.9669160288 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.30769230769 7.25397266985 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 6.9802955665 129% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 2.75862068966 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 2.91625615764 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.123860283497 0.242375264174 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0512983391433 0.0925447433944 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0415600720801 0.071462118173 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0889181006721 0.151781067708 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0245215879609 0.0609392437508 40% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 12.6369458128 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 53.1260098522 61% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 10.9458128079 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.01 11.5310837438 139% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.83 8.32886699507 118% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 55.0591133005 169% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.94827586207 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.3980295567 104% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.5123152709 162% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 72.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.