Whether parents should limit time their children using internet involves a conflict between its pros and cons: certain individuals assent to the notion by citing various resources from different kind of website are readily available whilst others oppose the concept now that youngsters might lack of good ability in choosing inappropriate contents. In this essay, I will argue that limiting using time seems a plus. Those advocating not to setting boundary for adolescents on internet might point out the internet is the most convenient means to meet friends nationally and internationally.
Even so, this opinion is not absolute, nor is the most critical element. In my assessment, the interests served by restricting use of time are more crucial. Manifold benefits can be generated if juveniles overuse internet. Serious health problems, such as nearsightedness, is the most frequently asserted defect. Although we might not have conclusive scientific evidence of a cause-effect relationship, ample anecdotal evidence establishes a significant correlation.
Moreover, both common sense and our experience with predecessors inform us that managing the time for children is of great importance. Admittedly, I believe that kids surfing internet should be surveilled. The issues it produces are, in my view, both palpable and profound. For the individual, juveniles might be prevented from viewing unsuitable information; for the society, people could avoid unrealistic rumours disturbing their lives.
Both outcomes, in turn, prove the necessity of limitation for adolescents in using internet. In sum, despite of the fact that resources are numerous on the internet, a great amount of negative outcomes can be readily observed. If parents setting the limitation for younger generations not only reduce severe health damages but also avoid unrest, I am deeply convinced that parents limiting time their children using internet is a must.