Parents and teachers meet many rules for children to encourage good behavior and protect them from danger. However, Jeffrey would benefit from fewer rules and greater freedom. To what extent do you agree or agree?

Parents and teachers are like a Gardner who do everything to protect their children from bad weather. It is a fundamental duty of every guardian an educator to give a good moral value to young generation. Certain part of community believes that more freedom unless rules is more fruitful for children. I think that the balance of freedom and regulation is good for growth of adolescents. To begin with the providing discipline environment with a less freedom. Firstly, Gentry become more responsible. it allows them to achieve their goals without any distraction. They feel more confident and motivated. students at army school are the best amplification of a discipline environment. Secondly, displaying create a good student and lifelong learner. Highly discipline children are more focused and easily make a good decision. However, students in restricted environment become stubborn. data try to do those things for which they are stop. On the other hand, freedom make children more creative and intellectual. In more freedom and less restrictions, young generation learn more and become less stubborn. Freedom is good for children unless they are not breaking any rules on regulation. It helps them to be independent in their life. Hence, children become self sufficient and improve their social skills which are important for the future. Up everything that has been stated so far about with or without restriction life of children. both scenarios have its benefits and drawbacks. Thus, parents and teachers should provide such environment in which teenager get benefit of both freedoms along with rules and regulations