Prompt: Some people believe that teenagers should be required to do unpaid community work in their free time. This can benefit teenagers and the community as well. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

One of the most conspicuous things of today's world is a discussion between people about children and their free association work during their leisure and if it can be viewed as a boon or detrimental to the society. While there is a deluge of arguments not in favour of the teenagers doing free duty, I believe, in my humble opinion, there are numerous advantages for doing social work freely. Ċ There are a plethora of arguments in favour of my stance. The most preponderant one of them is that it inculcates a sense of brotherhood early in the soul which purifies the hearts. Moreover, it can be argued that this causes society to be a closely-knit one. Furthermore, it should be taken into account that, with a closely-knit nation, the probability of friction between crowd does not arise. For example, more than 90% of family surveyed in London agreed to the fact that the neighbourhood duty helped the children to a great extent. Ċ On the flip side, there are folk who have a different perception. They believe that it cannot be beneficial in the long term for the students if they perform the unpaid supply. Firstly, it is claimed that they will lose out on the opportunities to earn money which makes them financially independent. Secondly, it is also true that, with financial support, the youngsters gain confidence in the activity which only helps them face challenges with aplomb. For instance, according to the New York Times, the students who earned money early in their growth have greater chances of success in life. Ċ In conclusion, there are huge advantages for teens who perform unpaid society work than those without it. However, there are some advantages to not do it as well. People must do a bit of both according to the circumstances. The apprehensions need to be considered and should not be warranted.