Although Coben mentioned many points, he fails to include several factors in his argument. Coben acknowledges the fact that teenagers …show more content…
However, spyware is not practical, or necessary, in order to provide a nurturing, safe, and protected household. Simply providing an open avenue of communication between children and parents could be the key to a happy household. In his fifth paragraph, Coben argues both for and against "today's overprotective parents." He depicts them as nosy, irrational, and overbearing as he paints pictures of an angry father arguing with his child's coach, or a mother completing her child's college application. So he agrees that today's parenting styles can be over the top and invasive? Not quite. Coben then switches tones towards these behaviors and essentially argues that the craziness might as well extend into children's internet usage as well. He does not simply address the opposing idea here, he instead mocks these parents in one sentence, then declares their overprotectiveness as upstanding parenting in the next. Regardless to whether his main idea of spyware is morally right or wrong, his entire fifth paragraph becomes irrelevant because he argues both for and against …show more content…
I myself cannot understand what it feels like to have a child, or how hard parenting muct be; but from coming from the other side of that relationship I can guarantee that those children expect their parents to practice what they preach: communication. By placing spyware on a teenager's computer a parent is invading the privacy of his or her child and more often than not I would assume that this happens behind the child's back. This is breaking the trust of the child and will certainly cause resentment of the parent in