Do you think that parents should be punished if their five-year-old child commits a crime? From what age should children be held responsible for their own behaviors?

There is a controversial notion heating a debate over the fact that parents should be punished on the condition that their child at the age of 5 is convicted of a crime. I am of the firm opinion that parents should take responsibility for their child’s unlawful acts.

This

essay will attempt to address the verification of my views as follows. On the one hand, there is a myriad of arguments why it is widely believed that parents ought to be penalized when their descendants commit illegal conduct. One of the most prominent reasons is the imitation of following their patrons.

This

is because 5-years-old toddlers are considered someone who lacks self-cognition about their behaviours. Their acts are

therefore

accidental and intuitive, signalling the accumulating effect of the environment where they grow up, especially from their supporters.

For instance

, take children suffering from an abusive past as a vivid illustration, in their formative years they are easily susceptible to whom they meet and what they see in their daily lives. Provided that their guardians deliberately made an illegal act in front of their offspring, they would copy

this

malicious purpose and

then

try it with other children.

On the other hand

, there are several arguments why I support the statement that children when turning 18 years old or above must shoulder their responsibility for illegal decisions. Due to their full awareness and adequate maturity, they can distinguish whether it is a moral or immoral activity. It is

thus

irrefutable that scion from 18 years old can be accountable for their behaviours and acts. In conclusion, for these aforementioned testaments, I almost concur that guardians should be castigated when their under-18-years-old scion is convicted of a crime.