Commentary On Rhetorical Analysis Of Undercover Parents By Harlan Coben
In the article, “Undercover Parents,” the author, Harlan Coben claims that parents should spy on their kids to monitor their internet use. He states that anything less than spying “borders on negligence.” Coben uses anecdotes to support his claims. His evidence is weak and his anecdotes are unbelievable at best. He poses several arguments and proceeds to refute them in his same idealistic manner. Coben’s idea of parenting and his claim are both idealistic and paranoid. Coben uses an anecdote in which a father uses spyware to monitor his daughter’s internet activity. He makes a startling revelation when he realizes not only was she using drugs but she was also sleeping with her drug dealer. Coben proceeds to say that they had a calm and rational discussion. The problem with this anecdote is that no reader, parent or child, would believe that after a father finds out that his daughter was doing drugs and having sexual relations with her drug dealer, would approach her calmly and openly. Likewise, having found out that her father was spying on her, it is unlikely that the daughter would be open
…show more content…
However, Coben borders on paranoia. He writes about kids who have been taken advantage of and preyed upon via the internet. This is indeed a real problem, but it is not as common a problem as Coben makes it out to be. Coben implies that if one does not monitor everything a child does, they will immediately fall into the clutches of an online predator. That is a possibility, but it is not going to happen simply because a parent was not monitoring their child. He seems to think that kids can in no way handle themselves. To some extent it is true that kids might not be able to handle themselves completely but that is why it is necessary for kids to grow and learn how to handle themselves. However, kids are not so helpless that as soon as they are left to themselves they will fall prey to internet
However, Coben borders on paranoia. He writes about kids who have been taken advantage of and preyed upon via the internet. This is indeed a real problem, but it is not as common a problem as Coben makes it out to be. Coben implies that if one does not monitor everything a child does, they will immediately fall into the clutches of an online predator. That is a possibility, but it is not going to happen simply because a parent was not monitoring their child. He seems to think that kids can in no way handle themselves. To some extent it is true that kids might not be able to handle themselves completely but that is why it is necessary for kids to grow and learn how to handle themselves. However, kids are not so helpless that as soon as they are left to themselves they will fall prey to internet