In the society of today, there are more young couples have decided that live in a lifestyle without children. DINK (double income, no kids) is a term used to describe a high-earning couple who choose not to have children and are able to afford a higher quality lifestyle than those typically families. The term has been created during the 1980’s. In post-2000, the economic crises have made this social phenomenon more permanent. This issue has been well-discussed by Shawn Hou in his essay “Should We Have Kids.” The opinions are well-provided by his contrast essay, which gives readers some particular advantages and different features between DINK and traditional family. Here are some reviews and reflections following his essay.
The first is the idea and content. Shawn gives a good topic of his essay. This issue has become popular in the modern society because the topic, “having a child, or not?” is related to most people. In addition, he gives some practical instances of DINK and typical family, analyzing the benefits and shortcomings to the readers. For example, he mentions that family with children will put the emphasis on the children. They will spend most time and money taking care of their children, and less of those to themselves. The issue has been well-concerned by most people. Therefore, Shawn has gives us several concepts of his good content.
Next discussion is the structure and organization. Shawn has divided the differences into three parts, the living style, time, and economy. In his article, both the living style and time are focus on the same concept that family would pay many attentions on children. And each example is actually talking about the same thing. Thus, I think Shawn may reorganize the details and examples for a better manifestation.
The third is the language and writing style. Shawn has made his opinions very clear in his each sentence. He also gives several well examples for every secondary topic. Otherwise, he delivers his opinion that he wants to be a DINK instead of traditional family. The reasons are that he is doubtful if he could be a good father, and children are really a sweet burden. The writing style illustrates his thinking thoughtfully.
Through the above discussions, the essay gives the readers a good introduction of DINK, providing his opinions toward DINK. Although he tells the readers he do not want children, I wonder what he would feel if he is married and raising children someday in the future. However, his clear and direct language has made his essay more readable and attractive for the readers.
Next discussion is the structure and organization. Shawn has divided the differences into three parts, the living style, time, and economy. In his article, both the living style and time are focus on the same concept that family would pay many attentions on children. And each example is actually talking about the same thing. Thus, I think Shawn may reorganize the details and examples for a better manifestation.
The third is the language and writing style. Shawn has made his opinions very clear in his each sentence. He also gives several well examples for every secondary topic. Otherwise, he delivers his opinion that he wants to be a DINK instead of traditional family. The reasons are that he is doubtful if he could be a good father, and children are really a sweet burden. The writing style illustrates his thinking thoughtfully.
Through the above discussions, the essay gives the readers a good introduction of DINK, providing his opinions toward DINK. Although he tells the readers he do not want children, I wonder what he would feel if he is married and raising children someday in the future. However, his clear and direct language has made his essay more readable and attractive for the readers.
Written by William (431 words)
The review is thoughtful and well-organized.
回覆刪除Brenda Chou