People currently have different views about whether citizens live in small family units or in large, extended family groups could be more beneficial. While many citizens tend to live independently, those living in extended families are increasingly becoming a rarity. In my opinion, this is a negative development.

As families become smaller, members would receive less support from others. In large families, people are likely to share household chores together. This is believed to release the burden for individuals and enhance interpersonal relationships between members. Furthermore, extended family groups play a fundamental role in children’s development. Children, for instance, can be raised by those truly loving them instead of being taken care of babysitters and nannies. Hence, it is considered to be more economical and perhaps reduce the rate of juvenile delinquency later.

The trend towards one-person households is even more damaging as it is thought to be a cause of increasing mental illness. First, those living alone hardly share problems and difficulties with others. It is due to the fact that they have nobody to talk to at home where it is supposed to unwind after working hours. Gradually, this develops the feelings of boredom and loneliness. Second, when people living separately, real interaction is replaced by passive distractions including TV and the Internet. This, therefore, is likely to be a reason for the increasing sense of isolation, alienation and even depression among people.

In conclusion, it seems to me that there would be a great deal of merits for people living in large, extended families, compared to one-person or nuclear families.

You posted this twice.

https://www.englishforums.com/English/PleaseReviewIeltsWritingAcademic-TaskThank/bxnwcd/post.htm

Please include the essay instructions:

Subject: Please review my IELTS essay

Message body:
Topic: Write the instructions and prompt here.

My essay:

(Your text here...)
---------------------

People currently have different views about whether citizens live in small family units or in large, extended family groups. (The sentence ends here. The words that follow do not fit in the structure of this sentence. ) could be more beneficial. (fragment, not a sentence. It needs a subject.) While many citizens tend to live independently, those living in extended families are increasingly becoming a rarity. In my opinion, this is a negative development.

As families become smaller, members would receive less support from others. In large families, people are likely to share household chores together. This is believed to release the burden on for individuals and enhance (wrong word) strengthen the interpersonal relationships between members. Furthermore, extended family groups play a fundamental role in children’s development. Children, for instance, can be raised by those truly loving them instead of being taken care of by babysitters and nannies. Hence, living in a large family it is considered to be more economical and perhaps reduce (wrong form) the rate of juvenile delinquency later.

The trend towards one-person households is even more damaging as it is thought to be a cause of increasing mental illness. First, those living alone seldom / rarely / hardly ever hardly share problems and difficulties with others. It is due to the fact that they have nobody to talk to at home where it (How does a home unwind?) is supposed to unwind after working hours. Gradually, this develops the feelings of boredom and loneliness. Second, when people living separately, real interaction is replaced by passive distractions including TV and the Internet. This, therefore, is likely to be a reason for the increasing sense of isolation, alienation and even depression among people.

In conclusion, it seems to me that there would be a great deal of benefits merits for people living in large, extended families, compared to one-person or nuclear families.