How Dangerous it Can be
After first reading the essay “Sports Should be Child’s Play,” I believe David Epstein made a valid point when discussing the issue of children participating in competitive sports at a too young of an age. He effectively delivered his argument by giving an appropriate amount of evidence without crowding the piece and losing the reader. There were certain sections of the essay that would have been difficult to understand without context, however Epstein was able to guide the reader and explain the evidence and situation when necessary. The title of the essay drew me in because “child's play” coincides with something that can be easily accomplished and is enjoyable. However sports, at the higher level, are challenging and are required to be taken seriously. If children are playing at competitive level too early in their life, it can cause a loss of enjoyment and be detrimental to their physical and mental health.
The main point Epstein is trying to discuss is the heightened pressure on children to become star athletes is becoming counter productive. The
…show more content…
intense structure of sports could lead to hyperspecialization which is why he encourages a sample period for children to try a variety of sports before choosing only one. He also challenges the use of adult-sized fields, with the same rules originally designed for professionals, that sports facilities are voluntarily providing. These claims are reinstated throughout the piece and are supported with research to help the reader understand the importance of these issues occurring across the nation. I agree with Epstein: children are at a high risk level when joining competitive teams early in their lives. It can be physically traumatic to the body, resulting in a need for physical therapy and surgeries at an age that is not common. I also believe it can cause children to be “burnt out” by the time they are older. Due to how demanding sports are, there is not much opportunity to diversify time and try new things such as other sports, clubs, and spending time with friends and family. I have been in a similar position when I first started playing volleyball at age 10. Even at a young age, there was still competition and it required the majority of my time, so I was not able to try other activities. After years flew by where the competition intensified, the less and less time I had for anything else: it was eat, sleep and breathe volleyball. I began to become bored of this cycle and lost passion for the sport I once loved. Epstein is aware of this issue that is common in many households. This is why he advocates for a sample period where child athletes try a variety of sports and activities before being committed to only one. Epstein was effective in making his point because he used research from universities and other widely known sources to further explain the argument being presented. In the essay he gives compelling research “From a Loyola University, a three year research group, concluded the athletes who quit all other sports except one at an early age were at a higher risk of injury than others”(393-394). This proves sport diversification is crucial and shows how important this topic is, due to the three years worth of research. If Epstein didn’t include this study in the essay, his idea of children, not being chained to only one sport, would have been taken less seriously. Loyola University is highly known throughout the nation so when it encourages sports, such as futsal, for younger athletes it is taken seriously. This new soccer-like sport is less structured and has kid-friendly sized fields to help skill development, engagement, communication and overall health of the younger athletes. If similar sports were introduced to families across the nation, it will be beneficial for their child's health. Christopher Godail, the author of the article "’Friday Night Tykes’ Encourages Hypermasculinity in Young Athletes,” shares a similar opinion to Epstein. He believes everyone, parents and coaches included, wants to see their child athlete being aggressive to help their team win–even if that means risking an injury. The article says, “If their parents aren’t taking the competition seriously and pushing their children to “man up” and play through their injuries, then overzealous coaches are encouraging violence and yelling profanities at their players”(Godail). He continues to support this argument with evidence from the Sports Concussion Institute that estimates fifty three percent of high school athletes have had a concussion prior to their competitive high school careers. This highlights Epstein's point that young athletes are being pushed beyond their capacity which is causing issues that are too important to be overlooked. I believe parents play a huge role in the decision of deciding when to sign their child up to start playing a competitive sport. Epstein communicates the issue of “scholarship driven parents” in his essay. Parents will sign their child up to play on a competitive team so they will be equipped with the skill level needed to be later recruited by colleges and receive a scholarship. If their son or daughter has what it takes, then colleges will offer the athlete school tuition money in return for them playing on their college sport team. Parents would not have to pay the full amount of their child's college tuition: saving them money. To receive the “honor of a scholarship” players will need to be highly advanced in the sport. This drives parents to encourage their child to start participating on many teams early in their career such as a high school team or travel club programs. Although the essay was packed with evidence supporting Epstein's viewpoint, it failed to give the other side of the argument. He only touches on the opposing side in a few brief sentences by saying, “We may prize the story of Tiger Woods, who demonstrated his swing at age two for Bob Hope”(395). But then swiftly pulls in another example of two-time N.B.A. star, Steve Nash who started out as a soccer player and later mastered professional basketball. If Epstein offered more opposing evidence, he would later shoot down and use to build up his own argument, then his ideas for helping this situation would have made a stronger impact to each viewpoint. Author, Jim Jordan, a co-chair of the Congressional Caucus on Youth Sports, wrote an article, “Keeping Youth Athletes Safe,” that took a different route than Epstein.
The article shares with the reader that children who join competitive sports at a young age can learn discipline and healthy habits when performed right. Jordan strongly suggests athletes, coaches and parents need to be properly educated on safe training techniques and know how to read their children when they have an injury. This way the young athletes can join in on as many sport teams as they want. Over the recent years many regulations and laws have been passed, such as The Lystedt laws that “mandate a gradual return-to-play protocol to better protect youth athletes in all sports from the risks of preventable concussions”(Jordan). This will protect the players who do decide to specialize in one sport at an early
age. If Epstein decided to use this source in his essay, it would strengthen his piece by engaging both readers with different views. It allows the opposing side to feel including in the argument by showing there are more options than waiting to play until they are older. However, it continues to support Epstein’s view by suggesting there is still something wrong with the current systems for young players. Both authors make valid points and could benefit from each other's research on the topic. Throughout David Epstein’s essay the reader was given crucial information, examples and research to help show the overwhelming significance of child athletes joining competitive teams too early. Through this, it is communicated the importance for athletes, coaches and parents to understand the risks they gain from joining teams that are time consuming and built for mature players. If the trend of this competition increases, then the outcome of life-changing injuries will show for this generation and generations to come. The idea of new sports being introduced to communities that are geared to young athletes will help this situation along with other authors, families and research groups sharing the risks at hand.
Are young children putting their health and even their lives at risk if they partake in the sport of football? Some claim that the American sport is far too dangerous and the risk of concussions and injuries far outway the pros of the physical sport, while others insist that technological improvements and new regulations have made the sport safer. Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor of history and education at New York University, argues in his paper, “We Must Stop Risking the Health of Young Football Players,” that football is a sport that is too dangerous for the youth. He states his belief that technological improvements in helmets and changes in the rules of the sport have had little effect on reducing injuries and that nothing has worked.
In the United States today the age for a kid to start playing competitive sports continues to get lower and lower. Parents in America have started to get their children involved in sports at a much earlier age than they used to, hoping that their child will be the next superstar. Parents are placing too much emphasis on winning and being the best, instead of teaching their children how to have fun. Parents in the U.S. are also placing too much pressure on their kids to be the best. Parents in America are becoming much too involved in youth sports and are starting to get out of control, sometimes even resorting to violence and vulgarity.
When the coach turned his head, the seven-year-old stuck a finger down his throat and made himself vomit. When the coach fumed back, the boy pointed to the ground and told him, “Yes, there it is, Coach. See?” (Tosches A33).It emphasizes the fact that if a child gets hurt once, they will fear the possibility of getting hurt again ,so they try to find excuses to prevent themselves from playing the game.Second,Statsky states how competitive adults have drained the fun out of children's sports and made the game unappealing for children.She cites Martin Rablovsky, a former sports editor for the New York Times says that in all his years of watching young children play organized sports, he has noticed very few of them smiling. “I’ve seen children enjoying a spontaneous pre-practice scrimmage become somber and serious when the coach’s whistle blows,” Rablovsky says. “The spirit of play suddenly disappears, and sport becomes job-like” (qtd in Coakley 94). It shows the fact that competitive adults are oblivious to their actions and don't notice that what they are doing can really affect a child mentally.Third, Statsky is concerned that competitive sports will lower a child's self-esteem and make them lack confidence.’’Like adults, children fear failure, and so even those with good physical skills may stay away because they lack
The author (“Bennet Omalu”) argues that after all the research has been done about how football is linked to brain injury, there is no question that children should not be aloud to play football. A big issue is that even if a child has no documented concussions or reported symptoms and that child continues to play
More specifically, children are also increasingly pressured--again, usually by parents and coaches--to specialize in one sport and to play it year-round, often on several different teams (Perry). Now, if sports specialization is such a great idea, then why are kids being “pressured”? As stated before, sports specialization can result in severe injury or even retirement from sports all together. Evidently, parents would not want to risk their athlete’s entire athletic career just because of an overuse injury. Knowing this, a diversity in sports activities is the solution to the problem. Additionally, a specialization in sports can lead to the young athlete not experiencing a sport that he or she may truly enjoy in their life. If a parent already makes a child decide on a sport to play, how will the child know if that is the sport they truly want to participate in? As the child ages, they could realize that the sport they play now is not one that they love anymore, so they could just quit. Deciding at such a young age is not only a hasty decision, but also a terrible one. Finally, this specialization can also create social problems. If a child is already so competitively involved in a sport, then their social lives and relationships with friends are at risk. The clear choice here is to let the child live a normal life by allowing them to make friends and play, rather than taking over their lives with competitive
Many parents will argue about whether kids should be allowed to play sports at such a young age. In my opinion, I think kids shouldn’t be allowed to play sports at a young age. When they grow older, I think that kids should be allowed to play sports. When a young athlete gets injured, coaches may not be trained for an injury and the child can suffer more serious injuries just from that. Kids want to skip practice so they will often fake an injury, serious coaches will use shaming techniques and call athletes “ladies” or man up, and athletes might not have the best protective gear, making them more likely to have a concussion. Worst of all, coaches
Participating in a sport at an early age can be essential to the overall growth process during a child’s upbringing. Whether the participation is through some sort of organized league or just getting together amongst friends and playing, the lessons learned from this can help teach these kids and provide a positive message to them as they develop. There is a certain point, however, when organized sports can hinder progress, which is when adults get too involved and forget about the underlying reason to why they are helping. While adult involvement is necessary, adult involvement can sometimes send the wrong message to children when they try to make participation become more than just about fun and learning. According to Coakley (2009), “organized sports are worth the effort put forth by adults, as long as they do what is in the best interest of their children and put that thought ahead of their own agenda” (Coakley, p. 151). This is a valid argument because once adults put themselves in front of the children and their values, it needs to be re-evaluated as to why they first got involved in the beginning. Partaking in organized sport and activity from a young age can be beneficial to the overall development of children, as long as decisions actions are made in the best interest of the children and not stemming from ulterior motives of adults.
Epstein really thought through his evidence and his work reflects off in the editorial as it is very convincing. But to make it exceptional, Epstein can include the advantages of sport specialization to show the readers both sides of the argument. When an author presents both sides of an argument and presents their side, it will more over reflect author's maturity and increase the article's reliability. Especially when talking to a wide range of audience that can disagree with your standing, it is more advantageous to ease into the argument by recognizing both sides of the argument. Adding on, he can also use personal accounts of kids who either hyperspecialized and caused detrimental effects or how kids who diversified and had much success in their lives. These stories and counterarguments make Epstein's claim that sport specialization leads to many health injuries and no real benefit in skills or technique more connected and
In the article "Have Youth Sports Become Too Intense?", the issue of whether or not sports are good for kids is debated. One side explains that it is not good, while the other is that it is. Even though they disagree on if it's too intense. They agree that it is getting more intense. The benefits in participating in competitive youth sports are worth the drawbacks because the pressure of the competition pushes you to do more.
youth sports [were] the one haven for good sportsmanship," says Darrell Burnett, a clinical child psychologist and youth sports psychologist. "Not anymore. It's not just a game anymore." With technology (etc) distracting our children with violence and so on, we cannot afford to ruin what sports may do for them. With sports being just one of the few things left that can contribute to success in life, education, and health, parents need not to put any sort of unnecessary pressure on their kids at such a young age, or any age for that matter, ever.
Jessica Statsky, in her essay, “Children need to Play, Not Compete” attempts to refute the common belief that organized sports are good for children. She sees organized sports not as healthy pass-times for children, but as onerous tasks that children do not truly enjoy. She also notes that not only are organized sports not enjoyable for children, they may cause irreparable harm to the children, both emotionally and physically. In her thesis statement, Statsky states, “When overzealous parents and coaches impose adult standards on children's sports, the result can be activities that are neither satisfying nor beneficial to children” (627). While this statement is strong, her defense of it is weak.
These sports, where there are no winners or losers, he seems to hold in particular contempt and directs ire at them. He believes it is more important for a child to learn how to fail than how to win, because they will undoubtedly fail more than they will succeed over the course of life. The author seems to discount opinions to the contrary and his language, though subtle, is insulting to someone who feels they are looking out for the best interests of a young athlete. A less confrontational approach or perhaps an outright confrontational approach would be more
Every year 3.5 million children 14 and under have to be treated for sports injuries (Cambria). Many of these injuries come from playing too hard and only playing one sport. Due to the cost of sports and risk of injury, parents have to make big decisions about sports. Because of the many injuries related to sports, the expensive costs, and pressure to be exceptionally good, students should not be required to participate in a sport.
While it may seem that sports are good for young children, but in reality, it is bad for the young children. Children shouldn’t enroll into sports at a young age, here are my reason why. One example is the Intense Training Schedules, Pressure to win and be the best, and the Painful Injuries. It’s not surprising that some athletes simply burn out on their sport. But what is shocking is that many kids are burning out from their sport at a young age, sometimes as early as 9 or 10.
All the time, you hear adults say they wish they were children again. It’s because children get to have fun, they don’t have to worry about so many responsibilities. As adults, we have to provide for ourselves and maybe even our families. We have to make sure our priorities are taken care of before we can do what we actually want to do. Children on the other hand, do not have to do this. They get to enjoy life and have fun without so much pressure on their shoulders. Competitive sports do not let kids be kids. Competitive sports are not what is best for children because the children ae being pushed too far by their parents, their bodies are not developed enough to endure so many collisions, and their losing can harm their self-esteem.