Up for Debate: Changing the U.S. Emphasis on Competitive Youth Sports
Oct 14, 2013, 1:35 PM
A recent article in The Atlantic on the history of competitive sports among American kids led The New York Times to write a wide-ranging debate on the pros and cons of competitive sports for kids and teenagers. The pivotal question: Do competitive sports overwhelm childhood or enhance it?
It’s an important debate. Sports can represent a gateway to a life of enjoyable exercise, good for both the heart and mind. But they also pose, as currently played, some significant risks. These include the risk of injury or even death and unhealthy competitive traits, all of which can be a turn-off for physical activity of all kinds for kids made to play and practice against their will.
Those weighing in on the Times’ debate pages include the head of Little League International, who says sports teach kids valuable lessons; a sociologist who says that since so few kids ever make their living in professional sports, we need a greater emphasis on education than athletics; and the head of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine, who says that most children's bodies are not capable of playing one sport day after day, for years on end, and because of this many kids have bone and joint injuries.
>>Bonus Links: Read NewPublicHealth interviews on preventing concussions in youth sports with MacArthur fellow Kevin Guskiewicz, and Robert Faherty, VP and Commissioner of the Babe Ruth youth baseball league.
This commentary originally appeared on the RWJF New Public Health blog.