Mommy/Daddy, It Hurts

Please note that this was syndicated on BlogHer on April 8, 2010: http://www.blogher.com/mommydaddy-it-hurts. Check it out! April is National Youth Sports Safety Month, according to the National Youth Sports Safety Foundation (NYSSF). I've been thinking a lot youth sports injuries-- last week I presented some preliminary findings from my research on youth sports injuries and the relative-age effect (which is joint with Rebecca Casciano and Children's Hospital Boston). One of the NYSSF's "Tips for Athletes" is especially relevant: "Some children grow faster than others and some have better coordination earlier than others. Everyone catches up eventually. Be patient."

I've mentioned my interest in age cut-offs here before, but today I want to highlight a different set of findings about how parents deal with youth sports injuries, which are especially timely.  Last week Gatorade released a study of "Sports Moms," a group they estimate is about 13 million strong.  Based on a poll of 900 mothers of middle- and high-school age athletes, Gatorade reports that these sports moms spend more money on, and time with, their kids than parents whose children don't play sports.  To do so they sacrifice their own personal time like sleep, exercise, and leisure.

It's not at all surprising that Gatorade chose to focus on sports moms, as they tend to be more involved in children's afterschool lives.  Dads are getting more involved, especially with girls and sports and coaching, but for the most part moms are still the ones who do the "dirty" work of washing uniforms and schlepping to and from practices.  I've always thought that the title of this book, by an Australian academic, pretty much sums it up: Mom's Taxi: Sport and Women's Labor

So it didn't surprise us that moms were much more likely to be with kids when they visited the doctor for a youth sports injuries.  What did surprise us is how many dads were present as well. Out of 989 office visits, dads were at the appointment 44.7% of the time.

However, dads are significantly more likely to be at an appointment if it is their son who is injured, irrespective even of a child's age.

(Note that there are more injured girls in our sample-- 54.3% of 2291-- which is higher than expected based on the sex ratio for girls this age born in the state of Massachusetts).

We have several possible explanations for this, but I'm interested to hear your thoughts! Is it that dads are simply more invested in their sons' athletic careers, or that boys play sports that are more likely to interest men (unlike, for the most part, the girls who dance, do gymnastics, or figure skate)? Other thoughts?

Preschool Olympians and Ivy Leaguers?

Two extreme parenting stories are making the rounds this week (yes, even in the midst of the horrific, and ongoing, tragedy in Japan). I see them as part of the same trend-- what do you think?

1) Yesterday The New York Daily News ran a story with the attention-getting headline: "Manhattan mom sues $19k/yr. preschool for damaging 4-year-old daughter's Ivy league chances."  The short version of the story is that mother Nicole Imprescia is suing York Avenue Preschool for not properly preparing her daughter for the ERB exam-- needed for private school admissions in New York City-- and for having two-, three-, and four-year-olds sharing the same learning space.

The article has some great quotes like, "The court papers implied the school could have damaged Lucia's chances of getting into a top college, citing an article that identifies preschools as the first step to 'the Ivy League.'" While I hate to place blame, especially on parents, I'm pretty sure Ms. Imprescia is damaging her daughter's Ivy chances far more than York Avenue Preschool ever could.  I fear Ms. Imprescia would make Tiger Mom Amy Chua look positively domesticated.

My favorite quote is the following: "Fortunately, Imprescia's lawyer said, the tot's prospects aren't doomed. 'Lucia Imprescia, for the record, will get into an Ivy League school - York Avenue Preschool notwithstanding,' said Paulose, of the firm Koehler & Isaacs. 'The child is very smart and will do well in life.'" As if getting into an Ivy League school is the only way to do well in life?! On top of that, there is no way to know if fourteen years from now little Lucia will be in a position to apply to the eight schools that make up the Ivy League... But I'm glad this lawyer can guarantee her future.

Since I read this article yesterday it has been picked up by MSNBC, so expect to be hearing more on this case.

2) MSNBC ran another attention-getting parenting story-- this one about genetic testing to determine if children have genes that predispose them to particular athletic careers. I first read about these services several years ago in Tom Farrey's wonderful book Game OnSince Farrey's coverage, as the MSNC article shows, the tests have become more sophisticated, and more US-centric.  With a simple cheek swab and swipe of the credit card, parents can know if their child is predisposed to being a sprinter or marathoner.

One father is quoted in the article explaining his ten-year-old soccer-playing daughter's response to their discussion about the testing: "She told me, 'Well, Daddy, I just have to try harder'" if the results came back negative, Marston said." The article goes on, "But even at age 10, [Elizabeth] knows it will take more than genes to reach her goal of playing in the Olympics."

Of course, simply having a form of a gene is no guarantee of future success, which is why pediatricians, like Drs. Alison Brooks and Beth Tarini writing this month in JAMA, are opposed to these types of at-home testing kits.  Children should neither be forced into a particular sport because of a genetic predisposition, nor should they be directed away from a particular activity.

What's the connection between preschool lawsuits and genetic testing for child athletes? 

More than anything both stories illustrate the extreme parental anxiety that exists today, especially in upper-middle class communities. My research on competitive afterschool activities shows how parents connect elementary school performance to preparation for the college admissions process. Ms. Imprescia's focus on the Ivy League isn't extraordinary today-- what is extraordinary is her willingness to sue because of her assumption/entitlement/fervent desire for Lucia to end up at Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, or Penn.  High performance in athletics is a "way in" to these schools, and a way to earn scholarships at others, so the Marston family is also on to something.

But both stories also show parents hyper-focusing on extremely unrealistic goals for children. The likelihood of getting into Harvard, for example, is around 6% this year. Getting an NCAA scholarship? Lower. The Olympics? Lower still. You get the idea.  Setting up highly unlikely, and perhaps unrealistic, goals for children from a young age can be damaging. It can skew children's thoughts on success, and hence happiness. The reality is that even with talent and hard work luck plays a huge part in securing an Ivy League spot (speaking from experience here), getting a college athletic scholarship, or nabbing a gold medal at the Olympics in 2024.

Perhaps Ms. Imprescia has already sent away for her own genetic testing kit for little Lucia? In any event, let's hope she's also set up a therapy fund along with the college fund.

Youngest SportsKids Ever?

The last issue of Sports Illustrated Kids highlighted the achievements of six-year-old Courtney Diemar. Courtney lives in Colorado and competes in triathlons.  She was first in her age group at the 2010 IronKids national championships, beating other six-year-old girls by more than a minute.  Judging by her picture, Courtney doesn't look very fierce, so I wondered how many kids she trounced on her way to victory.  I assumed not many six-year-olds compete in triathlons, but it turns out 32 of them competed in the national tournament-- and 13 of them were girls (note that three six-year-old boys beat Courtney).

Courtney was one of four kids featured as January/February SportsKids of the "month."  Along with Courtney 13-year-old Connor was honored for cycling, 10-year-old Makayla for soccer, and thirteen-year-old Kirran for golf. It's easy enough to nominate a child for this honor. You simply fill out an online form, detailing the child's sports, academic, and community service accomplishments. In the March issue of Sports Illustrated Kids, which I just received, this month's four honorees are all about the same ages, and they tend to participate in unusual sports (thirteen-year-old Lauren competes in archery, nine-year-old Jason in cross-country, fourteen-year-old Davon in football, and nine-year-old Alyssa in trampoline).

Sports Illustrated runs a similar piece each week, called "Faces in the Crowd," which has been a feature of the magazine since January 1956 (it's two years younger than the magazine itself, which Henry Luce started in 1954).  When "Faces in the Crowd" turned fifty, SI looked back at the 15,672 amateur athletes who had been featured up to that point [some of the results are in this Wikipedia entry, or you can look up the original in the December 15, 2006 issue entitled "Face in the Crowd (A Brief History)"]. A few of the fun facts include:

  • 5,706 Female Faces
  • 263 Faces Named John
  • 123 Faces Named Smith
  • 233 Sports Represented
  • 96 Countries Represented
  • 68 Faces who later appeared on cover of SI
  • 56 sets of twins that have appeared in Faces
  • 3 SI Staffers that have been featured in Faces (Dan Jenkins, Bev Oden, Candy Putnam)
  • 31 Women who were selected as Faces for being Beauty Queens

(One of my personal faves is Vera Wang's 1968 appearance for figure skating; of course, she went on to design figure skating costumes for my favorite figure skater of all time, Michelle Kwan.)

To my knowledge, no one has taken a similar look at the kids who have been honored in the SI Kids version. Not only would it be interesting to know the gender breakdown in the fully post-Title IX environment, along with the sports which seem to vary greatly, it would also be important to look at the ages of those who have appeared.

It's a common refrain in the media (myself included) that kids are more competitive in sports at younger ages than ever before.  This is enormously difficult to document with data though. By looking at the ages of SportsKids we would possibly see this downward trend-- think about six-year-old Courtney. I'm guessing no one like Courtney appeared in 1989, when SI Kids started.

SI Kids- call me!

Childhood is a Buffet

I love a good Sunday brunch buffet. I often sample lots of dishes, and then go back to get a larger serving of my favorite.

When people ask me about afterschool activities for their elementary school-age kids-- how many they should be in, which activity will help them get into college someday, etc.-- I explain that they should approach those afterschool hours the same way they approach that Sunday buffet.  Children should sample a lot of different things so that they can figure out their favorites.

Middle childhood, which is the time between ages 6-12 (or, for a rough equivalent, the elementary school years), is the time for exposure and exploration.  Parents make choices about which activities their kids should explore based on their own experiences and preferences.  Maybe mom played the violin, so she wants her daughter to as well; or, perhaps she never played a musical instrument and that's the reason she's so adamant that her kids learn to play music.  Other families emphasize physical fitness, so participation on an athletic team is very important.  Within those categories of music and sports there are more choices. A child can play a string instrument, or the piano, drums, recorder, or clarinet, and the list goes on.  Athletics is even more complex-- will a child play a team sport or an individual one? Will it be a popular sport, like soccer or tennis, or a more rarefied one, like lacrosse or squash?

Of course, this isn't an either/or enterprise. Many kids play sports and a musical instrument and do something else (like drawing, Mandarin lessons, theater, or chess, and again the list goes on). One mom evocatively described her parenting strategy to me by saying she is striving to raise "little Renaissance men." But not all boys will grow up to be Renaissance men and not all kids are destined to be "well-rounded."  While these are worthwhile goals, parents must also listen to their children.

Kids are an integral part of this process. In some cases, children will approach their parents with an activity that they would like to try out. Perhaps a friend at school is a skateboarder, or a girl saw Nastia Liukin win the gold in the Olympics and she wants to try to be a gymnast. If a child expresses interest in a particular activity it's a good idea to explore a class in that, or something very similar (perhaps biking if you don't like skateboarding, or dance or cheerleading if you don't like gymnastics).  Other times, like when an activity is parent-driven and a child wants out, or even wants more of it, parents should listen to their child's desires, especially before investments of time and money get too high.  What's important is that kids are exposed to a wide range of options when they are young so they can explore, be creative, and start to gain mastery.  This helps insure that kids will be intrinsically motivated and hopefully develop a genuine interest and passion in a given area.

Of course, what parents choose to expose their kids to is ultimately shaped by a variety of individual and societal factors.  To continue the buffet metaphor, not everyone will have grits or lox on their Sunday buffet, but most people will have eggs and bacon (some will have it free-range and organic, and others won't). For example, in certain parts of the country ice hockey is more popular, and in others Pop Warner football dominates.  On top of regional preferences parental background matters. More educated parents may shy away from activities they consider dangerous, like boxing, and instead push weekend math classes.  And parents of boys and girls tend to favor different sorts of activities, even within the same family.

There is no right way or wrong way to make these choices so long as you listen to your child and your own common sense.  There is no magic number of activities or number of hours of participation that will help your little one get into an Ivy League school ten years down the road.  There is no equation that tells us whether or not your child will rebel later in life is he or she goes to ballet instead of karate.  But there is a way to keep childhood fun, and full of creativity and exploration, while still training kids for the next steps in their lives. By allowing kids to explore within a structured set of choices, they'll be able to know what they really love as they move into middle school and high school, where those specific choices start to matter more. Until then, enjoy your waffles, pancakes, hash browns, Eggs Benedict, or whatever else you and your kids prefer!

Diving into Coaching

Greg Louganis, arguably the greatest diver of all time, and one of the greatest Olympians of all time, just started coaching young divers.  His accomplishments are extraordinary, but as many know, having superior skills does not always transfer to superior teaching.

Louganis' skills as a coach are his knowledge of diving technique and his ability to teach mental awareness and toughness.  He emphasizes basic mechanics and does not allow a diver to move on until they have mastered skills.  Louganis also says that practice is more important than competition and he has each of his students keep a journal where they can reflect on training and goals.  Louganis reports, "A lot of parents say they're on board with it... we'll see how well they can hang in there."

Parents should trust the knowledge of a teacher or coach and be patient with them in producing results and improving technique, even if that coach isn't as accomplished as Greg Louganis.  Tiger Mom Amy Chua got it right (at least in this instance!) when she said parents should not criticize a teacher/coach in front of a child.

That said, there are areas every parent should think about before enrolling their child in an afterschool activity.  Based on years researching various afterschool activities, I recommend parents investigate the background of potential teachers/coaches in three areas: expertise, teaching, and safety.  With some of these questions you should ask the teacher, or owner, directly.  For others you will want to ask around town.  Though beware listening to everything a few disgruntled parents say; however if many parents have negative things to say you should pay attention!  These questions may seem like obvious ones, but when it comes to kids' activities, they aren't often asked-- and that needs to change especially given the level of competition and the number of injuries currently observed in children's activities.

1) Expertise- You should make sure the teacher or coach has in-depth knowledge of the activity and some credentials to be teaching the activity to others.

If you ever watch So You Think You Can Dance you know that Nigel Lythgoe is constantly complaining about dance teachers who do not know technique and are making a lot of money telling people they can dance. Unqualified teachers make it difficult for the qualified teachers who do know technique to succeed.  When I was studying soccer I interviewed one business owner who proudly told me that because he is from Latin America parents assume he is good at soccer. In fact, he is a terrible player; instead of playing up skills, he plays up his accent which he claimed parents responded to well. This owner did hire qualified coaches, but it's easy to imagine this situation going a different way.

You should exercise your right as a parent to protect your child and find out the answers to the following questions:

  • Does my child's potential teacher/coach have technical ability in the subject matter? 
  • Can they demonstrate fluent knowledge of technique?
  • Were they themselves a diver/chess player/dancer/football player, etc.? 
  • What do they know about the mechanics of how the activity works (either knowledge of mental processes or, more importantly, awareness of physiology and how the body best works)? 
  • What formal credentials do they have to promote themselves as teachers/coaches-- college degrees, training certifications, etc.?

2) Teaching- Whatever the activity is, those who work with young people should have knowledge of how to teach young people-- this includes understanding learning techniques and children's social dynamics.  This is especially true in competitive environments.  Teachers and coaches should have some knowledge of how to deal with self-esteem issues and how to mediate conflict between children, for example.

Spending time around academic afterschool activities, like enrichment classes and chess clubs, I witnessed many skilled chess and math experts who were not trained as teachers. When children cried, gave up, had short attention spans, or fought with one another, the teachers often did not know how to respond to the situation.

While of course there is not one right way to deal with any of these situations, classroom teachers learned when they were students themselves about different techniques for dealing with children at specific age levels.  Afterschool teachers and coaches would benefit from similar instruction, which would help improve their teaching and children's experiences.  Just as our society doesn't allow classroom teachers or daycare providers to be untrained and uncertified, we should be sure that those who work with our children in the afterschool hours are equally able.

3) Safety- This may seem obvious, but you would be surprised how many assumptions parents make, if only because things seem legitimate.

  • Do you know if your child's teacher or coach has ever been convicted of a crime, especially one involving a child? Not all states mandate background checks for teachers and coaches.  If you live in a state that doesn't, you should know that many of the insurance companies who insure athletic clubs/studios/gyms do have strict guidelines.  
  • Does the program have insurance? You can find out by asking who insures an organization; if the group is uninsured this should be a red flag about the legitimacy of the business (perhaps even its business standing. like filing taxes). 
  • Are teachers CPR certified? Are the physical surroundings acceptable for the physical nature of the activity (like the type of floor or the security/stability of equipment)? In addition to legal issues, you should also think about basic safety!

Remember, just because someone opens a gym or studio in a strip mall does not mean they are qualified, even on in these most basic areas. One of the programs I observed was not properly run in terms of insurance, taxes, and teacher safety.  These omissions were not committed out of malice on the part of the owner (instead they were related to financial constraints), but parents nevertheless should endeavor to be aware of these issues so they can protect their children.

While, thankfully, I am not aware of anyone I ever worked with being convicted of any crimes involving children, they do happen. Just this month a gymnastics coach in Arizona was arrested on suspicion of child molestation (though not in the gym itself).  Less than a year ago another gymnastics coach was arrested in Connecticut on similar charges.

In many families the three areas of expertise, teaching, and safety will be weighted in different ways. Some may value safety more, while others place less emphasis on expertise. Every parent will make the right decision for his/her child, but that decision should be made based on as much information as possible. Sadly, nail salons are better regulated and have more safety requirements than gyms, studios, and practice spaces where children can die or suffer catastrophic injury.

Parents, always, always ask questions and do your due diligence before signing your child up-- and once everything checks out, you can rest easier in deferring to the judgment of the teacher or coach.  Who knows, your child may end up learning from an Olympian!