Literature

“Children Need to Play, not Compete” by Jessica Statsky: An Evaluation by Christine Romano is an essay evaluating Statsky’s argument on competitive sports. Romano appreciates the piece but she thinks that there are important elements that are absent and should be considered. Romano presents her ideas by giving citations what parents might predictably ask regarding Statsky’s argument in both noncontact and contact sports.

Romano cited that Statsky’s work was incomplete because it fails to anticipate certain objections and questions that some parents may raise. Although she showed that she considers about the reaction of the reader, still she didn’t go deeper regarding this matter. She didn’t recognize the reasonable possibilities of her arguments.

The author also cited that Statsky’s work overlooks examples of noncontact team sports that are less likely to be physically and psychologically damaging for a child.  There are sports that focus individual performance like swimming and tennis. Statsky didn’t recognize these possibilities that are so important, and because of these the author thinks the arguments were weak.

The evaluation of Romano is focused mainly on the strengths and weaknesses of Statsky’s work. Statsky’s argument was appropriate, believable and consistent, still it is incomplete. According to Romano, “It seems incomplete because it neglects to anticipate parents' predictable questions and objections and because it fails to support certain parts fully.” She didn’t tackle the possible effects it might bring to the parents who enjoy, support and advocate competitive sports. Such parents have positive experience and thinks that the gains, such as the principle of social cooperation and collaboration, in competitive sports are worth the risks involve.

Romano’s evaluation on the argument considers the effect of Statsky’s work on some parents who patronize competitive sports. She is pointing out elements that are lacking to improve Statsky’s argument.

Romano’s observation about Statsky’s argument was right regarding the opinions and the reaction of the parents. I think Romano was just thinking of the effects it might give to the readers about Statsky’s work. The readers might believe in it and avoid competitive sports. Maybe she (Statsky) was right in some aspects were children might get hurt but this are not the only thing to consider. There are lots of angles to consider in this matter, this includes the skills a child may develop in these kinds of sports. Statsky was focusing only on the bad effects, he is just looking on one side, he didn’t consider that there are lots of good things in competitive sports and this are worth the risks.

The evaluation was just trying to propose that competitive sports shouldn’t be avoided by the parents for their children. Even though there might accidents that can occur during the game it is just worth the lessons and the skills a child can learn. There are also competitive sports that are safe for children. Competitive sports teach child teamwork, patience, coordination, facing fears, and to discover many things that can help them grow. It is not right for parents to avoid competitive sports just to avoid accidents to their children, all things have purpose and this might be the only way a child can learn. In order to grow, you must introduce a lot of things to a child in order for him to understand all the things in this world, even if this means to let them get hurt. Parents don’t like their children to get hurt but they should consider this to let their child grow, because feeling pain is a part of growing.
Source: “Children Need to Play, not Compete” by Jessica Statsky