That news will be welcome in households like the Oviedos’, in Highland Park, Ill. Nine-year-old Bianca spends six hours a week in rhythmic-gymnastics classes and three hours a week at ballet, plus a half-hour piano lesson. “The alternative would be playing on the computer or watching TV,” says her mother, Anca, who believes Bianca benefits by learning to focus, making new friends and acquiring new skills.
The new paper doesn’t sway some experts who’ve advocated against activity-creep. They say kids are far busier–and overstressed by it all–than the numbers suggest. “This is an example of researchers using big data sets to dispute the lived experience of many, many parents and families,” says William Doherty, a University of Minnesota family-studies professor. Some skeptics question whether the self-reported time-diary data are really accurate; others say they don’t account for all the minivan time spent getting between activities. Alvin Rosenfeld, co-author of “The Over-Scheduled Child,” says: “If people follow this advice [and do more activities], I think it will be pretty damaging.”
Despite the doubters, the new data are a small step toward a better understanding of what’s best for kids. And no matter what the numbers show, there’s no disputing that every child is different–and some will absolutely do better with less. Lisa Dilg of South Lyon, Mich., feels as though her 6-year-old twins, Robert and Elizabeth, are the only kids in town who don’t take skiing and ice-skating lessons, and she recently pulled Robert out of tae kwon do. “This poor kid was so tired … [saying] ‘Mommy, can we stay at home?’ says Lisa. “There is nothing wrong with cuddling up on the couch with Mom and Dad.” And for families who prefer to bond on the sidelines of soccer fields, the latest research can provide a different kind of comfort.
