Football and What It Costs.

Bingo.
Every sport has some aspect of danger and long-term injury. If your kids want to play football and you say no, you're an overcontrolling asshole. You shouldn't force your kids to play a sport you want them to and you shouldn't rob them of the opportunity to play one they do.
In an ideal world, L'il Rhody is playing field hockey, basketball and lacrosse. If she wants to play something else, that's fine too. If she tells me to GFM and she hates sports, that's cool too, as long as she gives them a chance.

 

The kids don't know the risks and the long-term effects when they're making that decision. That's why you have the decision, and why the league makes you and not your kid sign a waiver of liability.

 

Then just put them in a rubber room until they're 18. That way they'll be safe.

 

Hmmm, on the one hand we have the mounting medical evidence of what concussions can do for the long term. And on the other hand we have Rhody challenging us to "be a man, dammit!"

Just don't know which way I'd lean. Tough one.

 

"Overcontrolling asshole" is another word for parent. That's what parents do, we assess risk. I won't be letting him do a lot of things he wants to do.

 

Is sheltering them much better?

 

Of course not. That is what those in the logic business know as a "false choice."

I'm a huge believer in scientific, rational parenting. That means assessing risks in a dispassionate way based on evidence.

Based on that evidence, I allow and intend to allow my son to do a lot of things that many parents would not let their children do. There are other things that parents find harmless that I draw a line on.

I've read the evidence on the dangers of contact sports. I've read the counter-arguments. I find the evidence to be more persuasive.

There's a whole world between sheltering and reckless, and I navigate that world with more nuanced views than "Come on, it's football!" or "You can't put your kid in a bubble."