Post #3 (Week 8)

This week I will be talking about a controversy in physical activity; I will be talking specifically about contact sports in adolescents. The big question is whether playing contact sports is worth all the associated risks, especially in adolescents. I’d like to present both sides of the argument and then give my personal opinion on the matter.

Firstly, on the side against contact sports, the main argument is that they’re dangerous. Even when an athlete is fully geared in protective equipment, there still can be bone, muscle, connective tissue, and even brain damage that can occur from contact sports.
One common injury from contact sports is concussions. Concussions are basically heavy blows to the head which can cause acute to chronic discomfort. Symptoms included, but are not limited to, headaches, dizziness, amnesia or blurry vision (Moser & Schatz, 92). Recently, a big subject of discussion has been on concussions due to Sidney Crosby’s (a high level NHL player). More focus and research has now come to light, because of Crosby, explaining the chronic effects of concussions. Concussions have been thought to be an injury that lasts for a few months; however, the effects can persist past a year and a full recovery may not even be possible. Furthermore, the average life expectancy of a retired NFL football player is 55 years, arguably due to concussions, which is 25 years less than the average male. Now, if a fully grown, geared, and trained elite athlete is severely damaged by hits in their sport, how will a growing teenager cope with these blows and their problems, especially since they are not even fully mentally developed yet? Obviously, there are many complications and life-shortening consequences from repeated concussions, which stem from contact sports and there is good reason just from concussions alone for contact sports for adolescents.

Another point that has been made about contact sports on adolescents is the issues of broken bones and fractured bones. Although, children and adolescents recover faster from fractured and broken bones than adults, there are still complications associated with bone damage (Patel & Nelson). If the bone is fractured or broken there is a good chance that the growth plate, the ends of a bone, may be damaged. If the growth plate of a bone is damaged, growth complications may arise, which can stunt the growth of a child or teen (Orthoinfo). Additionally, there is a positive co-relation between number of broken bone incidences and fractures with decreased bone mineral content. That means that the more you break your bones, the less minerals (Vitamin D and Calcium) your bones will have which may onset osteoporosis (loss of bone mineral content) earlier in an individual. Teens and adolescents want to maximize bone mineral content loading because the average human’s peak bone mineral content occurs at age 20, and from there on it’s downhill; therefore, by playing contact sports a teenagers may reduce their bone mineral content due to injuries.

Contrarily, on the side for contact sports, the argument is mostly based on cultural, sexual, and social factors than science (Gard & Meyenn, 30-31). Some argue that contact sports have been played that way and should always be played that way and that the violence is part of the game and by removing it would be like murdering the sport itself. Others say that the protective equipment and stricter rules make the game “safe” enough. Society has portrayed contact sports as a "man's game" and has depicted pain as being a “character-building” and stereotypical co-relation of a man and violence support contact sports. Even media portrays violence as “manly”, examples include movies like 300, Gladiator, and pretty much any action movie with a male protagonist. Society also endorses contact sports, the UFC, NFL, and NHL are incredibly popular sports being watched and if you watch the NHL the crowd usually goes in an uproar at the start of a hockey fight. Most of the reasons supporting contact sports are social and psychological factors that correlate violence with greatness.  

From my personal view, I think that adolescents should be allowed to participate in contact sports, but with firm conditions. I believe that protective gear needs to be worn by all players and that the players themselves should not be playing if they either injured in any way or unfamiliar with the rules, especially on hits, of their sport. Secondly, I think that the rules of contact sports, except fighting, need to be revised to the point where blows to the head, especially intentional, have huge repercussions and penalties because currently they are, in my opinion, tolerated in current sports when they should be intolerable at any level. To conclude, I think that adolescents should be allowed to play contact sports because it’s ultimately their decision but I believe that injuries should be minimized by having all the preventative methods in place with revised rules that have firm penalties in place.

Works Cited

Dilip R. Patel, Terry L. Nelson, SPORTS INJURIES IN ADOLESCENTS, Medical Clinics of North America, Volume 84, Issue 4, 1 July 2000, Pages 983-1007, ISSN 0025-7125, 10.1016/S0025-7125(05)70270-4.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025712505702704)


Rosemarie Scolaro Moser, Philip Schatz, Enduring effects of concussion in youth athletes, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Volume 17, Issue 1, January 2002, Pages 91-100, ISSN 0887-6177, 10.1016/S0887-6177(01)00108-1. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887617701001081) 


Michael Gard & Robert Meyenn (2000): Boys, Bodies, Pleasure and Pain: Interrogating Contact Sports in Schools, Sport, Education and Society, 5:1, 19-34 


American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons: Orthoinfo, Growth Plate Fractures (2010)
Retrieved from: http://orthoinfo.aaos.org/topic.cfm?topic=A00040