An alert reader sent me a note wondering if I wanted to write about the burgeoning concept of ‘redshirting’ a kindergartner.

You know what this is: the practice of purposefully holding a child back from starting kindergarten even though the child is ‘of age’ as far as the school is concerned. The most common application comes when you have a kid who is *this* close to the cut-off date, and you choose not to enroll Junior because he’ll be the tiniest/least mature in the class.

Full disclosure: two of my four kids were ‘redshirted,’ using this definition. Both of them were August babies, turning five just days before the cutoff. My oldest daughter was smart as all get out, very mature, very bright; but her father and I were divorced just days before school would have started and we didn’t want to pile on the stress on her poor, little five-year-old head. My oldest son was very bright, but very immature and unfocused. We were fairly certain that, had we thrown him into kindergarten when his age allowed it, the teacher would have committed suicide or run amok, complete with a hostage crisis. This suspicion was borne out when he went to kindergarten the next year and the poor thing (the teacher) almost had a nervous breakdown. He was *that* much fun.

Studies are coming out now that show that keeping the kid out that extra year doesn’t do much, if anything, for their scholastic success. I’m not even going to debate this one; I’m tossing it back into the conversation pool as being too small.

But what I’m struck by (and what I’m going to beat to death like a rented mule) is the idea that parents today have that the idea in their heads that they’re going to manage their kids’ lives as if they, the parents, are the kids’ agents.

Think about it: that’s what’s happening.

First, the obvious: Agents (or coaches who are fitting you into a team and want to promote the best results) decide when is the best time for you to play. Redshirting decisions are usually coaching staff decisions made for the good of the team.

Agents negotiate with your employer for you. (Do you let your kids solve what they can with their teachers, no matter how young they are, or do you *always* step in?)

Agents never leave you to fend for yourself…they either help you themselves or get someone to do your homework in college for you. (How much are you ‘helping’ your child with homework and how much are you doing yourself?)

Agents smooth out every bump and difficulty for you so your life is as easy as possible. (Well???)

More full disclosure: I kept this post on a draft status for a few days now because I had trouble deciding how I felt about this concept. Well, no longer. Even more disclosure: I didn’t ‘agent’ my kids, because I was just too damned tired. And a little selfish. I only had so much spare time after working a full-time job (or two) and I just didn’t have the energy to sit and do their homework with them. All my peers did, and it was clearly the expectation of the elementary school, but I just couldn’t pony up the enthusiasm. The thought of doing that for four kids is overwhelming the way the explosion of Mt. St. Helens is ‘overwhelming.’

And I’m retroactively glad for that. Yes, my kids are probably at a disadvantage when they compete with other kids who have agents-for-parents. But they have more self-confidence, I think, because they’re aware that they’re competing credibly against adults. And they never have to face the day when they don’t have an agent standing behind or in front of them, greasing the skids at every turn.

© E.S. Evans 2010