Introduction The article reports a study that disputes the long-held belief that overscheduled children are often anxious or depressed. Population and family expert Dr. Sandra Hofferth studied 331 children and surveyed their families regarding their hectic schedules and found out that “hurried children”, a term coined David Elkind in the 1981 bestseller, “The Hurried Child”, are not the most stressed out, but rather, children who are inactive. Hofferth stated that the problem of the study was to see if Elkind’s claim that overscheduled children are stressed and anxious was true. The article did not report Hofferth’s hypothesis to the problem but went on to discuss the methodology she used. She used industry-based behavioral questionnaires to survey families in two Midwestern communities. The population she studied was children and her subjects were the families of these children. Her independent variables were the number of activities these children were involved with and the dependent variables were the attitudes of the children regarding their schedules. Extraneous variables maybe what goes into the scheduling, and other factors in the home or school environment of the children which may cause stress instead of the multiple activities themselves. Discussion The article did not mention a control group for Hofferth’s study, but validated it with the results of the increasing number of studies offering the same results as Hofferths. The article does not provide enough scientific evidence for such results but gave implications of the study to parents. It suggested that although busy children do not show much stress and anxiety, parents should still be on the lookout for signs of stress in the children and in themselves and should make the final decision to cut back on the children’s numerous activities if need be. Although the implications are logical and reasonable, I do not think it has enough information and evidence to persuade me that “hurried children” are not stressed and anxious. It is more of a study to give credence to the article’s author’s bias, being a mother of “hurried children” herself. It presents a lopsided view of the “Hurried Child Syndrome”, that of disputing it to justify the modern way of living. It is a reality that we live in a fast-paced world. The new millennium has brought various changes in our lifestyle that value speed and efficiency. Modern technology makes it possible to facilitate processes which otherwise takes time and energy. Dual-career families make it convenient for parents to engage their children in a variety of activities after school just so they are preoccupied with something while their parents are at work. Also, the competitive atmosphere being fostered by schools and workplaces after graduation causes parents to step up in their pursuit of more opportunities for their children to gain skills to best other competitors. Conclusion Children who are forced to grow up too fast by being overscheduled with a lot of activities miss out on what may truly consist of happy childhood memories such as playing in the neighborhood with friends or simply having fun with nature. What may fill their memory bank are hours of drills, rehearsals, and the perfection of skills as expected by their par