Both groups are acting rationally, but their behaviors are based on different premises. The "relax" group values reducing the risk of suicide, burnout, and future psychological problems. The "push harder" group is responding to the (completely real) pressures to compete that get more serious all the time, pressures that tell them their children will become part of the precarious segment of society if they don't. The former group "should" be listened to on a health basis, but their ideas suffer from a collective action problem, so the latter group is probably going to win out one way or another (even if things like homework or whatever gets banned, they can always step up things like tutoring or extracurriculars outside school.)

The latter is willing to chance suicide or psychological problems in exchange for the reduced likelihood of future career failure. I think the way to deal with a Gordian knot like this is to convince everyone that it's actually pro-career success to have people step back, pursue creative activities, etc. Convince them that:

- Napping is a productivity booster (recent article on HN talked about this one.)

- Many jobs in the future will require creativity, not just memorization or technical skills (personal chefs, gardeners, high-end nannies, pilots, publicists/marketers, artists, entrepreneurs, and tutors as Tyler Cowen and others have suggested.)

- Lack of exposure to "play" ideas will limit possible inputs that could help with everything from game and UI design to business strategies. We're in a highly specialized society, but cross-disciplinarity is becoming more important every day.

- Many jobs of the future will require both technical and social skills (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-best-jobs-now-requir...)

The single minded focus on pure academics is missing the bigger picture. The "push harders" need to learn that.