I'm going to echo the previous comments about child-led parenting. It's such a subtle area, replete with shades of gray. If a parent suppresses time the child would otherwise spend enthusiastically pursuing the prodigious activity to engage in more normative childhood behaviours and activities, I don't think we can say with certainty that the parent is acting in the best interest of the child.
There is something to be said for well-roundedness, to be sure, in that a certain critical minimum level of social skills, empathy, multifaceted self-concept, etc are required to be resilient and mentally healthy in the long run. I'd argue these thresholds are largely personal, and parents and children might have dramatically different levels required, particularly if the child is a prodigy in a domain where the parent isn't. It's possible that these thresholds aren't even knowable ex persona. For a prodigy who has met his personal minimum critical thresholds and gains net positive utility from pursuing the prodigious talent for the twelfth hour that day, I say indulge the child. What is life if not pleasure?
