UM, I say that because of the very nature of having a CHILD working/competing/interacting alongside highly accomplished adults is... well...
I think that there probably are some inescapably unhealthy things associated with that-- namely, what interactions/activities must be sacrificed in order to accommodate the TIME to a singular pursuit at such a young age. Those sacrifices are almost certainly not all benign, and we all have just 24 hours in each day.
At some point, you wind up sacrificing essential development-- and beyond that, yeah, it's Bonsai treatment, whether it's child-led or not.
It may be the reason why there is such a fuzzy (IME) line between prodigy and savant. If you nurture that singular talent, at what cost elsewhere? KWIM?
It's the central theme in Searching for Bobby Fisher... which, yeah, it's old, but it's also a really great parable for any parent of a high-end talented child, or even just an HG+ one. What it doesn't address is what to do when your CHILD is the one leading, and when you as a parent are uncomfortable allowing your child to deliberately squelch development in order to maximize the development of the exceptionality.
I guess I see even prodigies as children first, and their talents second. They don't always know what is best for them long-term, but then again, parents don't have a crystal ball, either. You can't be both a musical prodigy and have a "normal" childhood. Something has to give, and either way there are probably going to be regrets down the road.
