It's funny the wide range of opinions here. I really don't think there's much of a problem as long as things are kept reasonable.
To mike ross:
I actually don't disagree with your main claim so long as it's qualified adequately; As you initially stated it, I disagree with you because you fail to qualify your conclusion. That is, you make a wide sweeping claim without regard to the specific conditions. If the kids trains light, with proper form, and once a week, will he be shuttled into puberty, his growth stunted, and never develop to his genetic capacity? Does this change if he tries to lift as much weight as he can ("Max out") once in a blue moon? If you believe that is the case without exception, it is my contention that you are wrong. That, in my opinion, is a leap.
If instead you think, given those details, that it will LIKELY lead to what you have claimed, I'd be very interested in seeing some science on the matter. Because given those circumstances it would seem, to me, that a kid could train under those conditions and not ruin his/her body.
Now, if they were maxing out with regularity we'd be on the same page. Does that clear things up? I think you make a valid and very reasonable claim based on common knowledge yet I think that, given the low frequency with which these kids are lifting (assuming the conditions I named are accurate), than I believe I must agree to disagree.
Either way, no hard feelings...