Who We Are

The Humane Exchange

Marie Belew Wheatley's Blog

Are Children No Different From a Litter of Puppies?

Posted August 13, 2009

In a recent story on the Today Show about the possibility of “Octomom” Nadya Suleman doing a reality show featuring her and her 14 children, Paul Petersen, former child star of The Donna Reed Show, said, “I want you to consider these octuplets as a litter of puppies. Because if they were a litter of puppies, the American Humane Association would have an animal control officer there in a second. Our priorities have been flip-flopped somehow.”

I first met Paul Petersen in 2004, my first year here at American Humane. Paul is the founder of A Minor Consideration, a nonprofit that advocates for, guides and supports young performers.

When I met him, we began a conversation on preventing the exploitation of children in film and television -- a conversation we have recently continued. Some years ago, American Humane worked with the Screen Actors Guild’s Young Performers committee to research child labor laws and working conditions in all 50 states and some popular foreign filming locations.

As you know, American Humane is the only organization with the authority to monitor the use of animals in filmed entertainment. Producers who follow our guidelines and have us on set may earn the right to put our disclaimer “No Animals Were Harmed”® in the end credits of their productions.

But what about children?

Many people think that the government or some other mysterious body looks after children. Except for social services agencies that receive reports of child abuse, there is no organization tasked with setting or enforcing standards for the humane and responsible employment of children in television, especially reality programming. Some states have vigorous child labor laws, and some don’t.

Reality programming is cheap to produce and the current economy is making it more and more attractive. And as reality shows featuring children, like Jon & Kate Plus 8, become more popular, the children involved find themselves in an unnatural world.

Reality programming is fundamentally different from other programming. Professional child actors presumably have chosen to work in entertainment and have received appropriate training and preparation to do so. Children who find themselves on reality shows may not understand the intrusion the show will create in their lives, especially if they are very young or infants, in the case of Suleman’s children.

Professional child actors go through a casting process so the producers can find the child with the right temperament and training for the job. The problem with reality programming is that “cast members” are picked for their demographics, race, gender, or some eccentricity of personality. A child may just come along with the parent as a sort of “package deal” -- it doesn’t mean the child has the right temperament for the job.

Children are inexperienced in life and vulnerable. They cannot speak up for themselves. And they certainly are not props or set dressing. They don’t understand what being on TV will entail or how their lives -- both their daily lives and their futures -- will be affected. Even with professional child actors, there are often far-reaching emotional and psychological effects that may not be immediately apparent. Reality producers casting children are potentially putting the welfare of the children at risk for the sake of something dramatic or unexpected being captured on film.

We must ask ourselves whether children in the industry are exploited. What is appropriate and what is unacceptable? The industry must take care to set standards for using children in entertainment -- including reality programming. Our children deserve it.

Bookmark this on del.icio.us Digg this submit to reddit Reddit this StumbleUpon

Submit a comment or question below, or email Marie.

This is not an open forum, but Marie and American Humane welcome all comments and points of view. We will post selected comments that are considerate and thought-provoking, and we may edit comments for brevity, grammar and/or inflammatory language.

Comments Form

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous at: September 16, 2009

I to do not understand why it seems that their are more laws protecting animals than there are for the children. I myself have made numerious reports to child protective services about emoitional abuse and nothing seems to get done for these great kids. They are not feed aquite meals, now if they were animals they would have been removed already. I dont understand why it is that we have all of these laws protecting animals ( which we should ), but when it comes to our children nothing seems to get done. Maybe if enough people get together mabe we can make a difference for the children everywhere.

Submitted by jentilpet at: August 19, 2009

It's almost as if our thoughts met,creating a statement of spiritual strangth,re: how I see an animal,& feel that same love for a baby,visa-versa!! I don't think babies,like 2-5yrs should be w/ puppies especially alone..there must be intellegence,diligence!I don't know in what sense you meant "live together!" however? Judge Judy once said,when her grandchildren are in a room,she makes sure her small [2?] dogs are not!! kids do not see pups,&cats[kittens as the fragile babies they are,rather,playthings,the owner,nurturer woman of the house[& husband] must be aware of the "cute factor",there's no way a child will understand how to play w/ & what "play" means to begin w/!Often poked,or bothered while sleeping,can cause undo stress,this "cute factor" is insipid&dangerous.