I suspect all of you have read about the 16 year old girl who tried to be the youngest to sail around the world by herself. She failed, her boat getting dismasted in a storm. Her rescue involved Australian naval operations, the chartering of a 757 (!) and intervention by two private commercial ships.
It is now revealed that-
The father had a reality TV contract on her voyage
The family is broke
They have 7 children
These children are rarely seen outside their home
They are home schooled
I have been troubled by several parts of this story, but now I am especially upset. Being the parent of two teens, I cannot imagine letting one of them sail solo around the world. It does not matter that the father is a sailing instructor, or that the girl is described as ‘adventurous’, or any other euphemism you prefer.
The plain reality, regardless of qualifications or spirit is that this activity is incredibly dangerous. It is not reasonable to voluntarily expose a 16 year old to life threatening danger. No accomplishment is worth the potential risk. As I often tell patients, if the risk is small, the stakes are enormous. So it is here. If her father is such an expert sailor, what was this girl doing in the Indian Ocean in winter time (for them) and storm season?
I was further struck by the pablum expressions of concern by the girl’s parents. Granting one is willing to allow a teen child to sail around the world alone, there should be absolutely no concern on the part of the parents. This is as foolish as the concerns about pregnancy raised by a woman after unprotected intercourse. If you were so worried about it, why did they let it happen?
The latest details edge into child exploitation and abuse. Child performers routinely have their earnings held in escrow for them until they are between 18 and 22. The escrow is usually handled by the parents, or a qualified advisor. There have been some suits over mismanagement of these earnings over the years, but generally the money is handed over to the now adult child at maturity (18-22 for most, 35-never for Lindsay Lohan).
If a reality contract was made for this girl’s exploits, she should have been part of the negotiation, and should have had the proceeds held for her. If the contract was made by the father alone, with monies coming to him in his name, it is exploitation no different than a child being sent to work in a coal mine and the parents being given the money by the company. In fact, she would have been much safer being sent into a coal mine for 6 months than trying to sail around the world. Maybe ‘World’s youngest female coal miner’ didn’t resonate with the TV people….
The fact the family is broke raises further concern for the appropriateness of the contract. Can a minor give consent to a risky proposal knowing her father will declare bankruptcy without her efforts? For sterilization consent, this would be considered coercion and consent under duress. In thinking about the money, who paid for the chartered 757? Might that have been the TV company? Would or will the cost be taken out of the proceeds of the TV contract?
The home schooling is mostly irrelevant. Home schooled children do better on standardized testing than the overall public school population. This is skewed by the fact that most home schooled children are white. I think the issue is relevant because these children were rarely seen outside their home, and did not interact with society at large. This raises yet further the possibility that the teen’s trip was manipulated in a closed environment.
Several issues and questions arise out of this-
Should the family be investigated by child welfare authorities? I think yes. There is enough troublesome or questionable material here to warrant an outside evaluation of the home and its dynamics.
Should teens be allowed to try stunts like this? I think not. The judgment required is far greater than that to opt for sexual activity, but we prosecute and condemn such sexuality while ogling and cheering for someone doing something even more dangerous and foolish. One CNN comment compared this girl’s adventurousness to that spirit which built our nation. That is nonsense. The men and women who did so much for our nation did so not only in a different time, but at an older age. Further, they were not motivated by stunt money or a simple sense of adventure, but by dreams of land, freedom and wealth.
Should reality TV shows participants be required to be over 18? Absolutely yes. Whether the show involves make-up, styling, singing or adventure behavior, all of it is a cheap exploitation of the recklessness and visual attraction of teens. Ever notice how girls under 18 appear so much more frequently than boys? Think that’s an accident? I don’t. Whether subliminal or deliberate, society wants to look at teen girls screaming, jumping in bikinis or otherwise physically or emotionally exposed. That’s wrong.
The whole story is tawdry from start to finish. Inadequate parenting, terrible planning, TV manipulation or inducement. A great deal can be learned about our society not only from what we prevent, but from what we condone. This should not be condoned, and I hope the story will induce others not to attempt such stunts, but to think more clearly about risk, reward, TV and parenting.
Ted
It is now revealed that-
The father had a reality TV contract on her voyage
The family is broke
They have 7 children
These children are rarely seen outside their home
They are home schooled
I have been troubled by several parts of this story, but now I am especially upset. Being the parent of two teens, I cannot imagine letting one of them sail solo around the world. It does not matter that the father is a sailing instructor, or that the girl is described as ‘adventurous’, or any other euphemism you prefer.
The plain reality, regardless of qualifications or spirit is that this activity is incredibly dangerous. It is not reasonable to voluntarily expose a 16 year old to life threatening danger. No accomplishment is worth the potential risk. As I often tell patients, if the risk is small, the stakes are enormous. So it is here. If her father is such an expert sailor, what was this girl doing in the Indian Ocean in winter time (for them) and storm season?
I was further struck by the pablum expressions of concern by the girl’s parents. Granting one is willing to allow a teen child to sail around the world alone, there should be absolutely no concern on the part of the parents. This is as foolish as the concerns about pregnancy raised by a woman after unprotected intercourse. If you were so worried about it, why did they let it happen?
The latest details edge into child exploitation and abuse. Child performers routinely have their earnings held in escrow for them until they are between 18 and 22. The escrow is usually handled by the parents, or a qualified advisor. There have been some suits over mismanagement of these earnings over the years, but generally the money is handed over to the now adult child at maturity (18-22 for most, 35-never for Lindsay Lohan).
If a reality contract was made for this girl’s exploits, she should have been part of the negotiation, and should have had the proceeds held for her. If the contract was made by the father alone, with monies coming to him in his name, it is exploitation no different than a child being sent to work in a coal mine and the parents being given the money by the company. In fact, she would have been much safer being sent into a coal mine for 6 months than trying to sail around the world. Maybe ‘World’s youngest female coal miner’ didn’t resonate with the TV people….
The fact the family is broke raises further concern for the appropriateness of the contract. Can a minor give consent to a risky proposal knowing her father will declare bankruptcy without her efforts? For sterilization consent, this would be considered coercion and consent under duress. In thinking about the money, who paid for the chartered 757? Might that have been the TV company? Would or will the cost be taken out of the proceeds of the TV contract?
The home schooling is mostly irrelevant. Home schooled children do better on standardized testing than the overall public school population. This is skewed by the fact that most home schooled children are white. I think the issue is relevant because these children were rarely seen outside their home, and did not interact with society at large. This raises yet further the possibility that the teen’s trip was manipulated in a closed environment.
Several issues and questions arise out of this-
Should the family be investigated by child welfare authorities? I think yes. There is enough troublesome or questionable material here to warrant an outside evaluation of the home and its dynamics.
Should teens be allowed to try stunts like this? I think not. The judgment required is far greater than that to opt for sexual activity, but we prosecute and condemn such sexuality while ogling and cheering for someone doing something even more dangerous and foolish. One CNN comment compared this girl’s adventurousness to that spirit which built our nation. That is nonsense. The men and women who did so much for our nation did so not only in a different time, but at an older age. Further, they were not motivated by stunt money or a simple sense of adventure, but by dreams of land, freedom and wealth.
Should reality TV shows participants be required to be over 18? Absolutely yes. Whether the show involves make-up, styling, singing or adventure behavior, all of it is a cheap exploitation of the recklessness and visual attraction of teens. Ever notice how girls under 18 appear so much more frequently than boys? Think that’s an accident? I don’t. Whether subliminal or deliberate, society wants to look at teen girls screaming, jumping in bikinis or otherwise physically or emotionally exposed. That’s wrong.
The whole story is tawdry from start to finish. Inadequate parenting, terrible planning, TV manipulation or inducement. A great deal can be learned about our society not only from what we prevent, but from what we condone. This should not be condoned, and I hope the story will induce others not to attempt such stunts, but to think more clearly about risk, reward, TV and parenting.
Ted
I'd like to know who paid for the boat, food, communications devices etc if they were broke. I can't imagine sending my child off to the deadly seas - alone! at 16! I'm having a difficult time sending mine to college next year :)
ReplyDelete