TV, Teens, & Sex

According to a recent study published in Pediatrics, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, teenagers’ exposure to sexual content on TV is linked to teen pregnancies. The study found that teens exposed to high levels of sexual content on television were twice as likely to be involved in a pregnancy in the following three years as teens with limited exposure.

The study's lead author cautioned that exposure to TV is not the only factor relating to teen pregnancies. She stated, “we don’t think that [TV] is necessarily more significant than some of the family and neighborhood factors that can lead to teen pregnancies. But even when we removed all the other factors, we still saw a compelling link between a high exposure to sexual content on television and teen pregnancies.”

Additionally, the study's abstract states: 

This is the first study to demonstrate a prospective link between exposure to sexual content on television and the experience of a pregnancy before the age of 20. Limiting adolescent exposure to the sexual content on television and balancing portrayals of sex in the media with information about possible negative consequences might reduce the risk of teen pregnancy. Parents may be able to mitigate the influence of this sexual content by viewing with their children and discussing these depictions of sex.

It seems that I continue to be made aware of research challenging my decision to let my son watch TV. As for now, I limit his TV exposure as best I can, and as he matures, I intend on having some very honest conversations with him about what he sees on TV, on the computer, in magazines, and anywhere else that the media is present. I believe that is ultimately the best that we can do as parents - talk to our kids. It is impossible to protect them from everything, but it is very possible to talk to them about anything.

Background TV not good for kids

In my seven months of motherhood, I have spent a lot of time thinking about whether or not I will allow my son to watch TV (movies and videos included), and if so, what limitations will I put on this privilege. Well the time has come for me to get serious about this decision. Just this morning I had my son in my arms, and as he fussed, I switched the TV from the Today show to the Disney Channel. I kid you not, my son was so enthralled in Handy Mandy that within minutes, he had fallen asleep. 

I was somewhat shocked by the effects of one program, but more than shocked, I was feeling guilty. I had used TV to put my child to sleep. And he's only a baby! And though I hate to admit it, this wasn't the first time that I have turned to the TV to entertain my son. 

Because I realize how easy it is to use the TV as a babysitter, child-calmer, and baby-soother, I decided to start thinking seriously about the issue and making some decisions. I imagine that I will allow him to watch some TV, but how much, I am still not sure. I am finding that it is not simply about what he watches. It's equally important that I consider what I am watching when he is present. Not only because of the PG-13 rated content of many shows and commercials, and the link to childhood obesity, but also because of the exposure to constant background noise.

According to a recent study, leaving the TV set on disrupts young children while they are playing and may be detrimental to a child's development. The study found that background TV disrupts the toy play of young children, even when they paid little attention to it; "when the television was on, the children played for significantly shorter periods of time and the time they spent focused on their play was shorter, compared to when the TV was off." According to the study's lead author, "Background TV is potentially a chronic environmental risk factor affecting most American children. Parents should limit their young children's exposure to background television."

Hhm. This complicates things. I not only need to consider limitations to my son's TV exposure but also for mine. And my husband's. Fortunately we only have one TV (and we plan on keeping it that way), but our house is small, and when the TV is on, it nearly fills the entire house with background noise. And I can't help but wonder if the constant background noise is a factor in the attention deficit disorders suffered by so many of our youth.

This recent study leaves me with more to think about as I decide what is best for my son. But more importantly, it leaves me with a challenge. Am I willing to sacrifice my own entertainment for the health and well-being of my son? I hope so (though easier said than done, I am sure).

Stop the stigma.

Please read this request.

As a parent, I am often concerned when I see blatant evidence of our broken society: graphic graffiti on a sidewalk, nudity on television, violence in video games. And as a mental health professional, I am passionate about breaking stigma, such as helping people to understand that to see a therapist does not imply that something is "wrong" with a person. 

I recently received the following request from a colleague. This request spoke directly to my heart as a mom and mental health professional. I contacted the highlighted party immediately because I am not only a concerned citizen, but I am also a concerned mom, educator, and child advocate. Please consider sending a message to this company.

This came from NAMI StigmaBusters:

The Burton Snowboard Company in Vermont, an international leader in the sport industry, recently unveiled its “Primo” line of snowboards, featuring graphic images of self-mutilation. NAMI is protesting the company’s insensitivity to public health concerns.

For people living with mental illnesses, self-injury unfortunately sometimes is a means of coping with severe emotional stress. Physical injury becomes a surrogate for emotional pain. The Burton images reinforce impulses toward such violence and essentially trivializes them.

Spectrum Youth & Family Services in Vermont , which provides housing and services to homeless, foster and at-risk youth, has protested the toxic snowboards by suspending its participation in Burton’s “Chill” program— which provides free snowboarding lessons to disadvantaged youth in cities around the country. Chill’s mission? “To build self-esteem.”

In a newspaper article , Spectrum’s executive director objected also to a Burton snowboard line that features Playboy models, which is being protested by other groups: “I think I have the right to get on a [chairlift] this winter with my 5-year-old and not have him subjected to any of these scenes…I think I have the right not to have my son ask me, ‘Daddy, why is there a picture of someone’s naked bottom on that snowboard? Why is there a picture of a bloody hand all over that snowboard?’”

Please send Burton a message:

• Primo snowboards are a public health hazard.
• Self-injury is not a sport. There is nothing athletic about self-mutilation.
• Graphic illustrations of bleeding fingers are insensitive and trivialize a symptom of mental illness.
• Be one of the good guys. Stop toxic marketing. Support mental health education instead.

Contact:

Mr. Laurent Potdevin, CEO
Burton Snowboard Company
80 Industrial Parkway
Burlington, VT 05401
info@burton.com.

StigmaBusters involved in youth-oriented programs are especially encouraged to contact Burton’s Chill Program to emphasize that the Primo line is a black-eye to the good the company tries to do. They are at risk of losing goodwill and credibility.

Katherine McConnell
Burton Snowboard Company
Director of Chill Program
katherinem@burton.com