Is it immoral to exploit the talents of the young?

Honey Boo Boo

no talent .....still exploited

get money while they want to give it I guess
 
Last edited:
Yes but what I'm saying is
you literally cannot say that it is abuse of a child.

"Child maltreatment, sometimes referred to as child abuse and neglect, includes all forms of physical and emotional ill-treatment, sexual abuse, neglect, and exploitation that results in actual or potential harm to the child’s health, development or dignity. Within this broad definition, five subtypes can be distinguished – physical abuse; sexual abuse; neglect and negligent treatment; emotional abuse; and exploitation."

you can't reliably say there is any "abuse" going on, because you have no idea about the situation. all you have seen is a child playing drums. you don't know anything else about him. my mum used to be the departmental head of a social workers in belfast btw, incase that has any relevance. which it doesn't, because even i have no idea what is going on in the situation. just like you don't. just like i don't. just like no one knows. just like this thread will go round in circle after circle if we talk about "abuse".

What I don't understand is, if you truly believe there is an element of abuse, why you (i'm guessing?) haven't alerted anybody, even youtube? that's the first thing i would have done instantly. however there's a reason i didn't. because from the evidence available it simply isn't.

What I have just done is to c&p this thread to the parents (owners of the youtube account), maybe they'll come and answer directly.

I 'literally' can and I 'literally' did

:)

There's enough information for me to form a personal opinion which is what I have done.

It's not compulsory for anyone to agree with me.

In terms of reporting these people, why would I? I've already made it perfectly clear that it's my personal opinion only and that it's not sexual, or physical abuse, just my view that really shit parenting is a form of abuse...how exactly would that hang if I reported them ?

Personally, I'm just chewing the fat...I'm not quite at the point of running to Save the Children with this just yet.
 
What I don't understand is, if you truly believe there is an element of abuse, why you (i'm guessing?) haven't alerted anybody, even youtube?

Because what is immoral and what is illegal don't always tally. It is not illegal to allow your 9 year old daughter to walk down the street wearing a T Shirt that says "Future Porn Star", but it is highly immoral and unquestionably abusive - yet plenty of people do allow it.
 
I think SquadLeader's description of "abuse" was in no way incongruous: just because someone hasn't been raped on stabbed it doesn't mean they cannot be described as abused. Surely there are shades of grey [if you'll pardon the expression]?

Correct...

Abuse of trust, abuse of position, etc. etc.

Abuse does not = sexual/physical abuse. It covers a wide spectrum
 
Because what is immoral and what is illegal don't always tally. It is not illegal to allow your 9 year old daughter to walk down the street wearing a T Shirt that says "Future Porn Star", but it is highly immoral and unquestionably abusive - yet plenty of people do allow it.

Very good !

My better half watches these programmes on UK TV about these beauty parades in Southern US states.

Nothing illegal about those..

Young children being made up, dressed like absolute tarts, and putting 'flippers' in to give them a beautiful smile, and a nice clean set of teeth.

Those parents entering their children think they are wonderful things...I think they are 'sick'.

It's what it's all about...opinions
 
Just to give some perspective on the rights that children are entitled to (according to the UN), I'll post this up:

http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/humanrights/resources/child.asp

Interestingly, the US has not ratified the treaty (only the US and Somalia haven't) but that's not relevant here. This is purely to try to objectify what constitutes 'abuse' - in that their rights have been violated - and what does not. Read away.

EDIT:

The UN said:
The child shall be protected against all forms of neglect, cruelty and exploitation. He shall not be the subject of traffic, in any form.
The child shall not be admitted to employment before an appropriate minimum age; he shall in no case be caused or permitted to engage in any occupation or employment which would prejudice his health or education, or interfere with his physical, mental or moral development.
 
these beauty parades in Southern US states. Nothing illegal about those.. Young children being made up, dressed like absolute tarts, and putting 'flippers' in to give them a beautiful smile, and a nice clean set of teeth. Those parents entering their children think they are wonderful things...I think they are 'sick'.

That's an excellent analogy. Any parent who thinks that no harm can come of such things should check out what happened to JonBenet Ramsey.
 
oh christ, don't bring the UN into this, who knows what we might start supporting!
in this thread: first world problems
 
oh christ, don't bring the UN into this, who knows what we might start supporting!
in this thread: first world problems

I'm a broad supporter of the UN - at least its conventions on human rights and the like. Big mistakes have been made in their military operations (just look at Srebrenica) but by-and-large their conventions are well-written and provide a solid framework when discussing worldwide issues like torture, slavery and rights abuses.

Not a perfect organisation by any means, or even by any measure but the frameworks are interesting and relevant.
 
We can't tell from where we are sitting if that childs experience is healthy or not.

Exterior appearances(within reason) and prejudice are meaningless in evaluating the health of a childs situation.

Heck, as a culture we can't even agree what is and isn't a healthy situation - except for the extremes.

I avoid the term "exploit" as it has more than one meaning in formality as well as in common usage (especially across professions).
 
Cheers Clave. I'm happy, just as long as things don't get too circular.

For me to be concerned I would need to see footage of the mother going all Buddy Rich on the kid's arse. No doubt there's some harrying and pushing, but parents often find ways of unnecessarily hassling kids. I've seen these kinds of pushy parents in action and, while it's a bit embarrassing, you wouldn't send out to child welfare about it.

Don't understand concern about a kid age 6 not yet having lesson. Often lessons start later. The kid is playing for the same reason most of us do. It's not as though the boy's being cruelly driven to do sums or go to Sunday school or eat broccoli - activities genuinely designed to disappoint your child. They want him to play drums! Hallelujah! I should be so lucky.

In the end, I've only been in this chat because I used to haunt an ethics forum in the same way I haunt this one. I keep apologising for being so over the top but people keep telling me it's okay - so I continue :)

Anyway, my attitude towards children (and especially proud parents) is George Carlinesque and my care factor for some stranger's contribution to overpopulation is zero. Got kids? Bully for you. Next topic.

So they shovel their brat around the place to play his drums. He has great natural talent but it's not as though he actually sounds good yet. Every now and then he gets a nice pocket. I like that he tends more towards groove than blowing chops, unlike most drum "wunderkinds". Just because many people equate ability to perform tricks with being a good drummer, doesn't make them right. Didn't stop Ringo and Charlie Watts from make a good living.

If we want to talk abuse then there's tons worse around - including the abuse of not letting a kid play drums or play music! Where's the outrage there, mmm? Priorities, people!
 
The media sure like to get us feeling good about life and what goes on.

Screenshot from this morning's "paper". It's so good to be alive!
 

Attachments

  • SMH-depressing-screenshot.jpg
    SMH-depressing-screenshot.jpg
    170.6 KB · Views: 532
The media sure like to get us feeling good about life and what goes on.

Screenshot from this morning's "paper". It's so good to be alive!

The reference to Macca needing '1 more mine' is a thing of beauty...

Paul_McCartney_landmines_campaign_zps8ea40c32.jpg
 
The media sure like to get us feeling good about life and what goes on.

Screenshot from this morning's "paper". It's so good to be alive!

The reference to Macca needing '1 more big mine' is a thing of beauty...

Paul_McCartney_landmines_campaign_zps8ea40c32.jpg
 
I struggle to see how it could be immoral. As long as the kid isn't hating life as it is, I don't see much harm at all. When he gets pushed into doing something he's not into, that's a different matter.

Agree. What a great thing to happen so early in one's life. As long as his family is supportive and his his best interests in mind, this could be the beginning of a lifetime of achievement and contribution.
 
Because what is immoral and what is illegal don't always tally. It is not illegal to allow your 9 year old daughter to walk down the street wearing a T Shirt that says "Future Porn Star", but it is highly immoral and unquestionably abusive - yet plenty of people do allow it.

edit: nvm killed myself
 
Last edited:
edit: nvm killed myself

No need to kill yourself, Chief - I'm sure I've been called a lot worse by people who know me a lot better over the years. As the saying goes, we're just talking bollocks over the internet so don't worry too much about it.

P.S. You're welcome to that High Five anytime . . .
 
I believe a 6 year old's place is in a classroom learning about Maths, English, and Life.

Only problem with this statement is that student who do music also do better in math and science. As long as his grades aren't suffering, or he has a tutor on the road like every single child actor for the last 60 years, I see no harm. Kids will decide when thay have had enough. Let the kid live.And where else better to learn life than out in the world and not just in a class room being told Christoher Columbus discoverd America or that the Civil War was fought over slavery. He'll learn more about life living it and not reading about it.
 
I believe a 6 year old's place is in a classroom learning about Maths, English, and Life.

Only problem with this statement is that student who do music also do better in math and science. As long as his grades aren't suffering, or he has a tutor on the road like every single child actor for the last 60 years, I see no harm. Kids will decide when thay have had enough. Let the kid live.And where else better to learn life than out in the world and not just in a class room being told Christoher Columbus discoverd America or that the Civil War was fought over slavery. He'll learn more about life living it and not reading about it.

Right.

So do music...at school.

Given the propensity for child actors to often go all 'screwed up' later in life, I'm not sure I'd be basing an assertion on the history of child actors.

No-one will persuade me that a 6 year old child knows what's best for him or herself, and no-one will persuade me that the critical grounding at this age is to be found anywhere other than at school, with other 6 year old kids, and trained teachers who (generally) know what they are doing.

But I do respect all your opinions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top