Teens, Sexting and Felony Child Pornography
April is Child Abuse Prevention month. This is a month to become aware of the different types of child abuse and what we can do to prevent or diminish it.
There just may be one type of child abuse that you aren’t familiar with – “sexting” – which is becoming more widespread daily.
We all know that cell phones with cameras have opened up a whole new world of possibilities for users. Unfortunately, many youngsters are abusing themselves and others with a new type of texting, involving graphic displays. Statistics show that up to 18% of teenage girls (almost one in five) has participated.
Whether the explicit displays are of blatant nudity and sex acts, violence, drunkeness and/or drug use, teenagers are not only breaking laws, they are also doing long-term damage to themselves or others.
While teenagers may view “sexting” (a combination of texting and graphic images) as the cool thing to do, there is much more at stake.
Though many teens see sexting as “paparazzi for teens”, it is much more serious than they know.
Because sexting usually involves participants under the age of 18, the graphic images actually are considered Child Pornography.
This means teens who participate in sexting can be prosecuted under Felony Child Pornography laws and be labeled as a “sex offender” for a period of 20 years.
Felony Sex Offenders?
Sexting is explicit and stupid, but do we want to label these young people as “Felony Sex Offenders”? I think not!
On the other hand, I definitely disagree with the Vermont legislature that wants to legalize sexting. This is a nasty problem in every state, but legalizing it is NOT the solution, in my opinion.
Perhaps Ohio has the right idea – make sexting a misdemeanor, rather than a felony.
This is a problem that can be mostly stopped by explaining a few facts of life and law to teens and preteens.
Experts say that the way to approach teens is NOT to discuss the matter as an issue of RIGHT or WRONG, but as an issue of COOL vs. UNCOOL! In other words, speak to teens in their language.
- Teens need to know that the practice of “tagging” is increasing. That’s when someone gets access to the explicit photo and broadcasts it online. This can be done by ANYONE and the results spread like wildfire, especially by online pornographers and pedophiles.
- Reports show that MySpace posts about drugs, sex and violence are increasing (up to an estimated one half of all postings) and being spread worldwide.
- Teens need to know that any information posted about them online is available to anyone, including future employers, as well as the creepy internet predators and pornographers mentioned before..
Google Yourself
As a precautionary measure, it would be wise for parents to suggest that their child Google’s their own name, nickname and screen names, to see what information and what websites they are already on. This can be eye-opening. In fact, this is a good idea for parents as well.
Another bit of advice for parents is to scan the teen’s MySpace/Facebook/Twitter sites, or any others they belong to. Experts suggest you can give them a few hours warning so they have time to remove any inappropriate material, which is very desirable. Knowing that parents will be monitoring those sites on an ongoing basis is an excellent preventative.
Another Epidemic “Sign of the Times”
We now have the Sexting Epidemic, to go along with the Pregnancy, Obesity and Dropout Epidemics.
Parents and all concerned citizens need to become aware of what is really happening out there in the world with our young people.
It’s time for CHANGE!
What do you think?
Brennan
The problem with US “child” pornography laws is that they make no distinction between of young children being horrifically abused on film or in photographs and young adults as old as 17 engaged in completely normal healthy consensual sexual behavior that just happens to be filmed or photographed even by the participants for private use. Not that young adults under 18 should be allowed to be professional adult entertainment models, but a distinction needs to be made so that the US laws are brought in line with the generally accepted definition and in line with reality.
Dear JeffZ,
I agree with you. We need to protect young people NOT make them felons.
I’m not in favor of legalizing “sexting”, primarily because it allows for such wide distribution and so many abuses.
Thank you for your comment,
Brennan
Honestly, this is bull s*** that they would consider this child pornography. I really don’t think it should be a misdemeanor either. Not legalized, per se, but definitely decriminalized. It’s not inherently bad…
But really, child porn possession is a crap charge anyways. It is basically the same as being arrested for having pictures of a murder on your phone.
Regardless of this, there are many other victims. I.e. school officials that investigate the claims of sexting can get fired, given the same felonies. This is unjust and criminal to say the least.
Dear Anon,
While I agree this should not be a felony, we disagree that “it’s not inherently bad”.
I feel in my heart that this is an unfortunate “titillation” that can have devastating consequences, especially for a young man or woman who does not have the knowledge or experience to understand how widespread those images CAN become.
I guess I’m just too old but I was raised to believe that exposing one’s body and private parts to another person was something that should be done in a bedroom or, if a bedroom is not available, in the back seat of a car – with the windows steamed-up so no one could pruriently spy on you.
I definitely disagree that child porn possession is a “crap charge”. There is NO EXCUSE FOR IT, because child porn must be deliberately sought out, and is only done by those who are pedophiles or engaged in selling the material to pedophiles.
I DO AGREE with your final statement! School officials must be very judicious in how they handle ANY complaints/instances of a sexual nature because they are under severe scrutiny from the public.
As the spouse of a retired teacher, I’m aware that school officials are in a double-bind: They are hesitant to involve the police because of the harm they might needlessly do to a student. But investigating on their own can be seen as prurient interest and be legally liable.
As I say, it’s a double-bind.