Experts frown on NBC's "Baby Borrowers"

The new NBC reality show "The Baby Borrowers" aims to give teen-age couples a close-up look at the realities of parenting. A couple cares for a stranger's children, from babies to toddlers, over the course of three weeks, on camera. However instructive it might be for the teens to learn about potty training, some child health experts say the show should be canned because of the harm it may do.

The national advocacy group for young children, Zero to Three, released a statement recently saying that the show could endanger the borrowed babies, who must live with strangers -- and perhaps incompetent ones at that -- for several days. " 'Baby Borrowers' may have a catchy theme, but it exploits young children with potential harmful consequences," says a statement from Zero to Three. "This is no social experiment. It is an extremely misguided endeavor that puts at risk our most vulnerable citizens, young children who need our love and protection."

Today, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry weighed in with a statement saying the show could cause the babies distress and anxiety. Moreover, the group says, the baby borrowing concept may be copied by others. But without the protection provided by TV cameras and on-site nannies, teen-age caretakers and strangers may be more likely to abuse or neglect infants. "A child's sense of security should not be gambled with," says AACAP President Robert Hendren.

NBC responded that the borrowed babies are well-cared for. They must be six months old and undergo psychological evaluation to make sure they do not have intense separation anxiety. The baby's real parents live next-door, can watch on closed-circuit TV and can visit at any time, says an NBC spokesperson. A nanny is also on the premises.

"The producers of 'The Baby Borrowers' took all the necessary precautions to ensure the safety and welfare of the children participating in the series," NBC said in a statement. "The environment was carefully controlled, and the children were properly care for at all times."

Seems to me the borrowed babies probably are safe and well-cared for. But this social experiment doesn't reflect the reality of teen parenting, either. Real teen parenting isn't nearly so entertaining.

-- Shari Roan

Photo: Courtesy of NBC

Comments

[Mikey Kay]

Yes, this concept is controversial. It's undeniable that reality teevee can (and often does) cater to cruder instincts in all involved. It's also arguable that tasteless content is not illegal, even if embarrassing. And parenting? OH BROTHER!! Who can dispute the desirability of teaching teenagers valuable lessons about responsibility? But who can honestly say they would trust the peacock to be a wet babysitter?
It's easy to see what's in it for NBC: the commercial demographic is colossal. Sales and Programming are probably drooling more than the babies ever will.
And it also can be reasonably said that considering the unlicensed nature of parenting in the first place, and the number of newborns found abandoned and abused in all cultures, including our own, the infants can do much worse than have a TV show as a guardian.

[Jim Garrett]

This show should be mandatory for every junior and high school in the nation!
Maybe then we would not have so many welfare moms that the rest of us taxpayers have to support!

[Lee]

I think the show is very interesting and not cruel at all. I don't think the parents of the babies would be them in harms way. This is just the tip of the iceberg when teaching these teens about being responsible enough to care for someone else besides themselves. It's an eye opener to them and I think this is something that should be explored more. Especially with middle and high school age children. This is a serious matter that can and will cahnge the rest of your life. Experience it a little first and see first hand how you would have to handle it.

[Jaswinder Ghuman]

NBC doesn't get it when they respond that “the borrowed babies are well-cared for.” We are not just talking about physical needs and physical caring for the baby; what about the emotional needs of the baby? How does the baby understand why his/her parents gave him/her away to strangers? How does a baby understand that it won’t happen again? The decisions parents make about their baby’s life have to be right for the baby and not just based on the parent’s own motivation (whatever it might be: money, fame, altruistic intentions of teaching teens how to care for babies, etc…). I am amazed nobody is talking about what is the advantage to the baby by participating in this social experiment.

[Joe Bennett]

For NBC to continue this show after the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry came out so strongly against it seems extremely negligent and reckless on their part. They have opened themselves wide for lawsuits in the future, and appropriately so, toying with the minds of infants is not entertainment, regardless of their so called benevolent intent.

[Child Psychiatrist]

This show is irresponsible and should be stopped immediately. Among healthy families, what parent would allow their one or two your old be away from them for this long and with perfect strangers. Most parents fortunately have more common sense than NBC, and recognize that infants are totally dependent not just on care and comfort, but on familiarity of person and place to feel secure and safe in the world.
The importance of this bond between parent and child is universally recognized in important practices such as allowing parents too 'room in" with their children in hospitals if at all medically possible.
The goal of having parenting hands on for teenagers is a great idea and one that could be done WITH THE PARENT PRESENT to take over and model appropriate behavior. The downside of separating infants from their parents cannot be stated too strongly.
So this is not an either or proposition. Yes teenagers (and all future parents of any age) need more experience in understanding children and the very high demands in caring for one--I think it is a great form of birth control as an added benefit. But not at the expense of babies' sense of safety.
It is a reckless and stupid idea, likely to be imitated in much less controlled circumstances.
NBC, grow up!

[Marjorie Frank]

The study of attachment in the human infant is very complicated. While I'm sure the producers of this show did all they know to do to assure this process wouldn't be harmful to infants, it is clear that all involved, producers, parents, teens, nannies, etc. don't really understand how attachment disruption can have long term serious negative results on infants. The babies can't talk, cant' express their distress in words. What amazed me is that no one involved seemed torealize that those babies who wouldn't eat, and couldn't sleep, and cried incessantly, were showing through their bodies what they couldn't understand in their minds, ie. "what's happened to me,' who are these strangers?" I suggest the producers watch the films of James and Joyce Robertson on the consequences of too early separation on infants.

mfrank

[Mature Adult]

When I started watching Part 2 of the program I couldn't help but to start thinking about how many would start lighting their torches and gathering in masses with stones in hand. Imagine how NOT surprised I was to see that I was right. Three days with a babysitter is not going to do any harm and for anyone to believe that it could will hopefully be in opposition for the billions of newborns, infants and toddlers in America today that are being raised in daycare, head start, pre-school and other similar 8-10 hour a day facilities where these children are being tended to by STRANGERS. I have to admit that I believe this program is probably the most insightful and practical representation of a reality show since we were introduced to reality TV. It not only allows the participants to obtain a glimpse into a "what if" scenario, even though it's unlikely most unwed teens who have babies would be able to reside in an upscale community, new, large house, NET $100 a day on the job and have a nanny on hand in case of an emergency. And the benefits don't stop there. When these participants are able to view their experience in real time, they may be able to recognize their own downfalls, such as the one teen girl defiantly refusing to help tend to the baby or return to her job at the woodshop. In addition, viewers will have an opportunity to see their peers on screen and by doing so, admitedly or not, they're apt to see themselves, or at least similarities, which could do significant good for their futures. I say NBC made a good decision to proceed with this program.

[Adult]

Kids are often put with day care providers, parents, friends, etc. when emergencies happen. Most parents have to leave for 2-3 days at some point in the babies first year of life, so this "the sky is falling" approach that the kids will be permanently damaged by being away from their parents for a few days is ridiculous.

I agree that this program should be mandatory for high schoolers who think it's "cool" to have a kid... It's also a complete unreality - 3 days? Try 3 weeks, 3 months. Also, good luck living in a house like that, food, etc. for $100/day... Try doing the same thing in a studio apartment without a car, etc. etc...

[jmmcg]

The parents of these babies are completely irresponsible. If the Texas CPS can snatch the children of the splinter poligamy group, the local department of children and families should certainly be involved with this reality show. I cannot fathom taking a chance that something could go wrong. It takes one second for a tragedy to occur, and living next door will do nothing for those children should something happen. Nor can a nanny prevent a tragedy from occuring - parenting takes experience and patience. A parent learns on the job and a teen cannot take over at the 6 month to toddler age and get it right. Why on earth would a good parent take a chance that something could go terribly wrong. Money...reality show fame...misguided attention...I am a mother of two and there is nothing on this earth that would make me become involved in this type of nonsence. Here is an interesting idea. Stop catering to your kids (meaning the teens), tell them you CAN get pregnant from sex, even if it is just one time. Male or female - promote abstinence, they are just too young to handle the emotional aspects of sexual relationships including the side effect of pregnancy. There is no good outcome - aborion, adoption, becoming a teen parent - none of them are a good choice. I do not see why we need a television show to teach our children good morals and behavior. Swift consequences for actions...including sex should start being taught at a very early age. Don't loan out your babies for some ridiculous reality show - keep them at home where they belong, out of harms way, and teach them to become responsible, productive members of society - that is a parents job. I know I am only one person, but I will look up all the sponsors of this show and not one cent of my money will be spent on any of their products. I just think this is taking a huge risk with the lives of these very young children.

[Experienced Father]

There no comparison between caring for ones own baby and someone else's. So beside from the trauma inflicted on the babies involved, the teens are NOT getting a true picture of what caring for babies is all about. What would be considered an unpleasant task such as changing a diaper for another's baby is a joy with ones own child. Would a sane person want a stranger to perform such an intimate act on their own child? The attitudes a baby picks up from his or her caregivers will last a life time.

[LRoacher]

I anxiously awaited the airing of "Baby Borrowers". I wanted to share the experience with my granddaughter and her friends. I wanted them to preview parenthood along with other youngsters to learn from their misconceptions about parenthood. Although your show provide a somewhat realistic picture of new parents, the tone in which the young borrowers interact with the adults and with each other isn't worth the information that it pesents. The girls on the show spout filthy language and dress in very provocative clothing, They are not examples of what I would want my grands to watch. Is it necessary for them to curse so that you get good ratings? Is profanity the norm? I would have enjoyed it just as much if they were not so vulgar. Great concept-Poor taste.