Sharenting - Parents documenting their kids online
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 68
Gender: Male
Posts: 39,637
Location: Long Island, New York
The problem, however, arises when one’s desire for fame comes at the cost of another’s privacy — especially in their most vulnerable moments.
“Sharenting” — a term coined by the Wall Street Journal in 2010 — refers to the practice of parents’ documenting their children’s antics and achievements through publicly-shared posts on social media. It’s neither a new phenomenon nor something that hasn’t been criticized before. Yet, some parents continue to participate in it — to connect with fellow parents, share parenting struggles, or project the idea of a perfect life. And in cases of children with disabilities like autism, either to raise “awareness” or to depict themselves as a “savior” for raising a “difficult” child.
“It seems the Internet has created a public international support group where parents of autistic and disabled children are not just parents, but content creators and community leaders, photographers, and bloggers,” Haley Moss, an autistic woman, wrote in The Washington Post in 2020.
Sharenting, by itself, is an ethical nightmare for a number of reasons. For starters, a child can’t give informed consent to information about their lives being shared because they may not understand the nuances of privacy or what its violation entails. Easily accessible information may also make children targets for identity theft and, in worse cases, perhaps, even pedophilia, with their images ending up on pornographic websites. Moreover, it deprives children of the chance to be in control of their digital footprint.
However, when it comes to the sharenting of autistic children, the ethical quagmire worsens, with parents posting photographs and videos of their children having meltdowns, stimming, or hyperfixating on a special interest — all activities that many autistic individuals are otherwise bullied and ostracized for, often forcing them to mask.
These posts also refuse to respect the agency of disabled children – treating them like an Instagrammable avocado toast or their latest haul from H&M that their followers must know about. The “trend” of sharenting autistic experiences has become so common as to inspire satirical pieces like “I was never able to accept my son’s autism until I monetized it through blogging.”
In an ideal world, an autistic individual wouldn’t have to mask their neurodivergent traits. But the world we live in is far from ideal. But when parents feature precisely those traits as “oddities” or “difficulties” on social media for the world to spectate, they are allowing visual evidence of their children’s autistic experiences to linger forever in this digital landscape.
They are often posted without consent and could haunt children for life… It’s complicated enough to exist as an autistic child or adult while knowing how people negatively perceive autism. Being exposed to these online messages parents share only makes things harder. Imagine learning that your parents see you the same way cruel schoolyard bullies do — and that they shared those feelings with the world,” Moss notes.
The need for awareness is certainly important but, as Shaneel Mukerji points out, there already exists a lot of information on autistic meltdowns or stimming in the public domain. Mukerji is a special educator and therapist from Kolkata, who works with autistic adults and children.But, often, rather than putting things in context, these videos end up “showing the behavior as if it came out of nowhere.”
This fuels the notion that having an autistic child is like “being stuck” with a “curse.” There are also some who argue that this might precisely be why some parents share things online — to be hailed by an ableist audience as beacons of kindness and bravery for daring to bring up an autistic child.
“There’s nothing to be learned from taping and posting a video of someone having a meltdown that you cannot learn in another way… Meltdowns aren’t fun for the children experiencing them, and they’re certainly not doing it to make their parents’ lives difficult… But posting videos of it generates hits, and gets [the parents] comments like: ‘You’re such a saint for dealing with this!'” says Gopika Kapoor, a neurodiversity consultant, author, and parent advocate. Perhaps, this is also why parents of some autistic kids brand themselves as “autism moms,” much to the chagrin of actually autistic individuals. Their anger stems from parents appropriating their kids’ struggles as their own “suffering,” which itself can be ableist.
But some parents insist that the lack of awareness around autism is the reason they are forced to take to social media to understand how to parent their autistic children better. “It’s hard as parents to learn how to deal with situations that are not common among parents with ‘neurotypical’ children. Social media, unfortunately, can be a good place to congregate with other people who are dealing with or have already dealt with similar things… Sometimes, we need help knowing if a [specific] behavior is considered ‘normal’ [among autistic children] or if it’s something to be monitored,” a Reddit user explained. “I have seen a lot of autistic people come after parents for the things they say [about] how they feel… [But] parents feel very alone when it comes to the ‘how to-s’ of navigating life with an autistic child,” she added.
While people have the freedom to share their struggles and seek help from those willing to offer it, it can’t come at the cost of violating the privacy of a disabled minor. “My desire to talk about my challenges, my fears, my own insecurities about the process, cannot ever trump [my daughter’s] right to privacy. Helping to guide others cannot come at the cost of her dignity,” says Jess Wilson, the mother of an autistic child. Whenever posting tidbits from her life involving her children, she asks herself, “If it were me, and I were twelve, would I want my mom telling this story to everyone I know?”
When Moss asked her father why he had never published her struggles, he said something rather simple that, perhaps, summarises this debate: “Your story is not my story to tell.”
I am so glad this article was written. I have been trying to say this in one way or another for years.
But what about the autistics who are too intellectually disabled to know about stigmas and privacy?
1. Because a child seems that they will never understand does not mean the child won't at some point later.
2. If they are truly too disabled to understand all the more reason to protect them and not do this.
_________________
“Self Acceptance is a process not a performance”
“You are autistic enough. And you always have been”
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.
The article did not mention "Sympathy Porn" - any type of media, be it written, photographed or filmed, which exploits the poor's condition in order to generate the necessary sympathy for selling newspapers, increasing charitable donations, or support for a given cause.
"When you see photos, video clips etc with the line about 'like = love', 'ignore = hate', et cetera, Please be aware that the person who posted the picture probably has no ownership of the picture. Quite often pictures of people, especially children, with disabilities or visible difference are appropriated by heartless people who use the image to draw attention to their Facebook page so they can become '(in)famous'. They do not do this because they are a caring person, they do it because they know that YOU are a caring person and will like something they have shared thus boosting traffic to their Facebook page, where sometimes there are links to things you would never choose to be associated with. It is wrong on every level to share photos that are not yours to share. It is wrong to post photos that are not yours to post." -- Rose Quartz, disability activist
It’s all about context and purpose, if its meaningful public awareness & education like the Louis Theroux documentary on families dealing with severe autism in the US that’s ok.
If its just some parent showing their kid having a bad day on Facebook probably not
On the one hand these people shouldn’t be locked away from public knowledge like the days of institutions to preserve a single fake glossy young Sheldon view of Autism, but at the same time prevent exploitation for no meaningful purpose.
_________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends upon the unreasonable man."
- George Bernie Shaw
This is the first time I've encountered the term "sharenting" and an overview of the thorny ethical issues that accompany it--thanks for posting. (I'm not a parent myself, and was lucky enough to have been raised in the very last of the the pre-social-media "analog" days, by ethical parents who wouldn't have dreamed of sharing awkward parenting stories on social media even if it had existed at the time... so I've escaped this entire phenomenon.)
I must preface my response with the statement that parents should absolutely refrain from posting compromising images and information about their children, neurodiverse or otherwise, on the Internet and should never compromise their sons' and daughters' digital footprints before said children are even able to manage their social media presence themselves (if indeed they ever will be). Especially if said parents are reaping financial and social benefits from sharing details of a condition that is ultimately not their own.
That said, from a "devil's advocate" point of view, I can see where future attempts to regulate these types of "sharenting" posts in the interests of protecting minors' privacy might someday clash with the ever-present "freedom of speech" issue, and that strictures against such postings, if written into law, would be very difficult to define, and indeed, to regulate. At what point does sharing become oversharing? When does toxic "sharenting" (however much it sucks as a phenomenon) become a prosecution-worthy offense? How will such things be quantified, and who will enforce the boundaries?
My intentions here are not to be contentious merely for the sake of it--just wondering how the admirable goal of discouraging certain parents from their over-zealous and unethical "sharenting" can be achieved without flipping, potentially, to the opposite extreme of unfettered censorship and cancel culture?
