Woman to woman: Consequences for sexting could be missing the mark

4-27-2009 National:

Should we decriminalize the sending of racy photos via call phones by teenagers?

Good news. Our courts are going after child pornographers with a vengeance, using technology such as cell phones and social networking sites to locate and trap these heinous criminals and throw the book at them. The only glitch is that the scum appears to be our kids.

Youthful hormones and high-tech communication have dovetailed, and the result is sexting: sending racy pictures via cell phone.

Think this dangerous and vile behavior is part of an edgy subculture? A recent survey by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy claims that 20 percent of our teens are involved in sexting activities.

"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity," Einstein once said, making me wonder if he saw this one coming.

I'm shocked by how widespread this activity has become and grateful to live in a community filled with adults who are on it in a big way, from academic and home life consequences to strict monitoring of teen behavior. Still, I'm more shocked by the way the law has swooped in to label young, impulsive teenagers as child pornographers.

Really? That's how we fix this? A boy in Texas is arrested on child pornography charges for simply having a racy photo on his phone. A 14-year-old New Jersey girl posts explicit pictures of herself on MySpace and could be forced to register as a sex offender under Megan's Law.

Even Maureen Kanka, Megan's mother, is appalled. "This shouldn't fall under Megan's Law in any way, shape or form," the mother of raped and murdered Megan Kanka declared, understanding that the MySpace exhibitionist needs help, not an avalanche of legal restrictions that will ruin her life forever.

Legislators in Vermont are trying to stop the madness, creating a bill that would remove the most serious legal consequences for sexting kids, such as a lifetime on the state's sex offender registry. However Vermont's governor is disinclined to support such a bill, feeling that decisions about these charges should be left up to prosecutors.

Either Gov. Jim Douglas hasn't been reading the same stories I have, or he thinks the best way to deal with teens is to brand them child pornographers and sex offenders. Makes me kind of wonder if it's our legal system that has exceeded our humanity.

Andrea Cornell Sarvady is a writer and educator in Atlanta. She received a bachelor's degree in English from San Francisco State University and a master's degree in counseling with an emphasis in marital and family therapy from the University of San Francisco. Her writing career developed in tandem with her nonprofit and educational endeavors, including teaching developmentally disabled adults.

Making young teens register as sex offenders is foolish, but decriminalization is not the solution - especially for those who pass along sexual images without consent. Let's not ignore the most relevant question: Is this new and exploding behavioral trend good, bad or neutral for those involved and for the public at large?

Many must believe it is neutral or even trivial, if they prefer no systematic consequences. But it is flat-out wrong and dangerous, often with life-impacting consequences for those involved. Especially for the female subjects who are left with their reputations in tatters and futures in doubt, while the teen male traffickers get off scot-free.

As Vicki Courtney, author of "Five Conversations You Must Have With Your Daughter," said: "Girls often are convinced to do this for the guys to get their attention. Then in a breakup situation, the guys often use it against them later. If you legalize sexting, the guys come out as the clear winners. The girls pay."

One of the main reasons teens do this is that they don't think it's a big deal. And how will they ever recognize that it is without systemic consequences?

Most of these same kids never would steal a DVD or some other item from a store. They may be tempted to do so, but they know it is wrong and that if they get caught they will be punished. Being 15 years old and stupid is no excuse.

Passing along someone else's sexual image is far worse than stealing, yet Andrea wants to make being young and impulsive a legal free pass.

By contrast, Kari Glemaker, national director for iCare, an initiative of the National Coalition for the Protection of Parents and Families, said: "If you shoplift as a minor, there is still a consequence, just not as big as for an adult. Similarly, my county is looking to define sexting as a misdemeanor, without jail time if there is no other criminal background, possibly with a fine or community service, as well as awareness classes. To say there should be no legal consequence until age 18 is ludicrous."

Andrea and those other parents agree that sexting is a big deal, but they are saying that we shouldn't treat it as such. I say if we don't treat it as the big deal it really is, then teenagers will never realize it is one.

Shaunti Feldhahn began her career as an analyst on Wall Street and became a best-selling author and speaker who also writes a weekly opinion column for the online edition of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. A graduate of the College of William and Mary with a bachelor's degree in government and economics, she earned a master's degree from Harvard University in public policy. ..News Source.. by Shaunti Feldhahn