Research Paper about The Perils of Sharenting

Spencer Elden never asked to pose naked on the cover of Nirvana’s Nevermind album. Yet, millions today can look him in the face and say they know what his genitals look like. Is it fair for a grown adult to have to endure this embarrassment? As digital sharing and social media have grew rampant in the coming years, this scenario serves as one of few examples that we have of the long-term detrimental effects of ‘sharenting’. This newly-birthed phenomenon entails the conflict of drawing the line between the extent of a child’s autonomy and the extent to which a parent can express themselves through their children. We do not know the future of this phenomenon, but the few cases we have seen prove sharenting unpromising. Given this uncertain future, it is best to wait until the child has a voice and a capability to say no before we post their pictures online. This is the argument that Adrienne Lafrance pleads parents online to consider in her article “The Perils of ‘Sharenting’”. Through her holistically scornful tone she enforces her argument with piercingly introspective contrite statements from those who live with the effects of sharenting and irrefutable expert testimonies that question the validity of the reader’s sentiments on this issue through appeals in logic. 

Logically, no one wants bad things to happen to them. Oftentimes, people make decisions without realizing the consequences of their actions. This is why we are shown the aftermath of people making bad decisions. To allow for less people to fall victim for these decisions. It’s akin to why a health teacher may show students a before and after shot of a heroin user, or why a mother may point to a person on the street and tell their kid to not end up like them. Fortunately, in age-old scenarios like these, we already have many examples of what not to do and why. However, when it comes to newly born issues we often do not see many examples of what not to do. Hence, a lack of awareness culminates around the issue. Consequently, much later on, we see a surge of people watch their decisions come back to haunt them and the cycle continues as time moves forward. This is what Lafrance recognizes and wants to prevent through regretful statements from a blogger’s experience. Imagine, as a proud parent, you post how your child has finally jumped the hurdle of potty training. Unfortunately, later on you “learned that strangers accessed the photos, downloaded them, altered them, and shared them on a website commonly used by pedophiles”(Lafrance). Completely culpable for how perverse strangers have viewed your child, your racing mind can only muster up the courage to say, “I’m the one responsible” and “I took the picture and shared it. There’s nobody to blame but me”(Steinberg). To have your child manufactured into material that arouses pedofiles would produce immense guilt. The guilt you would feel through this hypothetical situation prompts you to ask yourself if a social media post is worth it. Is it worth it for your friends to see your child’s accomplishments if this is the price to pay? Better yet, that this could have been prevented had the children had the cognition and understanding to consent to being in the picture. No child should have to bear the consequences of their parents decisions, except the consequence of their own conception of course. 

Aside from emotional appeals, Lafrance supplements the foundation of her argument through logical testimonies from law professor and sharenting expert, Stacey Steinberg. Steinberg notes that in addition to preventing pedofile debacles, waiting for a child to have autonomy over their decisions allows for them to “create their own sense of both private and public self to thrive as young people and eventually as adults”. In turn, we produce members of society that will have the capability to pass this autonomy down to their children and put an end to parent’s posting on behalf of their children. This will give kids an identity and allow them to see themselves as individuals with values and beliefs. Having these traits makes children more willing and capable to participate in civil matters which better society.  This autonomy in children is the kryptonite to the perils of sharenting as it eliminates potential harm while simultaneously teaching children their sense of value, identity and responsibility, especially online. 

In summation, an awareness of the importance of a child’s right to what is shared about them online is crucial if we want to prevent the misuse of these children’s photos. We prevent regret, we prevent exploitation of children, and we prevent adults from speaking for their children. In addition, when parents’ sentiments are not exuded through their children we can foster a society of independent, free thinking individuals who will raise their children in a way that emphasizes their right to an identity and their right to consent to what is posted about them. These children have children and the cycle continues ad infinitum, putting an end to the perils of sharenting.