ABC Health Insider
The ABC News Medical Unit takes a critical look at the popular medical news of the day.
The Medical Unit is responsible for making recommendations to ABC News programs about coverage of medical stories, writing a daily "Medical Minute" that is sent to ABC-affiliated stations, producing a daily health program on ABC News Now, and overseeing the Health page of ABCNews.com.
RECENT POSTS
- How Can the Flu Kill You?
- Facing America's Doctor Disparity
- No End in Sight for Peanut Product Recalls
- Dr. Tim: Inside the White House Forum on Health Care
- Health Policy Experts Mull Impact of Wyeth Ruling
- Health Coverage for All -- Is It on the Way?
- This Is Your Brain on Envy
- Is a Virus Making You Obese? Fat Chance
- Video Gamers May Be 'Virtually' on Their Own
- Think Birth Control Pills Are Dangerous? Try Pregnancy
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 |
« Previous | Main | Next »
Blaming the Boob Tube for Your Baby's Baby Bump
November 03, 2008 5:22 PM
By Dan Childs, ABC News Medical Unit
Parents, lock up your daughters' TV remotes. And your sons' too, while you're at it.
Such was the message people may have gleaned from news reports this morning on a new study suggesting that television shows that feature depictions of sex or dialogue about the subject lead teens to engage in risky sexual behaviors themselves.
Reuters didn't qualify its lead on the study, making a direct link between the TV exposure and the sexual behavior.
"Exposure to some forms of entertainment is a corrupting influence on children, leading teens who watch sexy programs into early pregnancies and children who play violent video games to adopt aggressive behavior, researchers said on Monday," Reuters reported in its story.
Delve a little further into the research, however, and we see that the study suggests that there is an association between the amount of sexually charged television programming teens watch and their risk of becoming pregnant if they are girls, and impregnating someone if they are boys.
There's that word again in a medical story -- "association." When you see that word, a part of your brain that controls skepticism needs to flick on, triggering a big neon sign that reads, "caution -- association does not prove cause."
It could be equally valid to say that teens who are sexually adventurous are more likely to be attracted to sexually charged programming. That's exactly what the Washington Post reported in their story, at the very bottom.
The Post quoted Laura Lindberg of the Guttmacher Institute, which studies pregnancy-related issues: "It may be the kids who have an interest in sex watch shows with sexual content. I'm concerned this makes it seem like if we just shut off the TV we'd dramatically reduce the teen pregnancy rate."
If it seems like this alternative take dilutes the frightening nature of this report, it may be for good reason. The translation for parents is your TV set may not be the speaker box for teenage sin and sordid behavior that you believe it is.
Or it could be. The fact is, we just can't tell from the information at hand which way this river flows.
Let's take a look at the research. In the study, published in the journal Pediatrics, researchers at the nonprofit research organization RAND, led by behavioral scientist Anita Chandra, followed 718 adolescents age 12 to 17 who when surveyed indicated that they were already sexually active.
Researchers asked these adolescents about their TV viewing habits when it came to 23 different television shows. What they found was that those who watched the most shows that featured sexual content -- including depictions of sex, talk about sex and innuendo -- had about double the chance of being involved in a pregnancy than those who watched the least of these shows.
I talked with our resident study guru Joanna Schaffhausen this morning, and she said it is little surprise that the researchers would gravitate to one possible interpretation of this research over the other. It is, in large part, the job of the researcher to explore the most interesting possible interpretation of their findings in order to encourage further hypotheses and investigation.
Indeed, even the researchers themselves note in the study: "… the present analysis cannot establish definitively how much, if any, of the observed association between exposure to sexual content and pregnancy is causal …"
Here's what Joanna had to say: "The authors acknowledge the problem on the one hand, but in the very same sentence they also say that even if only part of it turns out to be causal, reducing teenagers' exposure to sexy TV could have a big impact. That's a lot of supposition, really, given that they allow as how they don't know if ANY of the relationship is causal.
"Basically, it's like losing your keys in the dark and looking for them near the light post because that's where you can see," she continues. "We can hide our kids' remotes but we don't have the faintest idea how to make them less interested in sex."
Thus, we as reporters should really have our eyes open for alternative explanations. In fact the alternative explanations are so important, that they belong in news stories within the lead -- or at least as a qualifier in the second paragraph.
Bear in mind that this study hits not only at a time when teenage pregnancies, on the whole, have been on a downward swing for the past decade and a half (the exception being a small, 3 percent bump last year according to the CDC, amid a general rise in pregnancies among all age groups), but also when the amount of sexually-charged content on television is ostensibly on the rise.
If it were true that: a) viewing more sexually explicit TV drives teens (teens who are already sexually active, in this case) to be engaged in more pregnancies; and b) we are in fact seeing more sex on TV in the age of Sex and the City than we were in the era of The Cosby Show (Huxtables, wherefore are thou?); then wouldn’t we be seeing a STEADY RISE in teen pregnancies?
To be fair, latching on to the sexiest -- no pun intended -- headline is probably something of which many of us in the field of medical reporting have been guilty at one time or another. In this case, several major media outlets took the bait.
But we should be aware that in these sex-laced times, a single stroke of our pens could lead to young Johnny and Jenny falling hopelessly behind in following the storyline of "The Hills." What ever will they do with that extra time slot in their evenings?
Just a thought. What do you think?
November 3, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (10)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I find this interesting, as I've always felt that our modern TV shows are nothing but fairy tales for the digital age. Unfortunately, if your child is fed a diet of fairy tales instead of getting good information, their expectations for marriage, parenthood, relationships and other important aspects of life will become warped and unrealistic. Nothing wrong with a bit of escapism every once in a while, as long as that's balanced by the counselling and teaching of prudent parents.
Posted by: Former Republican | Nov 3, 2008 6:03:57 PM
As someone who was once a teenager, I completely agree that TV, movies, popular magazines, and lack of proper information on sex, are responsible. I was bombarded even as a young kid with sexual images on TV, or similar forms of entertainment. It was overwhelming. I am afraid for today's youth because the media is getting more lenient with letting these images be shown on TV. The media shows these images in ways that tease the mind and lead people to want more. I believe that either none of these racy images should be shown (nor should the subject be talked about) and abstinence should be pounded into youth's heads **OR** show full nudity but be VERY open about the importance of safe sex and discussion on the consequences of not having safe sex (for example, show people on TV getting STD's or AIDS for being irresponsible-- that's something you don't see...). This method is used in Europe, I believe. You cannot have a middle ground on this issue-- media should not be leading people on.
Posted by: sm | Nov 3, 2008 6:15:54 PM
We can blame tv, the movies, magazines, or the guy next door, but the fact is if you spend time with your children and give them good information, they aren't going to do anything unless they want to (some teens want to get pregnant) It is a parents responsibility to parent our kids, stop blaming everyone and everything and do your job as parents.
Posted by: samhiguchi | Nov 3, 2008 6:27:21 PM
Kids do what parents allow them to do. Most kids are the parents today.
Posted by: Kahtleen | Nov 3, 2008 6:38:42 PM
Kids do what parents allow them to do. Most kids are the parents today.
Posted by: Kahtleen | Nov 3, 2008 6:38:43 PM
Another excuse for lazy people who can't be troubled to properly care for the children that they brought into the world.
Posted by: Alex | Nov 3, 2008 6:55:44 PM
In general, if parents aren't doing their job, then the tv will do it for them.
Posted by: shana | Nov 4, 2008 6:50:48 PM
I think it is our social responsibility to ensure that all children (not just our own offspring) are exposed to positive encouraging imagery and ideas. Exposing people to violent images makes a lot of people violent. Studies have already shown this. I also think that exposing impressionable minds to perversities is irresponsible.
Posted by: LM | Nov 5, 2008 12:04:32 AM
Parents need to parent, but TVs, Movies, Music, Internet definitely put the idea into kids heads. My parents raised me well and I stayed a virgin until I was married. Sex was not what I expected it to be though. I had this idea of what it was from watch movies, and it wasn't anything like that. That caused some problems for me at first. That is just what I went through. I guess the bottom line is that parents need to monitor what their kids are watching and doing because the images that they'll see to affect them. As for the TV, movies, ect. They would do society well but they are a business and sex sells so they won't do that, which is why it is up to parents.
Posted by: Erin | Nov 21, 2008 4:11:46 PM
Im currently 19 & gave birth to my daughter at 17. And im sorry but people can come up with the stupidest excuses for teen pregnancy. they need to spend more time in learning on how to prevent. Im not saying that im for or against teen pregnancy because being a mother has been the best thing that has ever happened to me. but i do know that it is hard and i would love to be able to prevent it! But i didnt get pregnant from watching tv shows. that is for sure!
It took a little more than that & i think this allocation is observed.
And im also a proud teen mother.
Posted by: Michele | Dec 2, 2008 11:45:11 AM
Post a comment
