Babble

a magazine and community for the new urban parent

Strollerderby

Moron Parents Abandon Kids for TV Fame

My first complaint about Baby Borrowers -- a new reality show in which five teenage couples care for the babies of a few morons who rented them out to NBC -- is that it's just bad television. If you're going to make a reality series about abandoned children, at least make it interesting.

Choose a grittier locale. Get a furry dog. A bald rich guy. A cute little orphan with red hair and maybe some catchy Broadway numbers about what a hard knock life it is but that somehow, tomorrow maybe, the sun will come out. Oh wait, that sounds familiar in some odd, distant way. But you get the picture. Baby Borrowers is not entertainment. It's dregs from the writer's strike -- brought forth during the summer TV doldrums to either sink or swim.

Let us hope it sinks.

Because my second complaint has to do with the aforementioned morons. But let me take a step back for those who haven't heard about NBC's latest reality show. Five teenage couples take care of an infant for three days, and then progress to caring for toddlers then teenagers and then old people. The idea is that this is some form of "birth control" -- showing these teens that raising children is actually hard work. And we get to watch their kooky antics ... joy. (Although did anyone actually hear these teenagers say they wanted to have a baby right away? Like, tomorrow? Like, they need a massive dose of reality check intervention to avoid making a mistake? Of course not.)

But there you go. That's the premise. Teenagers. Infants. NBC went from the West Wing to this. You're caught up.

So OK, back to the morons. Let's say for argument's sake you're dumb enough to give your infant to a TV network for three days. Let's even go a step further and say the cameras are rolling, you meet these teenagers who will be taking care of your infant and you think, "Well, they sure do look awfully young and immature, but what the hell? We're on TV, right?" and you hand over your baby. Then let's say one of those teenagers gets all pissy and lets your kid starve and is clearly frustrated. You wouldn't put up with that from a babysitter, but you're watching from a special "viewing home" nearby and somehow you decide to keep your baby in that situation ... why? Because you're a moron.

Would any sane parent let their infant get into that situation in the first place? The show says there are "shadow" nannies ready to step in at a moment's notice -- but that just seems like yet another glaring reason to avoid handing over your child. (Producer: "Look, they might be in danger - but we promise to step in with our secret cabal of shadow nannies." Ummmmm no thanks.)

The parents who pimped out of their children to a television network argue they're "helping" teenagers realize they're not ready to have kids. (Teenagers who never even say they're ready to have kids -- in fact, one couple says they just hope this "experiment" will save their "turbulent" relationship.)

"I was a teenage mother," says one moron, after dropping off her baby, "And I never got to be the person I could have been. But now I'm on national television and all I had to do was abandon my kid. Awesome!"

So I made up some of that last part. But still. The motive is clear -- some people will do anything to be on TV. Even put their kids at risk.

-- Mike at Cry It Out


Comments

 

India said:

I think *you* might be the biggest moron.

June 26, 2008 8:31 AM
 

Sherry said:

I am not the slightest bit interested in this show, but I don't see how this is much different from leaving a baby/toddler with a teenage babysitter who is totally alone without any supervision at all. How many parents all over the US do that on a consistent basis?  All they all morons?   Their kids don't even get to have camera crews, producers, and "shadow nannies."   And I think you are seriously under estimating teenagers.  They may not be ready to be parents, but I doubt they are going to get "pissy" and starve or abuse a baby as in the stupid hypothetical you have outlined.  

June 26, 2008 9:31 AM
 

KellyK said:

HAve you had a pre-screening of the show and an infant was actually starved!?  I agree with Sherry.  I also think the time has come to remove that stick.

June 26, 2008 9:39 AM
 

diera said:

Furry dog, presumably, not fury dog.  Although a fury dog would certainly liven things up.

I still don't get why older teens are presumed to be incapable of taking care of babies, although of course I haven't seen the show so I don't know if there was something especially immature about the teens they selected.  I mentioned my mother-in-law who was a parent at 18 (a married parent who went on to successfully raise 6 children) in my last comment about this show, but I was babysitting when I was sixteen and had a part-time job at a day care center.  I never took care of a baby for three days straight, but I bet I could have handled it, especially with a team of nannies as backup.

June 26, 2008 9:50 AM
 

Gretch said:

I was also babysitting at 15, but I know I would have handled myself and the babies better than these teens. I really think the producers went out of their way to find teens with the worst attitudes and least experience.

June 26, 2008 9:54 AM
 

Kaz said:

My beef is that the kids are already several months old. I understand no one is going to hand over a newborn for this show, but these kids (teenagers) are missing out on some of the more difficult months...

June 26, 2008 10:18 AM
 

M said:

It isn't fair to the teenagers or the babies.  Some of those teenagers might have done a great job caring for their own babies- babies that they were used to and who were used to them, babies they had been with for every moment of the child's life.  Mom and Dad have a lot of power through familiarity.  I have the easiest kid in the world, but I worry about leaving him with someone who doesn't know his signals.

June 26, 2008 10:53 AM
 

cooper1178 said:

Mike, I'm with you completely on this.  After the first 30 second preview my initial thought was what kind of moron would hand their baby over for days at a time to complete strangers?  

Yeah, I baby-sat at a very young age, (I think I started at 11 for aunts and uncles), and for babies that were even younger than what's on the show.  But never for more than maybe 5 hours, only for people I knew, that I could call with any problem, and that most importantly, knew and trusted me.

And then to watch the whole thing from a satellite location?  OMG, there is no way I could handle it.  I struggle with my own relatives not "doing it right" - can you imagine watching helplessly as an inexperienced teenaged stranger handled your baby?  Even if they weren't inflicting harm, just knowing they weren't doing it just like you know your baby likes it?  Ugh, horrible, I don't know what these people were thinking.

June 26, 2008 11:26 AM
 

NBR said:

Wow, these comments are not what I expected. I watched the show last night (I know, I know) and it made me so sad. I went in and checked on my 7 month old daughter three times while it was on. I was sad for the babies, who were left with teenagers for three days (and nights!) with random interruptions from their parents. I agree with Mike - these parents, while they seemed nice enough, did something I could never ever ever do. It is very different than leaving your baby with a sitter for a few hours. We all know how much babies love the familiar and routine. Even an adult would have a hard time getting thrown into a random place the way these babies were. I did feel for the parents when the teens said things like "Fine, starve" or "just put her in the crib - she is going to cry anyway." We all wonder with even the best caregivers if they have moments of frustration, but the babies did NOT sign up for this. This show is like a train wreck - I hate it, it makes me ill, and I will watch again next week if I have time.

June 26, 2008 11:27 AM
 

Liane said:

I agree with Sherry -- how is this different from parents leaving their kids (with no cameras, shadow nannies or parent watching) with teenage babysitters?

Parents are watching from a house a few doors down and are not helpless -- they're free to intervene whenever they deem necessary.

June 26, 2008 12:20 PM
 

AmyinMotown said:

I've left my 3 year old with a 13 year old babysitter, and I was certainly babysitting at that age, but here's the difference--I KNOW the girl who babysits for us and my daughter developed a serious case of hero worship before we hired her as a sitter. And I know her mom, and I'm gone for three hours, not three DAYS. These teens were complete strangers to the parents and the kids.

And that little bitch who kept swearing in front of the baby, said he could starve, and then had the gall to pull bicthface at the mom when she very nicely corrected her? I would have backhanded her and taken my kid away after that.

June 26, 2008 12:54 PM
 

Sherry said:

Oh, one other thing, it always amazes me how many people assume reality tv shows are really reality.  They might not be scripted line for line, but those shows have an agenda and the people on them are directed to present that agenda so I very seriously doubt anything on that show is even remotely reality.  

June 26, 2008 7:41 PM
 

averagemom said:

Just a note, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry has asked that NBC pull the show from broadcast.  When NBC and a bunch of psychiatrists are on opposite sides of a question about mental health, well, I don't know, maybe NBC is right.

July 5, 2008 8:33 PM
 

NATSUMI KASUYA said:

I write the diary of the child care. It is daily life being nice, a pleasant thing, a serious thing, surprising continuation.

Please link this site.

July 6, 2008 7:15 PM

in

GROUP BLOGS

  • Strollerderby

    The smartest, funniest, most exhaustive parenting blog in the blogosphere.
  • drool.icio.us

    The top million must-have baby products.
  • FameCrawler

    Your daily baby celebrity fix.
back to blog homepage