"Do you remember Baby Jessica? She got arrested," my friend and colleague Chris Queen texted me last night.
I did, indeed, remember "Baby Jessica" McClure, the toddler who, back in the 1980s, fell into an old well in Texas and was stuck there for 58 hours. Well, I vaguely remembered the story. I am not all that much older than Jessica, but in the 19th-century home in which I grew up, there was also an old well, and my mom was forever warning me of what would happen if I fell into it. She used the "Baby Jessica" story to reinforce our shared anxiety, and to this day, I still won't stand that close to it when it's not boarded up.
But that conversation with Chris got me thinking about another big news story from my childhood: Haley Hardwick.
Haley was a seven-month-old baby in metro Atlanta whose father claimed she was kidnapped when he stopped to help some stranded motorists. The story took the area by storm, and hundreds of people showed up to help search for her. Every day, the news would update us that there were no updates, until about three weeks later when there was one: Haley's body had been found in a shallow grave, and her father was eventually arrested for her murder.
It was a few years after Baby Jessica. I was in elementary school, but I remember quite vividly seeing the updates on the news. I clung to hope that all of the people out searching would find her. When they found her body, I was on a trip with my family to a place called Callaway Gardens here in Georgia, and I became so depressed that I didn't want to do anything but stay in bed and cry. I could not find joy in any activity.
I remember they would play the Joe Cocker song "You Are So Beautiful" on the news, and now the lyrics are inscribed on Haley's headstone at her grave. To this day, I still get anxious when I hear that song or think about Callaway Gardens.
Thinking about that last night made me wonder: Was I too young to know about this horrific situation back then, or was this just an essential real-world introduction to death, murder, and the horrible things people are capable of?
Should kids of a certain age even be watching the news?
I was certainly no stranger to current events, even at that age. As part of a school project on writing letters, I'd written one to President George H. W. Bush and received a response, and I'd campaigned for him in our little mock election. I still have a cute pink and white diary from around that time, and there are a few lines about war, specifically Operation Desert Storm, the "bad guy" Saddam Hussein, and supporting our troops. Exposure to politics and patriotism at such a young age probably helped make me who I am today. But so did the murder of that poor baby, and I'm not sure the latter was a good thing.
Researching this topic, I found that the overall consensus is that there is no right or wrong answer as to when should children should be exposed to news. Some kids can handle it sooner than others, and it's really up to the parent to make that determination based on their child's emotional maturity level and past experiences.
However, as the American Psychological Association (APA) points out, kids may not be watching the news, but that doesn't mean they aren't exposed. "They may be playing in a room where the TV is tuned to coverage," it says. "They hear adults talking. They may not always understand what is being said, but sometimes that confusion can be a source of anxiety and worry."
I know that was my case back in the early 1990s. I may not have sat down to watch the evening news with my parents, but I was around when it was on TV. That's how I came to know about little Haley, and I had a lot of questions for my mom. As a matter of fact, it was my mom who told me they found her body, not a news anchor.
Monitoring your kids' exposure is probably even harder than it was a few decades ago. As the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP) suggests, there are numerous sources where kids are exposed, even accidentally — streaming TV, websites, social media, live broadcasts, podcasts, etc. — and the way the news is presented also makes it more intense. It gives examples of "repetitive visual and auditory coverage of natural disasters and violence" and "increased reporting of the details of the private lives of celebrities and influencers."
According to one study the APA sites:
Following the 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City and again after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, researchers found that those children who spent most or all of their time tuned to coverage reported more symptoms related to trauma. We don’t know if watching more of the coverage makes children more anxious. Or, if those children who are already more anxious are watching more coverage.
A 2016 study I ran across suggests that "Viewing extreme violence and terrorism, either directly by witnessing acts or indirectly by watching them in the media, affects children’s mental and emotional health, and some children are at a higher risk for negative effects than others."
Again, it all just points to the fact that every child is unique. Some can handle the news at a young age, and some can't. Some have gone through unique experiences in their lives that may impact their ability to fully understand what they're hearing and seeing.
Once upon a time, I knew a woman who had adopted a little girl. The little girl had Mexican heritage — I believe her birth mother was Mexican, and her birth father was from the United States. The woman I knew was a big-time Democrat. This was back when Donald Trump was running for president in 2016, and she was all in for Hillary Clinton. The little girl was around 11 or 12 years old at the time, and the day after Trump won, the mother posted all over social media that she was up all night with her daughter, consoling her because she thought she would be deported because her birth mother was Mexican.
"Why would she think that? Didn't you tell her that she's legally your daughter and a United States citizen?" I asked, but she just ignored me and continued posting her outrage all over Facebook. The truth is that she wanted her daughter to be scared. She was willing to use her for her own political agenda. That's just child abuse.
I'm not friends with that person anymore, but it's a perfect example of the idea that every child is different. Many kids, at 11 or 12 years old, may do okay if they're exposed to the news, but this little girl had a traumatic history that involved immigration and her Mexican background, and she probably didn't need that type of exposure in that moment — at least not with a mother who wasn't willing to correct her.
But not all news exposure is bad. Child psychologist Tamara Soles told Parents.com that it can have it's benefits... but you still want to monitor for graphic for distressing stories.
"Engaging with news stories can enhance children’s empathy and compassion," explains Dr. Soles. "Children learn about the world’s complexities and can engage in meaningful discussions about current events. When adults value children’s opinions, it boosts kids’ self-confidence and critical thinking."
The APA points out that no matter what your beliefs or whether you let your child consume news coverage or not, it's ideal to take breaks. "Turning the news off does not mean we feel any less sad for what has happened, but it does mean that we are taking steps to limit our exposure and increase our resilience and the resilience of our children to cope in the face of difficult situations," it says, especially if it's interfering with your life.
I think that's true for children and adults.
