Wait! I’ve got an even better idea! How about having toddlers in fake boobs and butt pads FIGHTING EACH OTHER!!!
Bill Verst has asked a Kentucky court to grant him sole custody of his daughter Maddy Verst, now 6, who gained infamy on TLC’s vile reality show“Toddlers & Tiaras” when her mother had her appear in a kiddie beauty pageant dressed as Dolly Parton, with a padded bra and butt pads.
Good. I hope he wins.
This is nothing short of child abuse, and represents exploitation of the very young for an adult’s own (sick) gratification. It may not be quite as despicable as having toddlers duke it out at day care, but it’s close. A court-appointed psychologist agreed with Verst that his estranged wife’s sexualization of their daughter showed she was an unfit parent, and recommended that a judge make Verst the girl’s sole custodial parent.
I’m sure it will not surprise you to hear that Maddy’s Mom, Lindsey Jackson, doesn’t get it. She told reporters,
“If (the judge decides) that Maddy needs to live with her dad because she does pageants with me, then that opens the door for any parent to challenge anybody on activity that a kid does, period. We could really open up Pandora’s Box to set a precedent all over the world. What if years ago Gabby Douglas’ father said, ‘She’s not going to be a gymnast. She’s not going to move away from home and practice gymnastics because I won’t allow it,’ and he and Gabby’s mother got into a fight? We wouldn’t have gold medal winners, we wouldn’t have Miss America, we wouldn’t have Miss USA.”
Yes, and all those things are worth abusing children for, just like pageants. I, for one, would welcome a discussion of whether it is humane, responsible and fair to warp a child’s life to prepare her for the Olympics. First, however, I would happily forego the pleasure of every beauty pageant in existance for a lifetime if it prevented the exploitation and abuse of one little girl, and Maddy will do. We can debate about the costs of gold medals after that.
Jackson, though she doesn’t know it, is a monster of the sort I discussed in the previous post, just a slightly less repulsive species. And she is making her daughter into one as well.
I’m rooting for Bill Verst.
_________________________________________________
Pointer: ABA Journal
Sources:
Graphic: Fox
Ethics Alarms attempts to give proper attribution and credit to all sources of facts, analysis and other assistance that go into its blog posts. If you are aware of one I missed, or believe your own work was used in any way without proper attribution, please contact me, Jack Marshall, at jamproethics@verizon.net.
Ethics Alarms 
Ms. Jackson’s worst case scenario situation seems like a best case to me. We actually still would have gold medal winners…but it would be through ethical means.
The question I have is through what mechanism? This is reprehensible, but is the proper action the one Mr. Verst has taken or to legislate the activity? I think putting in place legislation on this would only treat the symptom and not the problem. This is a societal morality issue, and it can be seen throughout entertainment, politics and legislation. We have legitimatized behaviors that once were considered taboo. We demonize anyone who would hold to conservative/Christian values yet legitimize child exploitation, Sexualization of everything, promiscuity, abortion on demand, single mothers, “alternative” life styles, civil disobedience, nudity, violent music/movies/TV/games, lying, slander and victimization; all under the guises of “Choice”, “Art”, “Expression”, “entertainment” and “helping the down trodden”. I believe in libertarian principals, I believe in individual freedoms but society has a duty condemn behavior that is destructive to itself. We have turned the corner where legislation has taken the place of morality and it is just not as powerful as societal condemnation. The principals of liberals, conservatives and libertarians, ect are all sound when in balance, as our society mostly represents and that balance helps minimize unintended consequences. But the majority is generally silent and until it stands up against the vocal minority, mostly left at present, causing a change in direction, then the current cultural shift we are experiencing will continue left of center. Individual moral compasses will dictate if you think society is on the correct path.
My apologies on the rant .
Although this is not an ethics dunce determination, I would propose the silent majority.
Wait! I’ve got an even better idea! How about having toddlers in fake boobs and butt pads FIGHTING EACH OTHER!!!
I would not be surprised if this becomes reality.
Bite your tongue.
Can you imagine being credited with that idea?
Hey, I’m running out of time. I’ll take my immortality any way I can get it.
The mother assumes that a horrible precedent will be set if the judge sends the daughter to live with her father. She suggests that this judgement would open the door to anyone or any parent questioning any activity a child may be engaged in. Really? Responsible adults (though not enough adults) already question activities which seem to result in the exploitation of a child. The only message this judge will be sending if he awards custody to the father in this individiual case with its own set of circumstances is that the mother is an unfit parent. There will be no important legal precedents. There will be no Supreme Court arguments. There will be no visits by Oprah. There will be no made for TV Lifetime Movie. And I wonder if this mother will be disappointed by this?
When my child, now a brilliant, accomplished, lovely 40-yr-old Ph.D., was 5-yrs-old, she was the cutest LITTLE girl on Earth (no, I’m not biased). For God’s sake, let them be LITTLE while they can — that time is all too short. Kids are given us to be protected, nurtured, cherished — not for adult ego-gratification.
I hope he wins, as well. That said, I know from personal experience just how difficult it can be (at least in my state) to get a probate court judge to rule that a parent should be denied visitation, let alone award sole legal and/or physical custody to one parent – even in cases where there is more than ample evidence that it is in the best interest of the child/children to do so. Far too many judges are far too concerned with what they perceive as “fairness” for the non-custodial parent (usually the father), rather than what is in best interest of the children. And that is outrageous.