Friday, May 29, 2009

Pa. Officials Probing 'Jon and Kate' Complaint

Jon, Kate and their eight have attracted a huge TV audience, screaming tabloid headlines and, now, a state labor investigation. (May 29) From the Associated Press.

110 comments:

Linda said...

BTW - E! has a news special on tonight called Jon & Kate: Twisted Fate.

Anya said...

Thanks, Linda.

It comes on shortly here (West Coast). I am debating whether to stay awake.

As for the PA investigation, I stand by my earlier assertion that I doubt much will come off it, but I frankly don't see any downside. Either they will come in and tell TLC/Figure 8 they are doing everything right or they will come in and tell them what needs correcting.

It still appears PA doesn't have very strong laws in this area and I think those who are concerned about the issue (and not just obsessed with bringing Kate Gosselin down), would do best to focus their efforts in the area of new legislation in PA (or in their particular state of residence).

merryway said...

With the media blitz, the state would be remiss if they didn't investigate, as should other states who have reality shows going on. Possibly, this could lead to a change in labor laws. As posters on this blog have often stated, it would be nice to see something done to ensure proper working conditions and protect $s for children.

A Mom-ynous said...

TLC is already cooperting with the Dept of Labor.

This is just addressing complaints that have been filed that they are obligated to follow up on.

Much like if your neighbor tells CPS that you beat your child, they would have to follow up to see if it is true or not.

I stand by my earlier statements. If it is determined that they are "working", entertainment law will apply and each child can be "working" for 44 hours each week.

I'm not sure what people are expecting of magical labor laws--but they exist and likely "may" already apply to the Gosselins. If they don't it is b/c living your life in front of a video camera doesn't constitute work.

It will be interesting to see the results of all of this, but it won't be a victory for the so called advocates b/c they will not be getting "their" way.

If folks can be armchair psychologists, then by golly I can be an armchair attorney.

Clarify the law (not change the law) on children in entertainment and then leave the Gosselins alone to make parental decisions as they see fit.

It is not up the rest of the world to determine whether or not the family can do this or not.

Not in any state is this law so broad to limit a child's activities or interests or the parents direction of the kids in any activity. (i.e. sports, the arts, the sciences, anything! And given the number of injuries on the rise in sporting activities, that would seem to fit the bill of "abuse" more than video taping a child's birthday party for a television show.)

Parents have rights and advocates seem to forget that and hate that.

CincyMom said...

I've been a little curious about this situation since the state is looking into exploitation....
Why isn't the same attention now being put on the Duggars, Hayeses, Roloffs, etc?

J&K have been getting a lot of attention because of marital problems, that is the only difference in the situations that I can see.

So wouldn't it only be fair to treat all the kid situations the same? What do you all think?

A Mom-ynous said...

"and protect $s for children."

*******

What law determines the income of the children though?

If they are "working" but not "acting" and not members of SAG, then at best they would get minimum wage.

Even if they could fall under SAG guidelines, they wouldn't be required to receive but a small fraction of the fee the family gets paid per episode.

And while it is all well and good to require legal protection for the children's money, let us not forget that we have NO proof that the parents have not done just that by now.

We do not know if a trust does or does not exist.

Bringing up quotes made 3 or 4 years ago about college funds and the like is not "proof" or "verification" that something does not exist today.

It is within the rights of the parents to use some of the money on the children via their private school and activities.

It is within their legal rights to use some of the money on the children's clothes for the show or public appearances.


To presume that the money is being squandered and the children don't see a dime is disingenuous.


I can't help but think that parental rights will be stripped b/c of some pseudo-advocates.

No I don't condone "pimping" of the children as some might put it. But I don't consider this "pimping". It is highly likely the courts will not see it that way either.

themrs said...

Nadya Suleman officially signed up to do a show. I'm wondering if she'll move due to strict filming guidelines in california.

merryway said...

A Mom-ynous, you grabbed a part of my post, but I'm not sure if you're just writing your opinions or speaking to me directly. I want to clarify since your points go beyond my remark.

As I said “Possibly, this could lead to a change in labor laws.


Many times, investigations lead to changes in law. It usually takes quite a while. If it's a change then I don't know why you're putting restrictions such as:

If they are "working" but not "acting" and not members of SAG, then at best they would get minimum wage.I have no idea why you think they would be restricted to min wage. But, am guessing that maybe you're referring to an existing law. Is this an existing minimum?

My post was inclusive of all children in this position and not specifically to the G's children. Many posters here have often posted/wished/stated that children should be protected in this fashion. Not in relation to you, but that point gets lost in accusations that this site defends Kate at all cost. Your other points, such as to presume the children don't see a dime and the G's kids' college funds are beyond what I was addressing. I have often stated that I thought the G kids were lucky in this sense, as it seemed to me, to the parents had the best intentions for their family.

Linda said...

Cincy Mom wrote:

J&K have been getting a lot of attention because of marital problems, that is the only difference in the situations that I can see.

So wouldn't it only be fair to treat all the kid situations the same? What do you all think?
I think that J&K are getting a lot of attention because they have a Julie, Kevin & Jodi, and GWOP fanning the flames.

What will the alleged advocates do when the PA Dept. of Labor finds that TLC, Figure 8 & J&K are following the law as they exist in PA?

Linda said...

I've always wondered how the Gwoppers can argue that the kids are "working" and that their parents aren't?

A Mom-ynous said...

I've been a little curious about this situation since the state is looking into exploitation....
Why isn't the same attention now being put on the Duggars, Hayeses, Roloffs, etc?


****************

Different states and it should be noted that PA is only looking into this b/c there have been complaints to the Dept of Labor and they are following up on these complaints. The term investigation carries such negative connotation and gets folks all excited that "ooooohhhhh, someone's in troubbbbbbbllllllle". When really it is just a formal process to see if there is merit to the complaint and whether the alleged infraction is indeed an infraction.

TLC has stated that they have already been working with the state anyway. The premise that they are trying to skirt the law is laughable.

Allegations can still be filed and even though they have been working together, the state would have to investigate it.

I know that GWOP posters have posted that they complained to the Dept of Labor, but likely it either investigated without a press release if the complaint was considered a legitimate complaint.

IMHO--folks are not bothered by the other families b/c they do not consider them controversial enough to bother. Advocates would be advocating for all. Not a select few.

Also IMHO--if you are not party to the incident and have not personally witnessed "in person" anything, then it is crossing the line to file a "legality" complaint.

A Mom-ynous said...

I have no idea why you think they would be restricted to min wage.

********

I didn't say they would be restricted.

I simply said that that is the most that would legally be required.

Just as what happens when you "work" in a grocery store. They do not have a legal obligation to pay you more than minimum wage for your efforts.

People want laws to protect the kids, but they are blinded by what the limitations of the law actually is.



****************************
"Many times, investigations lead to changes in law. "

Many times investigations reveal no issues as well.

*******************************
"Many posters here have often posted/wished/stated that children should be protected in this fashion. Not in relation to you, but that point gets lost in accusations that this site defends Kate at all cost."

I am not sure if you are including me with that broad brush. I am not defending KAte at all costs. What I am trying to do is to point out the inconcistencies and irrational nature of the folks who are supposedly advocating.



However--you miss the point.

Advocates want change and they want that change to be "prohibition". That will never happen as it infringes upon parental rights--which due exist.

I.e the law cannot make me permit my child to take a dance class nor can it prohibit me from making her take piano. I have that choice as a parent.

The law can step in if I beat her to comply with my request for piano or lock her in the closet to prevent her from going to dance.

But that is extreme of course and that would be abuse.

My point is--depending on the legal interpretation of the situation, they may already be "protected".

Due to the good will of the parents, the kids may already have money set aside. (Surely folks will admit that they did not command as much per episode in the very beginning nor could the family predict their success and that they would eventually command what they do now.)

But that seems lost. We are presuming that the parents are out to make sure their children have nothing at all costs.

Where is the PROOF that that is taking place.

Law or no law--how do we know it isn't taking place and why is the public making it their business?

Let's pretend that PA's child labor law is expanded and reality is included in the scope of entertainment and the children are legally maximized to 44 hours per week.

Which truthfully ain't too much--school can be completed in 2 hours a day and when you figure that the avereage kid spends 35-40 hours a week commuting and going to school and an additional 10 hours per week in activities and homework...it isn't the abuse that folks think that it is. Homeschooled, a child the age of

Mady and Cara can complete their required standard education in about 2 hours 4 days per week. (This is based on several curriculums that I have researched.) So if they can complete school in roughly 8 hours a week...10-12 to account for fact memorizations and such, they would hvae plenty of time to "be children", "be documented", and "sleep" and lead healthy fulfilling lives.

I think what happens is folks see--40 hours a week and they apply their lives at work doing 40 hours of work and their exhaustion in doing that.

It isn't a fair comparison at all and makes the situation much worse that it possibly is.

You folks can speculate the children are being tortured and worked to the bone. It is only fair that others can speculate that to be nonsense and unrealistic in most any circumstance.


So if the children were included under the entertainment umbrella of child labor law in the State of Pennsylvania, would that be enoughto satisfy you that the children are properly cared for?

merryway said...

A Mom-ynous,

I said:


I have no idea why you think they would be restricted to min wage.


You said:


I didn't say they would be restricted.


and


I simply said that that is the most that would legally be required.


--------------------


As I was talking about a change, I don't know why this would be the outcome. You didn't answer my question if you were referring to an existing min.



You said:


People want laws to protect the kids, but they are blinded by what the limitations of the law actually is.


-----------


I'm not sure if you're including me in this broad brush, but I'm not exactly blind to limitations of the law. Again, I was referring to a possible change in time.



I said:


"Many posters here have often posted/wished/stated that children should be protected in this fashion. Not in relation to you, but that point gets lost in accusations that this site defends Kate at all cost."


You said:


I am not sure if you are including me with that broad brush. I am not defending KAte at all costs. What I am trying to do is to point out the inconcistencies and irrational nature of the folks who are supposedly advocating


------------------


As, it's stated above, I specifically said: Not in relation to you.You said:


However--you miss the point.


I said:


A Mom-ynous, you grabbed a part of my post, but I'm not sure if you're just writing your opinions or speaking to me directly. I want to clarify since your points go beyond my remark.


--------------------


My post was a simple statement about possible changes in laws, that posters here have often wished were in place. You're taking sentences or bits of sentences out of my orig post and going far beyond anything I discussed or implied in a way that seems addressed towards me.

Canadian Made said...

Linda said:
What will the alleged advocates do when the PA Dept. of Labor finds that TLC, Figure 8 & J&K are following the law as they exist in PA?

Just because may be legally correct, doesn't mean it's morally correct.

Guinevere said...

Just because may be legally correct, doesn't mean it's morally correct.Point taken. But I think what we're discussing is the legalities involved.

Of course, legally okay does not equal morally okay. For instance, those women who say vicious things about the Gosselin parents and children have a legal right to do so, but they are morally very wrong.

MarieSea said...

Linda
What will the alleged advocates do when the PA Dept. of Labor finds that TLC, Figure 8 & J&K are following the law as they exist in PA?

Canadian Made
Just because may be legally correct, doesn't mean it's morally correct.
Now this is where the next question will lie. Is it morally correct to bully a family through tabloids and forums and blogs? Which is more morally wrong? Does the end justify the means? Are we willing to accept the consequences of the hate mongering or will we all be shaking our heads, tsk tsk, nothing I said or did, they brought this on themselves?

This becomes a very slippery slope. Surely we all know that these blogs are insuring big money for TLC and a long life for J&K+8. What if the contract actually locks them in tighter if the show is a ratings boon?

Matryoshka said...

I will see this investigation as more than a witch hunt when other reality show families are also investigated.

A mother does not deserve to have others speak of taking her children because she is a bitch.

SallyS said...

IMO the Roloffs are totally different from the J&K situation. From what I have watched, most of their filming is done in the summer when the kids are out of school, and in the end of spring (school year) and beginning of fall (school year) and pumpkin season. The kids are shown, starting senior year, freshman in H.S., playing soccer, and working to help their parents during the family business of pumpkin season. They are also seen on vacation in the summer, when they are out of school which is totally different from the Gosselin children. I am sure that the Roloff and Duggar filming schedules are nothing as intense as the filming session for TLC's cash cow of the Gosselin family.
That is why all the inquiries into the Gosselin family. Has filming destroyed the Roloff and Duggar families? NO! Has the filming schedule destroyed the Gosselin family YES! That is the difference between these reality families. J&K need to step back, take a breath, and think of their children vs. themselves.

goldngod_s said...

this is seriously ridiculous...why dont they investigate the family situations of kids that are truly being abused..emotionally or physically...such a total waste of time and money..the gosselin kids are fine and most of the time behave better than my three year old diva..i am more concerned about what divorce would do to them rather than the cameras...they are not working in coal mines or sweat shops..they are out going on vacations, playing and painting..lets take away the good times of 8 little kids who otherwise parents couldnt afford taking them out on fun outings..seriously when i was a kid i could care less how my parents paid for the vacation as long as they werent selling drugs or doing anything crazy like that..my memories are based on the experiences shared and just being with my family..these kids are sextuplets and twins they were destined to have a different life...this is not abuse people come on...why dont we investigate on the stage moms out there who are guilty of much worse putting their kids through hours of dance training, and beauty sessions against their will..the kids just have to go on about their life and chill out...i would love to have my childhood documented for me...i would seriously watch myself every day!!

CC Rider said...

SallyS,

I believe that Jon and Kate actually might have separated sooner without the show. It is my opinion that quite possibly the show gave them a reason to stay together- up to a point.

I don't believe these two are compatible.

Trish said...

Sally S said...

"IMO the Roloffs are totally different from the J&K situation. From what I have watched, most of their filming is done in the summer when the kids are out of school, and in the end of spring (school year) and beginning of fall (school year) and pumpkin season. The kids are shown, starting senior year, freshman in H.S., playing soccer, and working to help their parents during the family business of pumpkin season. They are also seen on vacation in the summer, when they are out of school which is totally different from the Gosselin children. I am sure that the Roloff and Duggar filming schedules are nothing as intense as the filming session for TLC's cash cow of the Gosselin family.
That is why all the inquiries into the Gosselin family. Has filming destroyed the Roloff and Duggar families? NO! Has the filming schedule destroyed the Gosselin family YES! That is the difference between these reality families. J&K need to step back, take a breath, and think of their children vs. themselves."
-----------------------------------

I'm pretty sure none of us, unless we know the families personally or know someone on the production staff, really know what the other families' filming schedule. Any speculation on that is purely that...speculation.

I just love it how often opinion seems to turn into fact.

And for the record...I watch Little People Big World...and gasp...they've filmed during Christmas and Thanksgiving! You hit spring, summer and fall....guess we can include winter in there. Is there another season I'm forgetting?

Guinevere said...

Has the filming schedule destroyed the Gosselin family YES!You have absolutely no way of knowing this.

That is the difference between these reality families.I think the main difference is that some women hate Kate and want to destroy her. Their hatred is so strong that every other mother must be found more worthy than her in some way. I've seen it stated that Casey Anthony is a better mother than Kate Gosselin. It's not enough for the haters to hate her - she has to be the worst person who ever existed in the history of the world. All because she's kind of bitchy and controlling.

J&K need to step back, take a breath, and think of their children vs. themselves.And some viewers need to take a step back, a breath, and realize that they have their own lives (and children?) to worry about, and their own faults to work on.

H.K. said...

One of the things that made me extremely uncomfortable is that when you watch earlier episodes, you see that tere is a stationary camera in the chidren's rooms, that records their movements 24 hours. I know that often parents do that to monitor their children, but it's another to have it aired for the whole world to see.

I hope that one day that there are more strict rules to protech children who are in reality TV. One of the laws that I like to get passed is to remove the cameras that stay in children's rooms 24/7.
Children need their privacy.

Somehow I don't think J&K would like having a camera in their bdroom 24/7, so why would they allow cameras in their children's bedrooms?

Matryoshka said...

MO the Roloffs are totally different from the J&K situation. From what I have watched, most of their filming is done in the summer when the kids are out of school, and in the end of spring (school year) and beginning of fall (school year) and pumpkin season. The kids are shown, starting senior year, freshman in H.S., playing soccer, and working to help their parents during the family business of pumpkin seasonAnd Zack and Jacob in the hospital, and the death of a close family friend, and Zach's dating experiences....

Trying to justify why one show is OK and the other is not comes down to how much you like the mother in the family. That's what is so horrifying to me. It seems that a woman who doesn't "know her place" is subject to scrutiny that I believe none of us could withstand and come out looking good.

Kids on reality TV is exploitation, or it's not. It doesn't become exploitation just because Kate Gosselin is involved.

jace said...

The cameras have not been allowed in the kid's rooms since the move to the new house.

Lilly said...

One of the things that made me extremely uncomfortable is that when you watch earlier episodes, you see that tere is a stationary camera in the chidren's rooms, that records their movements 24 hours. I know that often parents do that to monitor their children, but it's another to have it aired for the whole world to see.

*****************
While we saw cameras in the rooms, 99% of the time it was the kids jumping on beds.

The whole premise of the show is to see what it's like in the life of the twins and sextuplets, that included in the early years the stuff some people were complaining about like the potties and such. So what! I believe the intentions of Jon and Kate were pure and still are. As somenoe pointed out, cameras are not allowed in the bedrooms. They had rules then and they have even more now.

Jordan said...

Matryoshka said...
I will see this investigation as more than a witch hunt when other reality show families are also investigated.

A mother does not deserve to have others speak of taking her children because she is a bitch.

May 30, 2009 1:04 PM
*********************************

This is indeed a witch hunt. Plain and simple.

It's a vicious cycle with the hate blogs feeding the tabloids lies, and the tabloids fedding the haters and jealous who are stupid enough to waste money on them.

It not fair people are making such ludicrous accusations and statements because they do not like Kate. And it's wrong that they make such detrimental statements that will hurt the kids. This is the most harmful and damgaging thing that could be done to those kids.

Way to go "child advocates". You are evil.

Quiltart said...

Jordan said ... This is indeed a witch hunt. Plain and simple.

It's a vicious cycle with the hate blogs feeding the tabloids lies, and the tabloids fedding the haters and jealous who are stupid enough to waste money on them.

It not fair people are making such ludicrous accusations and statements because they do not like Kate. And it's wrong that they make such detrimental statements that will hurt the kids. This is the most harmful and damgaging thing that could be done to those kids.

Way to go "child advocates". You are evil.
-----
Jordan, I've said the same thing in a different thread. I agree with you 100% that this is a witch hunt. I've seen people on some of the hate blogs patting each other on the back and congratulating their fearless leader for all her hard work to get the state of PA to investigate the Gosselins. (Gag me...)

Why aren't they investigating the fact that Michelle Duggar has her older daughters raise her younger children and that they are so closeted on their own compound that their biggest joy is to be able to go to the grocery store? Why aren't they investigating the fact that the Roloff boys barely made it out of high school and that one of them made blatantly racist remarks on Facebook? Why aren't they investigating the Hayes family for
stopping wherever they are so the
children can relieve themselves in public in the grass instead of in a bathroom?

Don't get me wrong... I watch all of these shows and all of these shows have good points and bad points, just like J&K+8 ... but Kate Gosselin is being investigated because a bunch of bloggers don't like the fact that she can be abrasive and controlling and they have orchestrated a very calculated campaign, including spiteful members of her own family, to bring her down. Never mind that her children are happy, well cared for, well fed, well behaved and that her children are loved by their parents and their siblings.

Yes, this is a witch hunt and I don't know about the rest of you, but I am extremely upset about it because it seems there is nothing that can be done to stop it.

A few thoughts said...

I don't hate Kate or Jon Gosselin. I do hate the fact that the actions of these parents and the public that is scrutinizing them is also in the children's lives.

Is it the chicken or the egg? Did the Gosselins behavior in the public eye bring this on themselves, or has it all been manufactured by that same public?

As another example, what brought the firestorm of bad press and paparazzi upon Britney Spears and the like, while others in the public eye/entertainment industry seem to escape this type of media wrath? Was it their bad behavior to begin with, or the public scrutiny regarding their bad behavior that brought on the media frenzy? I realize that the Roloff and Duggar or Hayes families do not create the same media feeding frenzy as the Gosselins, is that because the material is just not there?

The Gosselins did make a choice to make their family public. But others have as well without the same negative press results. Could a decision have been made by these parents to tone things down a bit before this all exploded, on behalf of their family? Sure, maybe they should be able to be themselves, but what if a parent being himself/herself is not a healthy thing for the family, for the marriage, for the children? As mature adults we should be able to problem solve and change course when things go wrong. We should be able to make the decision to take action to strengthen a family rather than let if fall apart. Some of these issues regarding the Gosselins that fuss up the public have been talked about for a long time, time enough to have changed course to protect their family? I hope that the scenario didn't continue simply to keep the show going, create ratings, the income stream going come hell or high water. Perhaps some of the issues have been manufactured or intensified by the press, but after the fact, can't these parents make a choice to become private again with their business to stop the bad press? If we point fingers only at the media and public, does it remove responsibility from Jon and Kate/TLC/child labor issues for their part in this situation?

I don't know the answers, but once again I feel that the children get the short end of the stick. I point some fingers at the media and those that have been outraged by some aspects of the show. But I also point fingers at the parents that just don't seem to be able to stop, go home and cherish those kids, centering for a while upon what they may really need at this time without thinking so much of the kind of income it takes to support their current lifestyle, but toning down a bit to close the gates, stop the bleeding and shore up the foundations.

This, in my opinion, would show the sharks that Jon and Kate really are in it for the kids. Keeping going despite the fact that the family is imploding does not make me think it's all for the kids. Food, shelter and clothing and college for 8 kids that will certainly be eligible for financial aid can be provided along with a lot of love and fun for much, much less.

I don't need to be entertained by this show. I don't need to watch this show as a train-wreck. Sponsors and ad space will go elsewhere. The public will survive if the show ends. The family will survive if the "media business" income ends. What is it that the children and the marriage need at this time, or perhaps a year or two ago? I don't think it was my viewing pleasure.

Time will tell. We will hear from the kids eventually. There are many fingers to be pointed, Jon and Kate is where change should start, or should have months ago. Bore the masses and they go home. I don't need to hate Jon or Kate to feel these things.

ORCALOVER said...

It is not up the rest of the world to determine whether or not the family can do this or not.
-----------------------------------

You are right, it is the public's descion. However, the public has every right to squawk, talk, blog, and scrutinize their behavior. If the Gosselin's can hack it, fine, if they can't they know how to stop it. You know darn well it is so much more than just taping a kid's bday party.

-----------------------------------
Also IMHO--if you are not party to the incident and have not personally witnessed "in person" anything, then it is crossing the line to file a "legality" complaint.
-----------------------------------

So if a kid comes up to me in the classroom and has bruises and won't tell me about them, I should ignore it because I haven't witnessed anything? How many child abuse claims are made on strong gut feelings, and how many are made based on witnessing?

-----------------------------------


I don't think all of this is a witch hunt. I think some of it was brought on by Kate herself. Tough luck being in the public eye, people love you or hate you. Part of this is because of the inconsistenicies and lies that Jon and Kate have told over the years. And I think another part is that people watch the show because they are entertained by the good, bad and ugly. We have seen it all from this family.

It doesn't really matter if it is fair not. If so many people hate Kate, which I think is true of most of the GWOPPER's.

She and Jon have to make a choice. Is it worth it? If the answer is yes, then she and Jon accept the bad with the good.

If Kate is trying to holiday in private, on an island somewhere, she will have to get used to the fact that the paps will follow her, just like they are following Jon.

I don't feel sorry for Jon or Kate. I feel sorry for the kids.

Tyra said...

So if a kid comes up to me in the classroom and has bruises and won't tell me about them, I should ignore it because I haven't witnessed anything?Of course you have witnessed something in that scenario: you directly observed bruises and the changed behavior of a child you are personally acquainted with. Call it a 'gut instinct' if you want, I think it's based on a very rational thought process, and 'gut instinct' is a misnomer.

A big part of the Gosselin blogging world for me is this huge glorification of 'feelings'. "I have a feeling the Gosselins are doing 'damage' to their children.. I'm 'afraid' one of the children will grow up to be a serial killer(!).. I 'bet' Kate is having an affair with her bodyguard. (Speaking of that, who decided it was an accepted 'fact' that the bodyguard is 'hot'? Attractive older man, imo. That's it.) It must be true, because I feel it." All of that baseless internet speculation comes from this 'intuition' that women are supposed to be good at, and take pride in. I wish we would knock that sh*t off. 'Intuition' is, to me, BS, a lazy way of thinking/arguing, something that women are often complimented on in a patronizing way. By men. Who then go on to reserve logic and rationality for themselves.

I'm thinking the Pennsylvania Department of Labor having their say is a good thing. Hopefully it's actually an impartial agency, with rational individuals working for it. Breath of fresh air!

A Mom-ynous said...

" Has filming destroyed the Roloff and Duggar families? NO! Has the filming schedule destroyed the Gosselin family YES! That is the difference between these reality families. J&K need to step back, take a breath, and think of their children vs. themselves."

Proof?

Evidence?

Links?

A divorce is not "destorying a family"--well in a literal sense anyway.

Just b/c the Roloffs and Duggars continue to be married, that is not proof that there isn't "harm" on the children that the "advocates" are so concerned about.

Just b/c the Gosselins may divorce does not inherently make the show "harmful".

As for shooting schedules, yes there is much less shooting but it is sprinkled throughout the year. If it is for one second during the school year, how much of it is during the school year is irrelevant.

It is either okay or not okay for advocates. They cannot have it both ways.

A Mom-ynous said...

"Linda said:
What will the alleged advocates do when the PA Dept. of Labor finds that TLC, Figure 8 & J&K are following the law as they exist in PA?

Just because may be legally correct, doesn't mean it's morally correct."

Morals are not legislated in this country. The basis of the law is not whether or not it fits someone's definition of morals.

*************************
"One of the things that made me extremely uncomfortable is that when you watch earlier episodes, you see that tere is a stationary camera in the chidren's rooms, that records their movements 24 hours. I know that often parents do that to monitor their children, but it's another to have it aired for the whole world to see."

Interesting. They have since stopped doing this. (We can only speculate why--but my guesses, kids got older and are no longer babies and do have a sense of privacy that 12 month olds and even 2 year olds do not have.)


Why this "change" not acceptable?

A Mom-ynous said...

"One of the laws that I like to get passed is to remove the cameras that stay in children's rooms 24/7."

While I would agree with the spirit of this change:

Why the witch hunt for a change that has been made?

And let's back up a moment--where is your "proof" that the cameras were there 24/7?

A Mom-ynous said...

"So if a kid comes up to me in the classroom and has bruises and won't tell me about them, I should ignore it because I haven't witnessed anything? How many child abuse claims are made on strong gut feelings, and how many are made based on witnessing?"

***********************

So the Gosselins have bruises now?

Discovering bruises on a student would be personal witness.

Making yourself feel better b/c you (generally speaking) are doing the right thing by interfering with a television show that you watch completely edited and have no facts of the schedule to know that the children are overtired and exhausted b/c they are being worked to death is not personally witnessing anything.

That would be like you reporting me for not homeschooling my kids properly b/c you know that I homeschool but we were seen at a Toys R Us at 1:00 on a Wednesday.

It is your perogative to do it--but you haven't witnessed anything except that we appeared during a time that is traditionally associated with being in a classroom.

The strong guts are fed by a website full of vitrol or hatred.

The feelings you are feeling about this family are not real, I am sorry to say.

They are no more real than my professed love for Matthew McCoughay (sp?).

If you want to believe you are doing the right thing, feel free to rationalize that to yourself.

Witnessing a temper tantrum on a tv show though--is not tantamount to finding an unexplained bruise on the child.

I hadn't realized that the Gosselin Children were your students and were withholding information from you about their abuse at home.

If that is the case, then you are within your duty to report their abuse.

A Mom-ynous said...

"My post was a simple statement about possible changes in laws, that posters here have often wished were in place. You're taking sentences or bits of sentences out of my orig post and going far beyond anything I discussed or implied in a way that seems addressed towards me."

I was probably mixing addressing you with speaking generally.

There is too much going on in your post to address specifics that for me to attempt to address it would make it seem more like I am going point to point with you which I wasnt.

My point IN GENERAL--was that posters want changes in the law as you say but they wont' be happy with the limitations at which the law will change.

Folks (not you) mentioned about legally correct vs morally correct and we have this funny document called the Constitution that does limit the Government's ability to legislate proper parenting. It is because of the constitution that I do get to enjoy some of my parenting rights.

Without the constitution folks would attempt to legislate stuff they just don't like such as anti-homeschooling laws and no nursing in public.



Now it is Sunday--so while the laws still permit me, I am going to drag my children against their will to a house of worship as I will do until they turn 18 or otherwise no longer depend on me for support.

Linda said...

Actually . . .

I think that a complaint to the PA Department of Labor is a fair response to concerns about the welfare of the children. ( I'd be surprised if they found that TLC or Figure 8 broke any existing laws.)

I think that developing legislation in PA is a fair response.

I think that enlisting the help of a recognized advocate for children in the entertainment industry is a fair response.

However . . .

The rest of the crap that these supposed advocates have done to me is pointless in enacting real change such as:

Aligning with GWOP
Calling the kids names
Calling the mother names
Calling the father names
Complaining about how K is not fulfilling her mothering duties
Complaining about how the Gs do not regularly attend church
Whispering "cheater" to a tabloid website
Etc., Etc.

A Mom-ynous said...

Well the latest tabloid news is that Jon and Kate have attorneys and are seeking a $10 million divorce (I guess division of assets??).

It is important to note that nearby headlines of other tabloids are that Michelle Obama has lied about her past and that the President is in the closet.

LoriNJ1970 said...

It makes sense that there needs to be laws protecting children in reality shows. Not just the Gosselin kids but ALL..and there seems to be an awful lot of kids on reality shows. The number of hours that they can be filmed and how the money is protected for them. TLC, Bravo, Discovery, etc. are all making a lot of money off these kids it's really no different than kids in Movies or sitcoms.

Tyra said...

A Mom-ynous said:

Now it is Sunday--so while the laws still permit me, I am going to drag my children against their will to a house of worship as I will do until they turn 18 or otherwise no longer depend on me for support.LOL :-)

Theresa said...

Quiltart said...
Jordan said ... This is indeed a witch hunt. Plain and simple.

It's a vicious cycle with the hate blogs feeding the tabloids lies, and the tabloids fedding the haters and jealous who are stupid enough to waste money on them.

It not fair people are making such ludicrous accusations and statements because they do not like Kate. And it's wrong that they make such detrimental statements that will hurt the kids. This is the most harmful and damgaging thing that could be done to those kids.

Way to go "child advocates". You are evil. -----
Jordan, I've said the same thing in a different thread. I agree with you 100% that this is a witch hunt. I've seen people on some of the hate blogs patting each other on the back and congratulating their fearless leader for all her hard work to get the state of PA to investigate the Gosselins. (Gag me...)

Why aren't they investigating the fact that Michelle Duggar has her older daughters raise her younger children and that they are so closeted on their own compound that their biggest joy is to be able to go to the grocery store? Why aren't they investigating the fact that the Roloff boys barely made it out of high school and that one of them made blatantly racist remarks on Facebook? Why aren't they investigating the Hayes family for
stopping wherever they are so the
children can relieve themselves in public in the grass instead of in a bathroom?

Don't get me wrong... I watch all of these shows and all of these shows have good points and bad points, just like J&K+8 ... but Kate Gosselin is being investigated because a bunch of bloggers don't like the fact that she can be abrasive and controlling and they have orchestrated a very calculated campaign, including spiteful members of her own family, to bring her down. Never mind that her children are happy, well cared for, well fed, well behaved and that her children are loved by their parents and their siblings.

Yes, this is a witch hunt and I don't know about the rest of you, but I am extremely upset about it because it seems there is nothing that can be done to stop it.

May 30, 2009 6:42 PM
Quiltart, I agree with you 100% and you make excellent points, as did Jordan.

Samantha said...

Part of this is because of the inconsistenicies and lies that Jon and Kate have told over the years.

**************

Orcalover, can you provide these "inconsistencies and lies"? I believe your thought about these goes to what Tyra was talking about regarding "intuition". In your case, I think it's your dislike of Kate that makes you keep stating actions and feelings that are just not there on behalf of what the Gosselins are experiencing and what we see on TV. So, of course there are "inconsistencies and lies" Jon and Kate have told. That gives you the basis to say this. (and the majority of the posters here know what is real and not. I would also venture to say, we probably know who you are just by your writing style).

You (and your sock puppets) are a big part of the witch hunt people here are talking about.

The women on this blog are smart cookies Orcalover. Go back to your pitiful blog and be the mean and vitrol person you have proven you are.

WhyDoesitMatter said...

well, the separation is real..check out these pics of Kate, the kids, babysitter, and steve the bodyguard
http://www.theinsider.com/photos/2222423_New_Pics_Kate_Plus_8_Vacations_Without_Jon

and

http://justjared.buzznet.com/2009/05/31/kate-gosselin-hand-sanitizer/

Well, this is going to be an awkward season.

Samantha said...

Thanks for the pics from the tabloid show and the tabloid website.

I think I'll hold my thoughts on a separation until I see this on the show.

Kinley said...

Who cares what happens to the adults? I really don't at this point. The two of them have made the decision to have their lives play out this way. The only people I think everyone should be focusing on is the children. They have no say , they have no voice, and they are the innocent ones. The thing is, we won't know what damage this is going to do to them in the future, but why gamble with it? I am hoping it turns out to be a fairy tale ending for them, but I can't see it being that way when the parents are bickering in front of them and acting like strangers, until they get in front of a camera. I think if they would have chose a different route with their lives they would have been much happier people at this time. I have heard Kate say she wants to continue the show because she 'loves' it. What she really needs to be saying or thinking is this. Is it worth it? Are my children's mental health going to be stable in the future?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Orcalover, can you provide these "inconsistencies and lies"?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I can name one that really bothers me. In the Ladies Home Journal, J&K acted like they were a very loving couple, when the truth was, they were already splitting up. Kate said she came to the realization of the changes 6 months ago. LHJ was put out only a few weeks ago. To me that is very untruthful. IMO, they would have still been acting as though they were happily married if Jason Hummels, or Kevin and Jodi had not came forward with information to prove different. Like I said I don't care waht happens to the adults, I care about these children, and no, I do not claim to be a child advocate,or 'witch hunter',I am just a normal down to earth person.

Momof2 said...

I've been gone for a few days and was just sticking my head in.....oh my...getting nasty in here...I had to check the URL to make sure I was in the right place...

btw, the new header gave me a CHUCKLE...love the cow!

(just going to duck back out .....)

Jordyn said...

Kinley, a woman admitting that her marriage may have been in trouble 6months ago and the timing of a magazine (where she probably was hoping there was nothing wrong) does not prove "a lie". She was probably trying all she could to make life as normal as possible for the children. She also has the right to withhold any kind of private information she wants.

They were living their lives as normal as they do. (doing the magazine). As Kate said in the interview chair (after we found out for sure about marital problems), she won't go lay down and die. She's fighting.

Put yourself in anyone's shoes who's had doubts about their husband. She wasn't sure. Just because she chose to air their lives, doesn't mean they have to tell us everything.

Their marital problems and the timeline are none of our business.

Catherine said...

I thought this was a good segment on Good Morning America Weekend, and part of it was on World News Tonight Sunday on ABC.


Growing Up On Reality TV

Could Popular Reality Shows Be Harming The Kids Growing Up On Camera? 05/31/09


http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=7718273

merryway said...

I was probably mixing addressing you with speaking generally. A Mom-ynous, thanks for explaining.

Rachel107 said...

I hope the recent pictures of Kate in a bikini finally quash once and for all the "boob job" gossip. Pretty clear to me that there are no implants there. Maybe she had a lift, but I personally don't see anything wrong with that. The six-pack abs are pretty impressive. At the risk of sounding like a sheeple, I can admit that I am jealous of something Kate has!

SarahW said...

To "May 31, 2009 7:32 PM"

I don't know if you realize it, but articles like the LHJ feature are put together months before the article is published...six or more months before.

As Kate noted "six months ago...if I'm being honest with myself" is a reflection in hindsight. When cracks begin to appear the situation six months down the road is not always immediately apparent, predicted, or if clues are present, believed.

Her experience of her marriage is that there are high points and low points, hills and valleys, and they have come through tough times before.

Your idea that if she looks back and sees where the current sad situation really began to creep up, that any attempt to soldier forth and put a happy face on things aroung that time is a "lie" - do you really think that can be a fair characterization?

I don't.

Saint said...

btw, the new header gave me a CHUCKLE...love the cow!
.........Great cow, Nina!

A Mom-ynous said...

The cow is cracking me up!


Regarding LHJ--

I cannot speak to when they photogrpahed that cover or did the story, but I remember VERY clearly that the Thanksgiving Issue was photopgraphed/Interviewed over last summer--many months before publication.

I'm unclear if this photo shoot was done at that time in anticipation of the kids turning five or if they did a separate shoot.

Photo shoots and intereviews are not necessarily done at the same time though so there would be no way of knowing when the story was actually interviewed and written especially if it does not address current events at all.

IIRC the issue is "put to bed" about a month before we see it on the stands and they go on the stands a couple of weeks or so prior to the date on the issue. So there would be no time for LHJ to backtrack on the story.

I have a strong feeling though that they will be quite busy this month with Letters to the Editor. Oh boy!

Mom2Maddie said...

This just hit people.com, all the speculation and accusing Jon of being up to no good. It's a shame they now NEED to justify their friends.

Though Jon Gosselin has been spotted with other women – most recently with two female companions over Memorial Day weekend and during a recent shopping spree at a New Jersey mall – the reality star says the women are actually just friends of his – and of his wife Kate.

"The two women with whom I've been photographed are family friends – Lauren Glassman and Lauren's daughter, Hailey," he tells PEOPLE. "Lauren's husband, Dr. Larry Glassman, performed Kate's tummy tuck surgery, and since the surgery we've become friendly with the Glassmans."

The Glassmans were photographed shopping with Jon at the Riverside Square Mall in New Jersey over the weekend, stopping in at Louis Vuitton, Cole Haan and Godiva stores, according to TMZ.com.

The trio were first spotted over Memorial Day Weekend, visiting a bar in Newburgh, N.Y., where Jon drank Miller Lite, according to witnesses.

Meanwhile, Kate Gosselin went on a working vacation in North Carolina last week with her eight kids, body guards, a nanny and camera crews.

Jon & Kate Plus Eight returns to TLC Monday (8 p.m. ET) with the second episode of the fifth season.

momofplenty said...

The Gosselins tape an incredibly large number of episodes for any type of show's standards. I don't really think any existing state laws matter as long as the children are not classifed as actors, performers or models. I wonder when this line is crossed? Photo shoots for magazines? Ads? These are certainly not part of a "reality" show.

Theresa said...

Mom2Maddie, thanks. It is sad indeed that they have to verify their friends.

It's funny becuase I saw that one with Jon (in the khaki) and she looked like the same gal talking with Kate back at the house (with Kate sitting in the chair) and thought how silly that TMZ was spalshing another Jon sighting. Perhaps they should've put the one of Kate and the Glassman girl next to it? :)

Rachel107, I think Jon was right when he says that Kate anti-ages. It's amazing how good she looks (toned and with her weight loss) and what a good bra does or a lift. I don't see anything wrong with a lift either. Killer abs!

Mom2Maddie said...

Rachel107 said...

I hope the recent pictures of Kate in a bikini finally quash once and for all the "boob job" gossip. Pretty clear to me that there are no implants there. Maybe she had a lift, but I personally don't see anything wrong with that. The six-pack abs are pretty impressive. At the risk of sounding like a sheeple, I can admit that I am jealous of something Kate has!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"sheeple"...kinda along the same lines as "kon", anyway you slice it, still "childish" name calling.

CincyMom said...

Isn't the photo shoot that came out in November from Good Housekeeping? That was the one taken during a hot summer day, I believe.

more2luv said...

kate is a weight loss insperation to me and a lot od the "overweight" sahm!!

stephanie said...

A very good article from Christianity Today.


http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/juneweb-only/122-11.0.html

"As fellow Christians, we should have reminded the Gosselins that life is a gift to be received in gratitude, not something to be grasped, purchased, or sold. In many ways, the last four seasons of Jon & Kate Plus Eight is the story of a family that seemed to progressively lose sight of this truth. Of course, they had help along the way from TLC, from the show's producers, and not least of all, from their Christian viewers."

Rachel107 said...

Mom2Maddie...I wasn't picking on you, I apologize if it seemed that way. Not sure why you are following me around on different threads to call me out on something. I'm just looking for a place to discuss these issues without all the hate. If you are trying to call me childish, just do it.

Rachel107 said...

Mom2maddie..."sheeple"...kinda along the same lines as "kon", anyway you slice it, still "childish" name calling.

Sheesh...and here I thought I was poking fun at myself! Sorry, I didn't put "sheeple" in quotation marks!

themrs said...

thanks for the link stephanie. good article.

Fanny said...

"As fellow Christians, we should have reminded the Gosselins that life is a gift to be received in gratitude, not something to be grasped, purchased, or sold. In many ways, the last four seasons of Jon & Kate Plus Eight is the story of a family that seemed to progressively lose sight of this truth. Of course, they had help along the way from TLC, from the show's producers, and not least of all, from their Christian viewers."




Oy. Is there ANYONE who hasn't said their peice about the Gosselins this month? I understand all the tabloid crap because that's what they do, but this? This is pretty bad.

Ya know, it's one thing to have an opinion about their situation, but to basically shame the "christian viewers" is another story. I would guess that only about 30 percent of the viewers were aware of the "controversy" surrounding the show. This has been an issue for me since I started following the story. It seems that some people don't understand the concept of perception, that everyone doesn't necessarily see it the same way.

Maybe I am being a bit harsh, but when I see terms like "narcissism" directed at Kate Gosselin, I can't help but be reminded of a certain hate blog where many claim to be christians when their words and actions say anything but.

Anya said...

Fanny, good points. I do think the author made one important observation, however:

"We are easily contented by the shallow rhetoric of hot-button issues."

This I very much agree with.

Mom2Maddie said...

Rachel107 said...

Mom2Maddie...I wasn't picking on you, I apologize if it seemed that way. Not sure why you are following me around on different threads to call me out on something. I'm just looking for a place to discuss these issues without all the hate. If you are trying to call me childish, just do it.

June 1, 2009 12:22 PM
Blogger Rachel107 said...

Mom2maddie..."sheeple"...kinda along the same lines as "kon", anyway you slice it, still "childish" name calling.

Sheesh...and here I thought I was poking fun at myself! Sorry, I didn't put "sheeple" in quotation marks!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am not following you around on any threads, we both just happen to be commenting on the same threads. I too am looking for a place to express my opinions without being insulted. And yes, it did seem that you were singling me out and calling me childish for calling Jodi & Kevin Greedy & Dipstick when there are a ton of other posts with equal or worse being said. So I commented back to you expressing that opinion. You again replied "I just think it's childish to call people names. If you want to say someone is acting like a dirtbag or dipstick, or loser, or anything else, fine, but to change their name to that, is exactly the same as using the terms "Kon" and the like." Ok...I got your point you prefer me to say kevin is a dipstick rather than using dipstick as a moniker. (Although I'm not sure I really see the difference but ok, agree to disagree.) But then while I'm reading the next thread there you are using the moniker sheeple to refer to fans of Kate. Is that not name calling? I was not calling you "childish" I was attempting to point out the hypocrisy in your comments. Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical of you to call me (or anyone else) out on something and then turn around and do it yourself? By your justification then if I would have said "Greedy & Dipstick" in quotation marks that would have been ok with you? I guess the difference is you were poking fun at yourself while I was poking fun at Kevin & Jodi in my comment:

Mom2Maddie said...

Boy....Greedy & Dipstick are really scrapping the bottom of the barrel to extend their 15 minutes of fame. Breaking news...this just in....Kate pawned some of her chores off onto her brother when they were kids...

ARE U KIDDING ME...that's the best U can do. Newsflash, I have 2 sisters, we always pawned chores off on each other growing up.

And guess what else...sometimes Jon & Kate don't make it to church....that's the last straw....let the stoning begin... Jon & Kate missed church this week.

Guess the price for the tell all just dropped to 25K since they've just revealed 2 more "secrets."

Really, these 2 need to get a life of their own and stop bottom feeding off Jon & Kate.

Oh...and one more thing I've noticed... UMMMMM must run in their family, none of them can get through an entire sentence without ummm.

May 29, 2009 11:44 AM

I took your comments as rather snappish and insulting when I was just trying to add a little sarcasm & humor to this horrible mess.

Mom2Maddie said...

Fanny...I couldn't agree more!!!!

On another note, I've come across several references to a "PennMommy", can anyone fill us newbies in?

Rachel107 said...

Again, sorry, not really sure what else to say. Maybe my humor doesn't come across in my comments. I thought my sheeple comment was completely innocent and had nothing to do with my comment on the Jodi/Kevin thread. Apparently I was wrong. I still stand by my opinion that name-calling is childish, but maybe you're right that I mistook humor for ugliness. And truly Mom2Maddie, I wasn't singling you out. I scrolled through the comments without even looking at who left them. I am certainly not trying to make enemies here.

A Mom-ynous said...

Oh goodness Cindy Mom, you are correct!!!

It was Good Housekeeping. No wonder my brain couldn't get a grasp on why in the world the magazine was placing them on the cover twice within 6 months of each other. DUH!!!

Yeah--it was a hot summer day but used to illustrate the length of time between shooting and publication and how the content of the article.

My apologies for my fact error--my brain clearly knew something was up. haha!

A Mom-ynous said...

But then while I'm reading the next thread there you are using the moniker sheeple to refer to fans of Kate. Is that not name calling? I was not calling you "childish" I was attempting to point out the hypocrisy in your comments


****************


FTR--Sheeple is a derogatory term developed by other site and IMHO she was using that term in a sarcastic way.

The term implies that if you come close to siding with the Gosselines that we are following along like sheep.

I think she was just mocking herself and it was not meant to namecall to other folks here. It wasn't meant to offend others.

becarefulhowyoujudge said...

I think that Christianity Today article goes to far. It feels to me as if they are trying to "cash in" (for lack of a better term) on the celebrity status of this family and almost maliciously discredit them when they should be praying for them. I know that the Gosselins are going through very difficult times right now but that does not mean that Kate is not a Christian. She has frequently professed her faith and her gratitude for the many blessings she has received. Granted, sometimes she (and Jon as well) exhibits unkind behavior but she has also stated a desire to change her often harsh ways. In general, she seems to truly believe in and rely on God and to be raising her kids to praise God as well. Right now she and Jon may be having a crisis and not handling it well but they have not gotten a divorce yet and may be, at this very moment, trying to work something out... or maybe not. We can only see what TLC chooses to show us. Everyone goes through difficult times in which they look back and realize that they were not necessarily doing God's will. Everyone has times of closeness and distance from God. The important part is that we always go back to God and learn from our mistakes. Nobody other than Jon and Kate themselves can say for certain what is happening in their lives and, as Christians, we should not judge them but lovingly encourage them to lean on God and pray as they struggle through the hard times. I am saddened to see so many people turn on this family and pray that they find people in their lives who will encourage and uplift them to weed out the important from the unimportant things in their lives and lean on God's help and forgiveness to heal their relationship and restore their Christian behaviors. Maybe, if these two can publicly succeed in leaning on God and working through the hard times, it will provide help and comfort to others who are watching and also struggling in their relationships or with difficult life situations. And, if they can not work this out, they (and the children) should be prayed for... not judged. We are not in their shoes to see what is really happening and be able to judge so leave the judging to God (who sees all things) and God alone.

Theresa said...

becarefulhowyoujudge, you're thoughts are very well written out and very true. I totally agree with you on all you said.

Have you sent something to Christianity Today? Seriously, they need to understand that they went too far. I find it hypocrital that they would judge anybody. If I were you, I would send your post...amend to fit a letter to them.

Linda said...

The article in Christianity Today was really well-written and thought-provoking.

And just think . . . there was no name-calling, no mocking, etc.

Judy said...

I just need to tell you guys something. My husband and I did a Discovery Health episode about twelve years ago, about our infertility struggle. We were half of an hour long special. (Another couple was shown the other half.)

The amount of filming we needed to do for that half hour was staggering. We were not only filmed probably ten hours altogether -- for thirty minutes -- but we were asked to repeat spontaneous moments with our doctor and between ourselves so the cameras could catch them again.

There is no way this is not a job for those kids.

Valerie said...

Thanks for sharing your experience Judy.

Do you think in the twelve years since that newer technology would make it less cumbersome for filming? I also think that a different crew, people being filmed, and way different premise of show would make the kind of show you did twelve years ago totally different (in most aspects, like filming and different takes for the show) than the show the Gosselins film.

A Mom-ynous said...

"I think that Christianity Today article goes to far. "

You can't believe that a Christian Publication would violate scripture and judge a family that they see on tv and keeps the gossip flowing, do you?

Say it isn't so?


(Note--I'm being sarcastic and am actually agreeing with your post!)

Guinevere said...

I agree with Valerie; while I appreciate you sharing your insight, Judy, I don't think any conclusions can be drawn about the Gosselin childrens' situation from it. Twelve years is a long time, it's a totally different show, with different producers, different crew, and different participants. It's a series as opposed to a one-off documentary. You don't know if your experience was unique or typical. So I really don't see the relevance.

A Mom-ynous said...

Judy...

My mother and her ex-husband did a very popular television show. An entire 48 hour period was spent to capture footage for a one hour episode. (well, they did sleep! But was a fully packed 2 days.)

I wasn't on the show--but I had to help my parents with the home renovations much like any other family would expect able-bodied children to pitch in.

They filmed our after party (that I did go to) on the very last day and the 3 or so hours spent filming it represented mabye a 30 second blip.

While it is fair to say that the filming is extensive, it is unfair for folks to accuse the show of violating child labor laws. (you didn't say that, but that is the ongoing anti-sentiment).

I think they should be covered b/c we are clearly being entertained and they need to film the kids or there wouldn't be a show.

Many anti-s would presume that folks like me don't want that and it is okay to watch these kids live in a fish bowl.

I have no problems with them working.

IF and WHEN they are included under the entertainment law umbrella--a few things will happen:

FIRST--the show will continue. So the constant beef that these kids need to be protected won't end the show.

SECOND--they aren't being exploited anymore than Hannah Montana. I hate how that word is toss around so freely. Once under the protection of the employment law, the exploitation premise disappears as a non-issue. wHY? See #3.

THIRD--parents have rights. If they want to share their family with the world, that is their perogative. While I have always been suspect of Nadya Suleman, I do not fault her for inking a deal to share her children with the world.

That is her right to do. The children, though human in every way, belong to her.

My children belong to me.

*I* get to choose what we will do as a family that will set their destiny.

(okay--me and hubby get to choose, but he is not writing this post!)

The first ammendment--that lets' KKK child rear future racists is the same amendment that applies to my family's freedom of expression.

Banning shows like Jon and Kate plus 8 (as opposed to limiting them to protect some level of privacy)--would violate the constitution.

Unless we want laws that obligate us to shelter our kids--this is why child entertainers are permitted in the first place.

Child labor laws do not prohibit children from EVER working. It just limits the circumstances in which they can be HIRED.

Another reason why kids can work in the family business (with restrictions in place for hazardous working conditions).

So much apples and oranges comparison is going on that it is hard to keep up.

Emily said...

I have to say that I am no big fan of Kate or Jon and I am glad that they are being investigated. They are exploiting their children. I don't think that because I don't like them. I think that because it's the truth.
All I needed to see was them ignoring the fact that the paparazzi was haning out in bushes photographing their kids. They should have stopped the party and gone home, to protect the privacy of the kids. All I need to know is that Kate is granting interviews and going on book tours when her famiy is in turmoil and her kids need her. Jon goes off on vacations instead of being a parent. Neither of them are up for parent of the year, and they are using those kids as meal tickets.
I don't see the Roloffs, the Duggars, or the Hayes family going on trips every week or airing their laundry in public or leaving the other parent and the children for a weekend 'with the guys'. Having your older daughters help with your younger children is not exactly abuse. I'd call it teaching responsibility and concern for others. All big families do the same thing. It's a good thing for the older kids and the little ones.
Jon and Kate both need to grow up, end that show and focus on their family. Divorce certainly does destroy a family, in every since. There is no more family after a divorce.

Judy said...

Valerie:

I imagine with newer technology, there might be slightly faster set up, but no, I don't think that otherwise it would be any different, faster, etc. I was a grown woman and it was annoying to me; I can't imagine for toddlers/young kids! We had to wait around a lot, pretend to be doing things, repeat things, etc. At one point, the treatment was going badly. I told my husband to tell the producer that I might not want filming done that day to document. (The crew was already there.) She told him, "But this is costing us a lot of money!" (We were not paid for our part in the film.)

Judy said...

Guinevere:

I'm sorry, but how many shows have filmed you and your family for Discovery Health or TLC?

Judy said...

A-Mom-ynous:

I am sure all laws are being followed. TLC is not stupid -- they will protect themselves. That said, I'm guessing the laws for children working in entertainment in PA are rather few and far between?

The kids are working, no two ways about it. If Jon and Kate are working, the kids are working. (Someone said earlier, I think, that they hated when people said Jon and Kate weren't working, but the kids were. I agree.) I think it's a bit naive for someone to think the kids are just casually going about their lives while they are being documented. I'm sure they are being filmed often, that they are being asked to repeat scenes, to wait very patiently for set ups and break downs, and that many parts of their lives are very scripted. Yes, the trips and so forth look fun -- they may even BE fun -- but they are being done so YOU can be entertained, not so the kids can be entertained. And even if parts of the trips are fun, there is still all the setting up, waiting around, certain scenes to be shot, etc. It's just like your own work --sometimes your job is fun, right? And sometimes it sucks, right? But you're getting paid either way.

Mary said...

well judy we see your REAL agenda comes out now.

so you believe the kids are working, still relating it to your experience when technology and each of these shows are different. then, telling us becasue it's entertaining us that they are indeed working. walk over back to the other side.

Quiltart said...

Emily said....I don't see the Roloffs, the Duggars, or the Hayes family going on trips every week or airing their laundry in public or leaving the other parent and the children for a weekend 'with the guys'.

If you haven't seen all of these families travel, especially the Roloffs, then you must be watching different shows than I am. The Roloffs went from one trip to the next from last spring until the end of the summer... and both parents did not always accompany the kids.
As far as dirty laundry, I would consider Matt's DUI dirty laundry.

If the Gosselins are exploiting their kids, there is no way you can say that these other families are not doing the same thing.

A Mom-ynous said...

Judy--a quick expansion of Child labor law and it is a non-issue.

We are not privvy to how the show is taped to classify that they are "working" and that was simply my argument.

But expand the law and then it is a non-issue and simply is a matter of properly and legally documenting the filming schedule.

(Transit is not considered work btw! So for example the bus ride to the cake shop would not count. Nor the plane trips to the vacation destination).

What it comes to after that is folks simply not liking the parenting choices of a couple whom they have grown to hate.

I don't raise my children to appease the public.

I raise my children as I see fit and as I determine is healthy for them and within their threshholds.

It isn't up to you or anyone else to decide that.

And I will say it again--PA permits minors to work up to 44 hours per week.

That will easily cover adequate filming schedule.

What's the argument when all that is determined legally permissable?

A Mom-ynous said...

They are exploiting their children. I don't think that because I don't like them. I think that because it's the truth

**************

It is the truth if the investigation reveals it. Not b/c you say so.

A Mom-ynous said...

All I need to know is that Kate is granting interviews and going on book tours when her famiy is in turmoil and her kids need her.



***************

Matt Lauer was gallavanting around the world on unnecessary fluff news assignments for ratings and he cheated on his wife and she wants to divorce him....

But he is being praised b/c he interviewed a shrink who thinks the Gosselins are being harmed b/c their mom is doing book tours.

That is quite sexist, don't you think?

another thought said...

I guess we should all relax and see what the investigation comes up with? How could we know it's work for the kids? But how can we know it isn't? We are not privy to what happens either way. We can not know that its only 44 hours a week that they do film, without being able to investigate, or if that will be the determining factor of the investigation, there may be a completely different set of standards used.

It's kind of silly to argue something either way without really knowing either way, don't you think? I will wait and see.

Guinevere said...

I'm sorry, but how many shows have filmed you and your family for Discovery Health or TLC?

Look, anyone can make up a story on a blog. Believe me, we have some experience in this area.

Maybe you were in this documentary 12 years ago as you say you were; maybe not. Either way, it's not relevant and pulling it as your trump card to try to prove a point isn't going to work. Nor is speaking in absolutes (e.g. "no two ways about it"). (Or doing as Emily does and declaring your OPINION "the truth". Sheesh, is it possible that there are so many presumably high-school educated women in this country that really can't differentiate between a fact and an opinion?)

Judy said...

So for those of you who don't think the kids are working, what do you imagine this life to be like for them?

As for as the traveling part goes, a three, four, or five year old is not enjoying hours and hours on a bus or plane to get to their destination, regardless if it is for work or play.

And btw, I'm college educated. ;)

Rachel107 said...

So if we believe the kids are working, we're not allowed to be here?

That's what I believe, but I HATE HATE HATE the way the commentors on GWoP talk about Kate and Jon, and anyone who may have a smidgen of empathy for them. Did I say HATE enough? I HATE it.

I do get berated a bit here for my opinion(s), but I figure that is par for the course. I am allowed to be here, correct?

Kikibee said...

If Matt Lauer thinks being filmed is bad for the kids, I hope he brings it up with the Duggars, next time they are on the show to announce the impending birth of a new cast member to its siblings and the world. Maybe he doesn't think there's anything wrong with it if those nice Duggars are involved, or if it benefits his show.

Rachel107 said...

As far as the kids working or not working, let me clarify...

Ever hear the saying "find something you love to do and you'll never work a day in your life?" Even if I had the best job in the world, and loved every minute of it, and it never ever felt like "a job," I would still want to get paid for it because I would be generating income for someone. The Gosslin children are generating income for TLC, Figure 8 and their parents. They should get some of the $ that goes along with that. We don't know what financial protections have been put in place by the parents, but I don't believe the state of PA has any laws to ensure that the kids get any of the money to which they are entitled.

I don't understand how minor children can work 44 hours a week in PA. When I lived and worked in Philly, anything over 40 hours a week required my employer to pay me overtime! How did I have more rights than these kids? If these are the "applicable laws" that TLC/Figure 8 are following, then they need to be changed ASAP.

Rachel107 said...

Sorry! My last comment should start:

"As far as the kids working or not working, let me clarify my position..."

After I posted, I read it back and didn't like how I was sounding!

Rachel107 said...

Also, I watched the E! special on Monday (I think at 8pm) and every commercial break had ads for J&K+8! Strange to me that TLC would advertise the show on a program sensationalizing the tabloid rumors, but I guess all press is good press.

stephanie said...

I don't know why my post wasn't accepted. I wasn't rude and I think I made a reasonable point without crossing any lines. So I'll try again....


*****And I will say it again--PA permits minors to work up to 44 hours per week.*****


I would think that the lawmakers probably made this law to protect 15 year olds baggie groceries and weren't thinking about 5 year olds "working".

Judy said...

Ever hear the saying "find something you love to do and you'll never work a day in your life?" Even if I had the best job in the world, and loved every minute of it, and it never ever felt like "a job," I would still want to get paid for it because I would be generating income for someone.


I agree with you Rachel107. :)

Fanny said...

stephanie said...
"I don't know why my post wasn't accepted. I wasn't rude and I think I made a reasonable point without crossing any lines. So I'll try again...."


You made that comment on the new thread. It was posted.

A Mom-ynous said...

Rachel107, you must have been in an hourly wage position.

Those who are in salaried or fee based "jobs" are not covered under Federal Law for required payment of OT.

The compensation to the Gosselins for doing this program is not based on an hourly wage and thus would not be covered under OT compensation requirements.



As for not being welcome if you believe they are working--noone has said that.

There is no defintion for what constitutes work for reality television.

I can make my child do my dishes b/c it is her chore that I assigned to her and it is neither child abuse or slavery or employment.

But even if the children are eventually classified as working entertainers for purposes of child labor law, they would still be permitted to continue.

PA Dept of Labor would have no compelling interest to ignore the Gosselin children's labor status. So certainly they aren't staying blind to it on purpose.

stephanie said...

I finally saw it Fanny. My bad. I coulda swore I had the right one up when I hit sent last night (it was like 3:00 am or something... so my bad). I chalk it up to a dingbat moment on my end.

Charlie said...

Emily said ...

I don't see the Roloffs, the Duggars, or the Hayes family going on trips every week or airing their laundry in public or leaving the other parent and the children for a weekend 'with the guys'.

I don't wathc these other shows much but I have seen all these families take lots of trips. We have seen the Roloffs on trips to California, Michigan, New Orleans, etc. They had a vacation on a Missipippi riverboat too.
The Duggars been to New York, FLorida, and Tennessee. And the Hayes family seems to have started their traveling as well. We have already seen them take a trip to Niagara Falls.

As for dirty laundry, Matt Roloff's DUI issues were aired and they showed lots of tension between Matt and Amy when they were on vacation and Matt wanted to go home. She took most of that vacation alone with the kids. And Matt has been off in Iraq a couple of episodes leaving the rest of the family home.

Judy said...

A-Mom-ynous:

I don't know if you can compare a requirement by a parent that your child wash the dishes with a requirement that your child be filmed by a crew many hours a week, including when he/she is potty training, has the flu, or is throwing a tantrum. In assigning your child (and would the child washing dishes be 5?) to the chore of washing the dishes, you'd be teaching the child to contribute towards his/her fammily and household. If the Gosselin children truly aren't working, then how can we compare the two examples?

In my mind, washing the dishes is something the child does to contribute to the functioning of the household -- at an age-appropriate time, of course. If being filmed is contributing to the functioning of the Gosselin household, then in what way? The only way I can think of is so the Gosselins can continue to earn money, and so if they are earning money off of it, aren't they working?

Rachel107 said...

Yes, I worked for the Dept of Veterans Affairs and it was hourly. I do know the difference between a salaried and hourly wage employee, but I was trying to make a bigger point about the laws in PA. This is an obvious case of the state not having the laws in place because there was not a need for them--until now. I think these kids should be afforded all of the same protections as child actors, and if a child was required to "act" 44 hours a week, I would be horrified. I'm not trying to say the kids are "acting" on camera, although I believe that some things are staged/scripted. But the show isn't a news documentary, it is an entertainment show. So as entertainers they should be protected just like any other child entertainer would be. I hope PA wakes up and put stricter laws in place to protect these kids and any future child entertainers that may be residing in PA.

Rachel107 said...

then, telling us becasue it's entertaining us that they are indeed working. walk over back to the other side.
-----------------------------

This was the comment I was referring to when I asked if I was welcome here. This comment was not directed at me, but it sums up exactly how I feel. So this poster is telling me to "walk over back to the other side." What side is that exactly? As I said before, I don't want to be over at GWoP. To paraphrase Liz Lemon, "I do not want to go to there."

It kind of stinks that, when a poster enters a discussion with a different opinion, we are generally labeled as being from the "other side." I admit, it stings a bit at first, but I know that it's mostly a tactic to weed out the "trolls." Truthfully, I get a chuckle out of it--it makes me think of Star Wars every time. Come--join the Dark Side of the Force! I know when I post that I am not siding with the majority of posters here, so I expect that my posts are going to be treated a bit differently than others. And I'm certainly not trying to "enlighten" anyone or get them to "switch teams." But please don't tell me to leave, either directly or by implication. I kind of like it here.

Valerie said...

Guess this proves the twins were in school and not taken out of school for the vacation Kate and the tups went on in North Carolina....

http://justjared.buzznet.com/2009/06/02/jon-gosselin-ups-guy/

I saw the Today show segment with the People mag lady and she was talking about when she asked Jon questions about the marriage his answer was always, "that's private, between me and Kate".

Good for him!

Illinois Mom said...

Valerie,

The twins were in fact in NC for a period of time-there are pictures of them with the bodyguard, not a nanny and the tups. I am glad they got to go home and finish out the school year!

Anya said...

To paraphrase Liz Lemon, "I do not want to go to there."

Rachel, I can hear Tina Fey saying that line in my head. I love it.

Your point is a good one. Thanks for sticking around.

Valerie said...

Thanks Illinois Mom. Good to know that they went back to PA and didn't miss school, or at least a lot of school.

Rachel107 said...

I looove 30 Rock! So funny.

Saint said...

I think these kids should be afforded all of the same protections as child actors, and if a child was required to "act" 44 hours a week, I would be horrified. I'm not trying to say the kids are "acting" on camera, although I believe that some things are staged/scripted. But the show isn't a news documentary, it is an entertainment show. So as entertainers they should be protected just like any other child entertainer would be.

Well said, Rachel107. I agree 100% with this, and this...I looove 30 Rock! So funny.