Kidnapped: Reunited 23 Years Later...

I tend to spend the odd minute or two surfing the internet. Every now and then, a story jumps out for its horror, its tragedy, its bizarreness or, as in this case seemingly, a happy ending. A young woman who was kidnapped 23 years ago has finally been reunited with her birth mother. It is hard to imagine what sort of feelings one must have learning that you had been kidnapped and have in essence lost 23 years of a potential parallel life. So, when Carlina White / Nejdra Nance says it "felt like a dream", you still wonder whether even in your wildest dreams you would have dreamed that such a day would happen.

The story is one that probably happens a lot more than we care to allow ourselves to acknowledge. The kidnap of children is not a new phenomenon or crime. However, it is rare to here of such happy reunions after such a long period of time.

A 19-day-old Carlina was kidnapped in 1987. The story began with a simple fever and a trip to a Harlem hospital. It ended with Carlina being kidnapped by a woman posing as a nurse and spending the next 23 years living with an abusive "parent". Carlina ended-up pregnant herself at 16 and this is when she started connecting the dots of her own life. A request for a birth certificate could not be fulfilled. The suspicions began to come to the fore as to why that might be. Ultimately, Carlina bailed out of the abusive home in Connecticut and headed to Georgia.

While in Georgia, Carlina met up with the Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The Center filled in a few of the blanks and joined the rest of the dots. A DNA test and a few phone calls put Carlina back in contact with her birth mother, Joy White.

The emotions for Joy White and the rest of Carlina's long lost family most be overwhelming too, particularly when they are not only getting back a lost daughter, sister, cousin, aunt or whatever, but Carlina has since had a daughter herself.

Hopefully, this is a story that continues to have a happy ending.

The Dangers of Sexting -- Megan's Story...

Sexting is a problem, a big problem. The prevalence of technology and the ease in which images can be transmitted means that an inappropriate image that was destined for someone "special" can quickly end up going viral.

This advertisement from Think You Know Australia highlights the dangers of sexting. If nothing else, as the law currently stands children with child porn can be, conceivably, convicted of a serious child porn crime and be placed on a sexual offenders register.

I would encourage all to watch and learn.

The Jackson Three?

The Jackson Three to follow the Jackson Five?

Joe Jackson who had a really poor relationship with his own son, the recently departed King of Pop (aka Michael), has been on television suggesting that Michael Jackson's three children: Prince Michael, Paris, and Prince Michael II (aka Blanket) are already showbiz material with the potential to carry on their father's legacy.

This is troubling to me. These kids were never going to have normal childhoods anyway, but these kind of ramblings by Joe Jackson on Good Morning America are exactly the reason these kids need to be looked after by someone else. This someone has to be someone that has the childrens' best interests at heart rather than some grand plan of their own to exploit these youngsters for all they are worth.

It seems that Paris, at least according to Joe, is already ready to do something in showbiz. It is said that Blanket can dance. And, that Prince Michael is already lining up a virtual duet with his dad in the Natalie Cole / Nat King Cole way.

This is not the only rumour doing the rounds. It is thought that the children are going to do a special birthday concert to honour their dad on what would have been his 51st birthday.

I just hope that someone sees the light. These kids need to be given every opportunity to have a life that is as normal as can be. I hope that they are not robbed of their childhoods like their father was.

Syekh Puji, Indonesian Law, Pedophilia

Hopefully once the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (Komisi Perlindungan Anak Indonesia / KPAI) make their report to police about Syekh Puji and his marriage to a 12-year-old, the police will have the testicular fortitude to throw the book at this pedophile.

The KPAI team that went to Semarang seem to think that they have sufficient evidence that the marriage was consummated. To be legally correct the fact finding team uses the words very likely that the Syekh had slept with his child bride, Lutfiana Ulfa.

There seems little doubt that this is a valid marriage in the sense of a religious marriage or as it is generally known, kawin siri. However, it is not a valid marriage in terms of Indonesian law. It would be a hard slog to try and prove that a kawin siri type marriage between a 43-year-old man and a 12-year-old girl is recognized in the Marriage Law (Law No. 1 of 1974 -- soft copy in Indonesia if anyone wants it). This would still be the case even where the parents or guardians are said to have given their approval.

What makes this case even more bizarre and sickening than it already is, is the manner in which the whole affair has been played out. Lutfiana was the winner of a bride selection competition where one of the judges was the Syekh's current wife (this would make her complicit in the procurement of a child for sexual exploitation) and some of his followers (also complicit in the procurement of a minor for sex).

This gets even more perverse when one learns that the parents are in considerable financial difficulty and as such were glad that the daughter was chosen. The only thing that could make this even more bizarre and sad is if the parents financial difficulties were in some way related to the man that they eventually sold their daughter to.

The implication quite clearly is that there was a transaction involved in that the parents are in financial difficulties and then not so after marrying off the daughter. This I need to check further because the parents have only said that they hope it improves their financial position and not that it already has.

The KPAI is hoping that the Police will act on this and charge all those involved under Articles 81 - 83 of the Child Protection Law. These articles in essence prohibit the procurement of child for sex. The articles would provide for a term of imprisonment of up to 15 years and a fine in the vicinity of IDR 250 million, if I recall correctly. I need to look at the law (soft copies in Indonesian and English, I think).

The KPAI reckon that before they can call the man a pedophile they would need to get a psychological test. This is one of those shake your head moments. The KPAI are one of the few to do something about this predator and then they come out with the idea they need to psychologically test the man before they can be sure that he is a pedophile.

The evidence speaks for itself. He is married to a 12-year-old and is looking to procure a 9-year-old and a 7-year-old as his next wives. For my mind there is no need to do psychological test on this man, he is a serial predator, a molester of children, a rapist of children, and worthy of jail time. I hear that the inmates of jails have a special liking for men who interfere with children.

The idea that this man is in some way right because he claims he is doing nothing different from the Prophet is ludicrous. He is not the Prophet for starters and has not been granted any special privileges in this regard. Even a cursory reading of the Suras and the Hadiths would highlight that Muhammad was granted special privileges in the marriage game.

It is also pretty likely that Muhammad only slept with his first two wives (I have been talking to people about this offline and learning a thing or two along the way) and that the Hadiths suggest that Muhammad's marriage practices were not to be followed. In fact there is specific mention of not having more than four wives (strict conditions for more than one) and that children are not to be married (I am sure that there will be a reader out there somewhere that can enlighten me on whether I am close to the mark or way off base -- constructive comments welcome because I want to learn more).

It is time that more people came out against this practice. It does not matter that it is rare. What matters is that it happens and it must not. The children of this world are our future, they are our hopes and dreams, and no man (or woman) has a right to strip a child of that future under any circumstances, ever!

Miley Cyrus + Hannah Montana

The controversy surrounding the photographing of teenagers in provocative poses has raised its ugly head again in relation to pictures of Miley Cyrus of Hannah Montana fame. By all accounts the shots in question are part of a shoot conducted by Annie Liebowitz and involved the whole Cyrus family. The head of the Cyrus family being one Billy Ray, the once famous Achy Breaky Heart guy!

By all accounts the whole process was warm and fuzzy and presumably nothing out of the ordinary occurred. The fact that the photos are to be (or already have been) published in Vanity Fair suggests that the Cyrus family is happy with the shots and happy for them to be published. Any one who knows anything about Vanity Fair knows that it is no stranger to controversy or provocative covers and photos.

The photo above is from the series of shots taken by Liebowitz. My personal opinion is that it is not provocative and knowing that she is 15 does not change my mind on that. I really do not like the photo because of the composition of it. Let's face it most people would look at this photo and their first thoughts before any consideration of provocativeness is that the subject of the photo looks a little washed out, an almost deathly paleness about her.

Yet, my take is that if her parents are happy for her to be portrayed in this way then so be it. The photograph is not pornographic and it is not sexually explicit! Is it exploitative? Perhaps it is but perhaps this was a conscious decision on the part of the Cyrus family and was about "growing up" her image. Whether this is the right image to portray is a different debate.

Nevertheless, the images have proven to be provocative as they have provoked much debate about the pros and cons of such photographs.

Exploitation and the Sexualization of Children

Nah, who decides here what is in the best interests of the child in a case where that child can be commercially exploited whether that be in the fashion world or on TV or anywhere else for that matter. This issue has come to a head in Australia when a 14 year old Polish model, Monika Jagaciak, was invited to be a part of Fashion Week.

What should be the minimum age for models to work in the industry. In a technical sense anyone under the age of 18 is a child and therefore the legal capacity to enter into contracts and the like is restricted. The legal functions are normally fulfilled by a parent or guardian of age who can make these legal decisions on behalf of the child. So, in this case, if a 14 year old Polish model has the permission and support of her parents and all things are above board then what is the problem?

If we are going to institute a minimum age for certain professions then this is a slippery slope. What should the minimum age for a child actor be? Let's face it, child actors are exploited in much greater numbers than children working as models. Child labor is a serious issue and one that must be addressed on a global scale and in a comprehensive manner because there is child labor and then there is "child labor". This is not a case of a young girl being forced into work breaking stones or stitching shoes to make ends meet for a family living below the poverty line.

Once again assuming that everything is above board and that she is earning what she deserves for the work she is doing in comparison to other models, then who should make the decision on whether this is in the best interests of the child?

Yet, the real issue here might not be the exploitation or the sexualization of children (although this is a serious problem in its own right) but rather the peer pressure that teens, particularly teenage girls, are under with regards to body image. It is often cited that these body image pressures lead to eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia.

For me though the issue is one that where kids start working at a young age they miss out on being kids. They do not get to enjoy life like other kids and it is these experiences in these formative years that colour your views of the world in your adult life!

This particular issue blew-up because there is also a provocative picture of the then 13 year old Monika Jagaciak in a swimsuit being hosed down. Once again though if the standard is that a photograph that may be used in an ad campaign of a child in a swimsuit is exploitation of the child then who should make this determination? The parents? A guardian? The Government?