This goes double for me.

[porphyrin]

http://www.aacap.org/cs/2008_press_releases/american_academy_of_child_and_adolescent_psychiatry_calls_nbc_to_pull_baby_borrowers

Comments

[buymeaclue.livejournal.com]

...the hell?

[stillnotbored.livejournal.com]

You have got to be kidding me.

Who the hell thought this was a good idea?

[mizkit.livejournal.com]

*gapes* Who on earth would do that to their baby?

[crimini.livejournal.com]

Wow.

[cakmpls.livejournal.com]

I had wondered about this factor when I saw the ads for the show.

But I have a problem with this in the article:
"'Should this practice be emulated without the benefit of the observing camera, it is important to note that teenagers may be more likely than adult strangers to abuse or neglect infants and toddlers,'" said Anne Glowinski, M.D., a child and adolescent psychiatrist and member of AACAP's Infancy and Preschool Committee."

Is there any reliable evidence at all, I wonder, that teenagers are more likely than adults to abuse or neglect children in their temporary care? If so, she should have cited it (and I am guessing that there isn't any, given her "may be more likely"--could it be any more weasel-worded?). If not, this is nothing more than her guess and has no place in the story, certainly not as a prominent paragraph.

[porphyrin.livejournal.com]

I agree that it could have been phrased better.

There have been a few retrospective small studies, but it's hard to get 'hard evidence' for a statement like that one.

I mean, you can't exactly say, "Okay, we're going to design a study in which infants or toddlers are put at risk of neglect."