Kids and Bathtubs: Wal-Mart Employee Labels Parents as Sex Offenders

Upon watching the news this morning, I was made aware of the plight of A.J. and Lisa Demaree. Who are they? According to Peoria, Arizona, they are sex offenders (potentially child pornographers). And why, might you ask, are they sex offenders? Well, because a photo developer at their local Wal-Mart didn't like the pictures of their three daughters (all five years and younger) playing in the bath.

And because that Wal-Mart employee called the cops, for more than one month, three little girls were taken away from their parents.

Who among us does not have photographs of our children in various stages of undress? Whether it's in the bath, in a pool, running around the yard -- it doesn't really matter -- most of us have these images without an ounce of malicious pornographic intent.

With two little ones at home, I snap photos of every meaningless occasion. I snap them for posterity, I snap them because my children look beautiful, I snap them because they grow so fast and if I don't snap them then I wind up missing something. Sure, with the advent of digital cameras I wind up deleting most of my photos (and I don't intend for the world to see them). But nonetheless, when I photograph my children, I do it because I love them and want to document their lives.

Any of us could be the Demarees. Any of us could receive a knock on our door because someone at a local photo developer can't decipher whether photographs are innocent or malicious. Meanwhile, real child pornographers aren't getting their pictures developed at Wal-Mart.

However, perhaps we should really recognize that the minute a photo store employee looks at a child and deems an image as being pornographic, it is that person who sexualizes a child. It is that person who takes away their innocence.

Don't get me wrong. There are definitely some people out there who don't have a child's well being in mind. And there are special places in hell reserved for them. But this isn't that case.

Granted, I suppose that this is again America's fear of the naked body and sexuality in general. We have a hard time distinguishing what is natural from what is exploitative, what is innocent and what is pornographic.

Hopefully we can all learn from the Demaree's experience. Don't be quick to judge. Let there be better procedures for determining obscenity (if you can even call it that). And seeing as obscenity is subjective to begin with, watch what you take to your photo developer.

 

 

Follow Dr. Logan Levkoff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LoganLevkoff

Comments

[Panola60]

It's certainly refreshing to see HuffPost readers supporting the Demaree's. I never would have guessed.

[superbenA02]

Does anybody remember Robin Williams in the movie One-Hour Photo? I can picture his character as the Wal-Mart clerk. These are innocent childhood photos. I have a half dozen of photos similar to these of my 6 year old half sister that my stepmom has taken over the years in a photo album upstairs. Most people have had to have seen the Wal-Mart TV ad of the kid getting out of the bathtub and her mom wrapping her up in a towel? They need to tape record this ad off of the TV and use it against Wal-Mart in court. Wal-Mart supports a country that oppresses free speech and wants to do the same here? What a bunch of hypocrites.

[yipyap]

Also, people should NOT censor their behavior because of a bunch of nuts in this country. Otherwise you are feeding into this notion that innocent pictures of completely natural nakedness are "bad". LET these people try to bring us to court. LET the people try to take away our children. I will fight them to the death!

If our Puritanical society never sees natural images of the human body, intimacy and sexuality, it will never learn that it is NATURAL and HARMLESS. The more we give in to them and their warped ideas, the less we are helping them to change and grow mentally. But if we do the opposite, and don't hide in fear, and we display naked images of our children and ourselves PROUDLY, perhaps little by little, Americans' warped mentalities will begin to change.

[Dr. Logan Levkoff - Huffpost Blogger]

It's one thing to think that a teacher has to think twice before he or she hugs a student for fear of how their "relationship" may be characterized; it's even more detestable to think that a parent can't capture a moment in his/her child's life for fear of being labeled a child pornographer.

As for breastfeed­ing...that will be my next blog topic:) Lots of material there, too!

[Kassandra]

Another example of what Bush released on America to allow low level employees to decide what is right and wrong.
I wonder if the employee had a few problems of his own??????
Good grief!!! I'd sue too and I HATE to sue; it's a pain in the butt.

[Shotgun Mary]

I have such a hard time with these situations. I have a four month old baby and on occassion my husband will take a picture of me breastfeeding. The photos are absolutely beautiful but I make him delete them for fear someone will see them and take them out of context. While I understand the fear about child pornography and as a mother the thought of someone exploiting a child in that way horrifies me, can't we find a common sense approach to the subject? Not too long ago there was a story about a couple from Peru (?) and they had a photo taken of the two parents sitting in bed topless with their one year old baby. In their culture it was an innocent family photo of a breastfeeding mother with her child and husband. Here it was pornography. The parents lost custody of their child because of an overzealous developer at Walgreens. Why are we like this?

[Nor Cal Mom]

How in the world could a judge have decided they should lose custody of their child? WTH?!