Extra Ethical Precautions When Reporting On Minors

Alli B. Westbrook

 

aw263116@ohio.edu

 

 

Children and teenagers are an inherently vulnerable population. They are subject to the same social issues as adults but often lack autonomy. Meaning it is especially important to make their voices heard, but when doing so extra ethical precautions must be taken. The SPJ code of ethics states that one should use heightened sensitivity when dealing with juveniles but what exactly does this mean?

 

On top of the SPJ and PRSA code of ethics, UNICEF released more detailed guidelines to serve as a set of global principles on the subject of reporting on children. Unicef states that its guidelines allow journalists to serve in the publics best interest without compromising the rights of children. This is done through six overarching principles, six guidelines for interviewing children and seven guidelines for reporting on children. The basis of the overarching principles rests on ensuring the sanctity of the children's future and their safety. 

 

Picture source: GraphicMama & Barnabe by Alena Tkach

 

In many cases journalists will protect individuals by obscuring or altering their identity. When reporting on children, if you have to consider altering their identity in any way, then it is not ethical to include them in the article. Exceptions are made for teenage juvenile offenders but it should be noted that whatever is written will stigmatize them for the rest of their lives. Journalist Sydney Smith stated in commentary for Imediaethics.org that identification is dependent on the severity of the crime, how high profile the case is, and how close to 18 the Juvenile is (Sydney Smith, 2020). 

 

The PRSA code of ethics emphasizes advocacy to aid in informed public debate. UNICEF makes it clear that the best interests of the child go above everything, including advocacy. It is easy to justify prioritizing advocacy by saying it will help children in the future, it will prevent an issue like this from happening again. But that is deeply unethical because the child's future and quality of life could be at stake and there are other ways to go about advocating. 

 

In an intense situation, getting parents permission can be difficult to attain but it is still a great priority. In many cases if a child is a witness in court, they should still remain anonymous to the general public. Author Thomas Kent stated for ONA Ethics states that if the child/parent chooses to go public then their identity can be stated but getting direct permission from the parent should still be done (ONA, 2020).

 

There are no exceptions for the online identity of minors. Their online identity needs to be protected and harm reduction should be prioritized just the same as everyday life. If the minor has an online alias or social media handle it needs to be protected to the same degree as their name.

 

There are many other special considerations that need to be made when reporting on children that can be found in either the articles listed above or the UNICEF hyperlink attached. The main take away is principle number one, respect the dignity and rights of every child in every circumstance.