What About Children Seeing the Images?

CCBR does not directly target children with our campaigns—they aren’t the ones perpetrating this injustice nor the ones complicit in it. The reality, however, is that it is impossible to reach teenagers and adults in society where no children will ever be present.

If parents with young children see the images, they can practice parental discretion and distract their children as they would if there were a dead deer on the side of the road. Or, they can seize it as a teaching opportunity.

They can gently explain to their children that babies were hurt but that the people with the signs are trying to stop that from continuing. Furthermore, parents can reassure their children that they will never be hurt like the babies have been hurt because "Mommy and Daddy love you and will keep you safe."

Sadly, parents sometimes use their children as an excuse for why the images shouldn’t be shown. Often, the reality is that they don’t want to see the images. They may have guilt from past abortions and they don’t want to come to terms with their mistake.

After all, children have consciences and they love babies. When children see the images they see a hurt baby and they want to know, "Who hurt the baby?"

It’s worth observing that the parent’s reaction will often determine the child’s reaction. An irate and swearing parent will have a frustrated and confused child. But a calm, rational parent will have a calm child.

Such was the case with a 5-year-old who saw graphic abortion images. Her teenage sister gently explained the situation and although the little girl cried, she was moved to pray during family prayer time "...that the doctors will stop killing babies."

Another child, a 9-year-old, who saw a graphic abortion photo went directly to his mother and said, "Mom, I want to stop abortion."

This is true for other issues too. In 2006, the Calgary Herald newspaper wrote about a 10-year-old homeless advocate who was inspired—at an even younger age—to form a charity to help the homeless. The paper reported that it was her seeing injustice that convicted her to act:

When Hannah Taylor was five years old, she was struck by the unfairness of something she saw that makes most others turn their heads.

As she watched a homeless man dig for food in a trash can in Winnipeg, she decided no person should ever have to go without food or a home.

Notice that people are not complaining that young Hannah was victimized by seeing such an injustice. On the contrary, people are inspired by her willingness to do what she can to help the less fortunate. But where is that same attitude towards children seeing the injustice inflicted upon the unborn?

Children have functioning consciences. The question is: do we? If we think we care so much about children, shouldn’t we care about the fact that we contribute, through our taxes, to the deaths of 100,000 Canadian children every year? In other words, shouldn’t we care more about the injustice happening rather than the fact that we see the injustice happening?

After all, if you were walking down the street with a 2-year-old and saw a 5-year-old being killed in front of you, would you complain about your 2-year-old merely seeing the injustice, or would you intervene to stop the injustice itself?

External Link: Show the Truth and the Effects that Graphic Pictures have on Children [PDF]

This is an article by Rosemary Connell of Show the Truth. She explains her study of children’s reactions to the display of graphic abortion imagery. In particular, she discusses the observations she’s made about how children in certain age groups respond.