Access all your favorite blogs from myajc! Home > Channel Serf > Archives > 2007 > January > 18 > Entry
The Question Oprah Didn’t Ask
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
You gotta hand it to Oprah. She played by the rules in her just-aired exclusive interview with 15-year-old Shawn Hornbeck (the boy allegedly kidnapped over four years ago) and his parents, Craig and Pam Akers: The rules set down by Shawn’s family and maybe the authorities (“I agreed to respect certain boundaries and not ask what went on during that four-year period.”) And the rules of journalism that say sometimes you have to ask the tough questions (“I’m gonna go there and ask what do you think happened?,” Winfrey calmly asked the Akers nine minutes into the show. “Do you think he was sexually abused?”)
Sadly, they do. Craig Akers also said there were different types of abuse and that “I have no doubt that mentally he’s not the same boy he was.” But they couldn’t say much more than that because as they’d already explained to Oprah, they haven’t yet asked Shawn anything about what happened on the day he disappeared or during the 51 months he was gone. On the advice of child advocacy experts, they said, they “were advised not to ask Shawn any questions” and to have trained professionals on hand when he is finally ready to talk.
So, um, what were they doing letting Oprah ask them questions about it instead?
Seriously, maybe there was a completely good explanation for this family that’s been through so much going on the most popular TV talk program in history to sort of share their pain and tiptoe up to the edges of off-limits topics like sexual abuse. Maybe they wanted to show the world they were doing OK, considering (really, it was heartwarming to see Shawn nestled between his parents on Oprah’s couch, smiling shyly and gripping their hands out of what sincerely seemed like love); Maybe, as Craig Akers said rthe day Shawn was found and reiterated to Winfrey, they want to give hope to other families of missing children. Maybe, understandably, they just wanted to do something nice for themselves after four years of horror. Maybe it was a combination of all three. Who knows?
The point was, Oprah never asked. Which was sort of weird for the woman who never leaves a stone unturned. Along with all the other intriguing questions that have swirled about what’s been dubbed the “Missouri Miracle,” it sort of hung in the air uncomfortably throughout the show. Frankly, as good as it felt to see them all doing fairly well, I’d almost rather they’d stayed home and worked on these profoundly difficult issues in the privacy they so richly deserve. And with the professionals who will prove so helpful. Mostly, though, I wish Oprah — who, it must be said did an excellent job otherwise — had asked why they’d agreed to be on her show. The answer might have been enlightening. At the very least, it wouldn’t have left me with any doubts about the motives of anyone involved in this high-profile program. Including our own, for feeling a bit like voyeurs for being unable to turn away from the TV…
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Tito
January 18, 2007 7:07 PM | Link to this
Oprah can go to hell!
By myconju
January 18, 2007 7:33 PM | Link to this
Say what you want to, but as a journalist Oprah had every right to ask the question. The parents obviously wanted to get across a message, because they answered. The young man has no reason to be ashamed, but he probably will. A hush hush attitude will not aid in his healing. Getting it out in the open and supporting him will
By Channel
January 18, 2007 7:37 PM | Link to this
Whatever!!! Somebody is mad that Oprah landed the first interview….
By myconju
January 18, 2007 7:48 PM | Link to this
To the AJC,
I moments ago I went to NFL.com to engage in their blog regarding Dennis Green’s possible hire in Oakland as the Head Coach. I noticed that they have a link to go to if you have been offended, or harrassed by the posting. Why don’t you do that?
By John
January 18, 2007 8:28 PM | Link to this
Oprah was out of line to even have the families on. While there is nothing for the two boys to be ashamed oftheir schoolmates will soon hear what happened and they will be harrassed. About 10 - 15 years ago, the same thing happened to a boy named Steven, I think there is a movie about it, and his life was hell. They should leave the boys and family alone and let them deal with it in their own way and time frame. When they are ready, then THEY should contact the media.
By sickened
January 18, 2007 8:30 PM | Link to this
I guess Oprah thinks it’s her God-given right to oversee some kind of national catharsis regarding child abduction. Where was Dr. Phil when we needed him most? She and the family should be shot for parading him like that just to satisfy our craving for “how did this happen”. Getting things out in the open is therapeutic, but not everything should be nationally televised.
By James
January 18, 2007 8:32 PM | Link to this
“Feeling a bit like voyeurs?” That is exactly what you are. Sugar-coating your obsession with things that are not any of your business does not make it any less disgusting. What happened to those boys or did not happen is not your business. In any way. Disgusting.
By Unique12u
January 18, 2007 9:01 PM | Link to this
Ummmm, Why is Oprah in the hot seat here? I don’t think she held a gun to their heads and forced them to do the interview. Why is this such a BAD thing? Maybe this is something GOOD for this family. Why is everyone else so quick to say what they should and should not do? No one has ANY right except that family to say what is best for them.
By John
January 18, 2007 9:19 PM | Link to this
While Oprah may not have had a gun to their head, it has been posted in other areas that she donated one million dollars to the foundation that both parents quit their jobs for and supposedly “devoted their lives” to. Something is not right there. If it were my kid, the last thing I think I would be doing for the sake of my child’s well being would be airing it out in the public. Stay tuned to this one, I have a feeling there is a lot more to this story that isn’t being told. Also, did you see that this guy plead not guilty to the most recent kidnapping? Maybe these kids found him on the internet and chose to leave. Like I said, stay tuned.
By Unique12u
January 18, 2007 9:23 PM | Link to this
John, are you actually suggesting a consipiracy theory here? Forgive me if I have misunderstood you, but are you really suggesting the possibility that these people “sacrificed” their son and this is a consipracy to seek financial gain?
By John
January 18, 2007 9:41 PM | Link to this
No what I am saying is that there is a lot more to this story that is not being told. I do not think that the parents had anything to do with the disappearance. But I do not think that it is out of the realm of possibility that Shawn was a runaway, and not kidnapped. And while you saying that Oprah did not put a gun to their head is true, a donation of 1 million dollars to the foundation that both parents founded could be pretty persuasive.
By holdingAJCaccountable
January 18, 2007 9:56 PM | Link to this
Unless it comes out later that the boy asked the parents to go on the show and he asked Oprah to ask them, the adults have completely failed him.
For Oprah to imply she is absolved of all moral responsibility because “they didn’t have to answer” says a lot about her character, or lack thereof.
If any type of abuse did happen, it didn’t happen to the parents! In essence, she violated him all over again.
By fer
January 18, 2007 10:27 PM | Link to this
I admire a lot about Oprah, but I think she stepped over the line on this one. I’m sure they can use the money, but ethically, she really shouldn’t even have invited them to appear on her show.
By Oaf-rah is
January 18, 2007 10:33 PM | Link to this
a panderer of the lowest order. Nothing more than a freak-show carny. Doen’t say much for the typical white female viewer, does it?
By Dana
January 18, 2007 11:30 PM | Link to this
I am the mother of a son who was molested. There are so many sides to this story that should be considered. Yes, it is wrong to exploit the boy at this early stage of his reunion. His life is not anywhere near “normal” and won’t be for a long time. To air the show at this early stage with him present — and asking about sexual abuse — is blatantly pandering to the masses. If there was sexual abuse (and few would doubt that there probably was) anything said by the parents or child at this point will become evidence for a future trial. They MUST be cognizant of this fact — so why jeopardize a trial by being so public at this point?
I DO understand their wanting to go “public” with their relief and desire to share hope with the thousands of parents who are still searching for their missing child. But, the subject of the show should have been kept on that level — not on the extent of the abuse the child may have endured!
I know that my son was not ready to talk about any specifics for several years. To this day (he is now 24), very little detail is known — and it’s not necessary to know the details. He didn’t disclose his abuse for three years because he felt ashamed. (It is a given that the abuser will convince the child that they are at fault and should never divulge the trauma/abuse because nobody would believe them or understand.)
This child will need all the support and caring that a good, strong family and community can give him. To those of you who feel that he will be teased in school — the answer is to move away. In many ways, staying in the same home and community may only prolong his recovery by bringing painful reminders of the abduction and stares from well-meaning (but well-knowing) citizens who have shared the family’s long wait for his return.
By Dee
January 18, 2007 11:44 PM | Link to this
In case you all missed it, I understand an interview was also on ABC’s news shortly after the Oprah interview, so she wasn’t the only one who interviewed the boy and his family today. And who cares if she happened to be the first one to interview them? What’s the difference?
I didn’t catch the ABC newscast, nor did I watch Oprah. Personally I’m really not interested in the details. I’m just happy both boys were found and are back with their families.
By Jeffrey
January 19, 2007 8:38 AM | Link to this
Okay folks here’s how it goes. Somebody gets asked hey want to do an interview and they have the right to say yes or no. Plus I’m sure the child had the right to decline if he did not want to appear. They appeared as a family and stuck together as a family which is so important in this time of need. They are out there to tell other people about the sick monsters that are looking at our children. They are out there to give hope to those that may have lost children that they can still be found after all these years. Oprah donating money to their cause is a great thing. She is a truly wonderful woman and should be admired for what she does. She could easily just keep her money to herself and tell everybody else to forget it however she doesn’t do that. All of you that think she is wrong for doing any of these things I feel sorry for you. You are the type of people that if you have something to give to help others you won’t do it. You will be selfish and greedy and say MINE MINE MINE. To that I say shame on you!
By Sarah
January 19, 2007 9:09 AM | Link to this
It’s all about ratings and Oprah more than likely dug into her deep pockets to buy this interview. She has every right to do so, afterall it’s a business. I don’t think Oprah has the welfare of the family or the young man in mind; she was not lsited as the most powerful woman in entertainment this year, as a matter of fact she went from position one to positon five and she doesn’t like the decline. She is out to prove her throne still has the most gold on it and she still sits the highest.
By Holly
January 19, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this
I personally think it was not a good idea to go on Oprah BUT I think the entire family is in shock. Shawn has been gone for 41/2 years and he only came home a week and 1/2 ago. I think everyone should cut them a break. On Shawn’s website it says the family will not be doing anymore media interviews. I think they are a smart and loving family who really need everyone’s prayers now and for years to come. It will be a very hard road for all of them.
By SummerG
January 19, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this
Excuse me, but the parents are the ones held responsible for protecting their children. Oprah can do only as much as one allows her to do. This is what she does for a living, so there is no harm in asking. So if you want to point the fingers because you believe that situation should not have gone public start with the parents and the individuals involved with the initial reporting’s of this case.
Why aren’t the parents fighting to protect their son as much as humanly possible. Why did they agree to even appear on the Oprah Show? What is their goal in doing so? Why has the government not created a law to protect kids from public humiliation in cases such as this. Even though he has nothing to be ashamed of, which I totally agree, that does not stop the ignorance of most. Let’s point the finger at the guy that violated and changed this boy’s life forever. If not for him, this would not be up for discussion.
By peachykeen
January 19, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this
I watched the show and felt really uncomfortable, like I was invading someone’s privacy. I think the parents should not have agreed to do the show. This was their decision, not Oprah’s. THey had a choice and I think they made the wrong one. Even if they agreed to go on the show, I wouldn’t have allowed my child to be on camera. Also, where is the proof that Oprah gave the foundations $1 million? Where is this information coming from?
By Kris
January 19, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this
Shame on the parents for being on the show and shame on Oprah for exploiting the child! Oprah as a victim of abuse should know better. I am sure it would not have been in her best interest the day after she got molested to be on National TV discussing it. How is this young man going to face peers now that he has been outed on national TV as the victim of male on male abuse. I am so disappointed in Oprah.
By BCW
January 19, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this
Blogging at work? Check out jobhopping.blogspot.com
By ShantheMan
January 19, 2007 1:46 PM | Link to this
I blame the parents here.
Instead of making the talk-show rounds, they should be spending private time with their family. These parents should be focusing on helping this child re-adjust to being back in the “real world”, as well as the abuse he surely suffered at the hands of his abductor. This child has the right to deal with the physical and emotional scars of his ordeal without having to do it in the glare of the public spotlight. He has nothing to be ashamed of—-he is a victim—-but give him some time to heal and wrap his brain aroung what happened to him before parading him around on every talk show in America!!!
By Yvette
January 19, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this
Did she really need to ask the question? I mean really, why else did that pervert kidnap those boys. We all know what happened, we just don’t want to say it. We’d rather point our anger at Oprah and her millions that so many people resent her for. I don’t believe for a minute that Oprah paid for that interview.(she’s always said she doesn’t pay for interviews) Come on, it’s Oprah did she really have to pay these people to come on her show? Maybe it was Shawn’s decision to do the show and parents were there for support. This could have been therapeutic for him. I’m not judging these people because I haven’t experienced anything as horrific as having your child kidnapped and returned. Was there this much hoopla when Elizabeth Smart did Oprah?