NEW YORK, NY Jan. 29 (DPI) — Lynsey Addario has written a book about her adventures as a photojournalist in Middle East war zones – often working as she carried her unborn child – and The New York Times today christened an excerpt with the headline: “What Can a Pregnant Photojournalist Cover? Everything”
That of course set off a comment board maelstrom in which many readers denounced Addario as “selfish” and “narcissistic” for subjecting her unborn to so much risk – while others embraced her “courage” and “living life on her terms.”
Overall, though, readers clicked on the denunciations with greater frequency, making the “Readers Picks” column a collective repudiation of the writer’s decisions and values.
Most remarkably, it was readers who identified themselves as women who stuck it most to the well known photojournalist, who described in some detail her love life and its ups and downs.
The five most recommended reader comments as of 5pm Thursday Jan. 29:
Sorry, but as a mother, I find this perverse and unconscionable. Put yourself in danger, be passionate and interesting all you want…but not while carrying an innocent, whom you are supremely responsible for, in your belly. That’s not passion, that’s narcissism.
Great story, thanks for sharing it. Definitely an insanely dangerous job, to be a war correspondent in any way, nearly as dangerous as being a combatant. I have to say though, the idea of going into such predicaments while pregnant is akin to going into combat as infantry while pregnant. The Army will not allow this, under any circumstances, and for good reason. I’m glad everything turned out OK, and glad that the author is safe. Had anything gone wrong, she would have had to live with the fact that her baby was born with genetic damage, or miscarried, or stillborn, due to the danger-seeking life of a war photojournalist. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I’m of the notion that anyone who goes to a war-torn land, like Libya or Syria, is accepting that they could die any second for no good reason. And anyone who intends to take a child into such a hell hole, should be prevented from doing so.
What you ‘can’ do and ‘should’ do when pregnant are two very very different things. Research confirms stress significantly affects a fetus both physically and neurologically in ways which will greatly affect them throughout their entire lives, even if the author was fortunate to escape the imminent danger to a fetus from lengthy imprisonment in a dire cell and/or sexual assault in said situations. I’m thus greatly saddened by the author promoting such irresponsibility as ‘bravery’. You ‘could’ drink and smoke crack while pregnant as well, but these too are far from intelligent choices.
Parents are meant to protect their children from danger. You put your own journalistic needs above your child. Sorry, this reeks of selfish parenting. There are other journalists who could have taken your job but only you are your child’s mother. Lucky for him everything turned out alright. I hope it continues so.
Sometimes (many times!) being a responsible parent means curtailing your passions for the sake of the kids. The world will survive with 1 less photojournalist taking pictures in war-torn _________ fill in the blank.
I’ve never quite understood the “kids are resilient and will be fine” argument…what accounts for all the messed up adults out there? Surely, kids don’t all turn out “fine” and, although I applaud the risks the author takes in terms of her own life, once you become a parent, I believe your responsibilities to your children should always take precedence.
Notably, The Times pushed the story off its index page in less than two hours this morning.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/01/magazine/what-can-a-pregnant-photojournalist-cover-everything.html