The Final Kid Nation Post

Well, at least for this season.

I have to say the finale was the least interesting of the entire show, though I was glad to see the town recognize both Zach and Sophia for their dedication to the town.

But the most interesting thing I noted was this: It seemed to me that a statistically unusually large number of the kids came from two parent families. I only counted two kids who had 1 parent show up to the part at the end: Sophia and Greg. Which is an interesting pairing in and of itself. The two most self-reliant and bossy kids come from single parent families? Interesting. I suspect there were a couple others, because we didn’t see all the kids’ families, but all the others we saw were two parent families.

But why would this statistically anomaly occur? Did the producers consciously self-select kids from so-called “normal” American families out of some political agenda? I mean, I noticed that none of the kids had same-sex parents, either, although two (Alex and Morgan) came from interracial families. Are kids from two-parent families more likely to want to go off and live in a town run by kids for 40 days?


~ by realsupergirl on December 13, 2007.

7 Responses to “The Final Kid Nation Post”

  1. The finale was soooo anticlimactic. I didn’t get the kinds of closure that I wanted.

    On the two-parent-family thing — where did you get the idea that they were all 2-parent families? All kids have two birth parents. Unless their parents were on really hostile terms, I could see both parents showing up to the finale of the show to support their kid together. Also — lots of divorces don’t happen until later and many of these kids are young. They might have a two-parent family now that turns out later to be a divorced family. Same sex parents (while AWESOME) are an anomaly also — I would think the producers would have had to really work to find one that also had an ideal kid who wanted to participate.

  2. I vaguely remember reading something about all of the kids needing to have both legal parents (if there are two legally defined) sign releases for the kids to participate (maybe a Slate article? I haven’t really followed the show). That could certainly have an impact on the kids that are able to participate, if one parent on the birth certificate can’t be reached to sign releases…

  3. Well that would certainly make sense, and seem obvious, but there are a lot of kids out there with single parents who have sole, legal custody of their kids…

  4. I suppose that’s true – not all the parents who showed up together might actually BE together. I hadn’t thought of that. Good point.

  5. Well, yes, the obvious, but I think the point I was reading was that non-custodial parents had to sign as well, since they could still potentially sue the network if something happened.


    That’s a copy of the signature page for the blanket release. I think the issue I was reading about was that unless the other parent is dead or has had parental rights legally severed, they were basically SOL. Even a judge’s signature that the child could participate doesn’t release the network for the liability of being sued by a non-custodial parent who’s rights haven’t been severed.

  7. Right, right, I get it. It makes sense. It’s just one more barrier that may reduce the likelihood that kids from divorced families could participate…and as said elsewhere in this thread, I may have also incorrectly perceived that just because most of the kids had two opposite sex parents show up for the party, that doesn’t mean that those two opposite sex parents are in fact, still together.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: