Documentary: Marathon Boy
HBO Films Topic: India, children, exploitation, sports, competitive running, United Nations Rights of the Child Act
This movie is about an Indian boy who is neglected and starving in the slums of India who was sold to an abusive alcoholic slumlord. He was then adopted by a foster father who runs an orphanage for slum children that also teaches kudo skills and raises them to be competitive kudo athletes.
This boy, Budhia, would misbehave and was told to run for punishment, but he loved it. He showed endurance for running and his foster father decides to start training him to be an Olympic marathon runner, when the boy is just three years old! The father tries to use the boy as a symbol to illustrate how someone from the slums has promise to rise above and achieve something monumental. The boy becomes a symbol for Indian pride and personal achievement.
However after the boy collapses (which seemed to me from dehydration or heat exhaustion or both) after a 65 km race at age four the UN people ban the boy from running. Disturbing to me was his father's denial of any medical problem (on camera) as the boy continued to vomit (a symptom of dehydration). Also at issue was his lack of basic medical training and lack of formal training about the sport of running, then working with such a young child. (Of course as a mother I was worried for the health of the boy and asking if training so hard at such a young age is good for the human body.) These concerns were brought up by physicians and citizens on a TV talk show as well as a stated concern of the UN Committee for Children who had an office in that region.
The UN committee in India has offices and staff but it was said that they have "no judicial power" and they are not directly tied to the Indian government. It was confusing that they can rally the police to act out to prevent actions, but later corruption in the police force was shown, so this is a complex and confusing matter for this American to understand. (The same issues would apply in America if the USA signed that Act.)
I won't tell you everything that happens with this story, you'll have to see it yourself...
This movie gives you a lot to think about and probably different people will have different things to be concerned with.
I would ask that you consider the bigger picture as well as thinking about Marathon Boy's individual story.
What I want to point out relates to government involvement in families, parental rights, the United Nations and the UNICEF's Rights of the Child Act. In the film the Act is used to stop Budhia from running and later to have him go back to his birth mother (who sold him for $10) yet although threats of emotional abuse were being made in his new home and when he was directly coached to lie to police and claim abuse by his foster father, he was still compelled to stay in that abusive home (so much for the UN committee, an outside party doing what they thought was the right thing by removing him from the foster fahter when the boy was left to stay in an abusive situation). Later medical exams proved the boy was never abused or tortured by his foster father/coach.
These issues of parental rights and the USA not signing the UN treaty on the Rights of the Child have been raised by some Americans. Actually in my opinion this issue has not been talked about enough in the media, for a couple of reasons.
The first is it was being raised the loudest during the Bush Administration. It was not signed back then. The reason was mainly that the conservatives want America to remain a free entity who governs ourselves. There are elements in the Act that would make some common things done in America illegal and governed by committees of the United Nations instead of being overseen by American governmental bodies. For example in the Act, children could not be homeschooled and also parents could not take a child to church with them if the child voiced opposition (perhaps if only to be let to sleep late on a Sunday).
Another part of the Act addresses child neglect and abuse which is illegal, but that is already illegal in the USA. Some who care for children and wish no children were abused therefore say this UN Act is a good thing. They don't explain though why participating in a new law overseen by the UN is necessary if American laws already prohibit such behavior and American police and government and court systems are already in place to address the issue. Yes, we all know abuse still happens in some homes but if a large governmental body of Americans is unable to fix 100% of it then what makes anyone think that a new crop of workers who are paid by the UN can fix it?
If you keep this in mind while watching Marathon Boy you will see the complicated issues when there is more than one overseeing body trying to supervise and control the people of a land.
The second reason I believe this has not been discussed much is that it never really came close to being signed so it never was a media splash.
Some who know of The UN Treatyt are homeschoolers and every homeschooler I've asked opposes it. The issue of homeschooling is often cited as a parental rights issue (who has the right to determine the child's education: government employees or the parents?). In my past discussions with parents of schooled kids they didn't seem to care much if the Act was passed as they don't think much about the issue of parental rights. They don't think it applies to their lives so they don't care what happens. Although most said, "I want you to have the freedom to homeschool but I don't want to homeschool so this is not an issue that applies to me." There was not much support being put behind others, people seem to care only for their unique situation and put their opinions behind that.
The other bunch of people who oppose the UN Rights of the Child Act are those who are more generally liberty minded, wanting Americans to have more freedom and less government in their lives. They want limited government by American government so they definately do not want increased govermental oversight by a United Nations based government!
In the film it was said at one point that there were many slum children suffering in poverty and that the UN committee for children was over-focusing on one boy who may or may not be suffering due to too much sports training at a young age. In one scene, a large group of slum children were angry and shouting asking why (the UN committee) was doing nothing to look out for their rights, to see that they had food and clothing and an education.
I was asking myself the same thing.
For more information read the production notes on the Marathon Boy official website.