although i can't disgree with you about using children to elicit fame and money--i don't see how its any different when parents do it for sports, or quiz shows or any other endeavor where the "child" is used to profess for the public's needs. her photos and film aren't considered pornography (mostly accepted as middlebrow art)--and since she seems so well grounded, graduated Princeton etc..this is how this "family" chose their career--whether it was for the money or fame or art--who cares? i would think the McCulkin (sp?) family is much more fucked up (w/o any sexual exploitation) than a Brooke Shields c.v.