More Proof That Pulling Pranks on Your Kids Online Is Both Lame and Dangerous

According to the NY Post, Mark and Heather Martin of Maryland lost custody of their 9-year-old son Cody after their YouTube prank went viral. The couple posted a video which has since been taken down.

They poured invisible ink on their carpet, tricked their son into thinking the ink was real, blamed him for the spill, and yelled and cursed at him for it. The 9-year-old burst into tears, they uploaded the video, and the rest is internet history.

Just because YouTube is there does not mean you need to be on it and have a viral video. What is the idea behind this?

Let's put aside the obvious error in judgement here, which is verbally abusing your child for other people's amusement. Why is it important to people to have a viral video? If you have a nice job, pay your bills, live under the radar, and are raising a family, try not to ruin that.

You might think I am a hypocrite for saying that. I mean, every stupid detail of my life is documented online in one fashion or another. It's part of my job to TRY and go "viral," and one I'd be more than happy to leave behind. I say that not because I think what I do now is embarrassing or dangerous for my family. I say it because if I were to get a viral video, it would be because I was embarrassing my family or doing something that would call my mental health into question. Just look at what people watch. Most viral videos contain really stupid and dangerous behavior.

You won't catch me screaming at my kids on video ever for the sake of a few clicks. That's because it is both damaging to them and really dumb. Do better, nipple heads.

P.S. My editor certainly was shaking his head while reading this one, but I gotta be me, man.

Editor's note: Lou meant to write, "I have to be me, man." "Gotta" is not a word.