Letter to Congressman Tammy Baldwin

To: Rep. Tammy Baldwin

December 10th, 2009

Dear Representative Baldwin:

My name is Sapir Sasson and I am a student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. As an Honors Project for one of my psychology classes, I chose to investigate the use of pro-anorexia websites by individuals with eating disorders and the effects that these websites have on viewers. Pro-anorexia websites (commonly referred to as pro-ana sites) are sites created by individuals suffering from eating disorders. These sites advocate eating disorders as a ‘lifestyle of choice’ and encourage individuals to continue with unhealthy eating patterns; these sites often include information about tips and tricks on how to lose weight the fastest, advice on how to purge food, and ways to punish oneself if the anorexic eats more than her self-determined caloric limit (which is often extremely low). These sites also offer forums in which individuals can exchange ideas and encourage each other to lose more weight.

While these sites present themselves as ‘support networks,’ they are far from it. Studies have shown that even site visitors who do not have eating disorders prior to visiting these sites suffer reduced self-esteem, more distorted body images, and an increased desire to lose weight after a single visit to these sites (this was regardless of the individual being of normal body weight). For a review of these studies, I encourage you to visit the blog I created, documenting my findings: http://antiproed.blogspot.com/

I am well aware of the restrictions regarding Internet censorship. I understand that it is against the First Amendment to censor any form of free speech. The prolonged and unsuccessful debates regarding the Child Online Protection Act, struck down for the third time in 2008, and the Communications Decency Act, struck down in 1996, are very discouraging. These Acts were meant to protect minors from harmful contents of the Internet simply by ensuring that minors would not have the ability to view these sites without parental supervision. Both were denied on grounds of violation of the First Amendment.

While I know that an amendment to the First Amendment is not ideal, nor is it likely, I urge you to find a loophole through which access to these websites can be restricted. Regarding COPA, the Supreme Court said there was a “potential for extraordinary harm and a serious chill upon protected speech had the law gone into effect.” However, in my view, there is just as great a potential for harm if nothing is done about this issue. From a purely economical standpoint, eating disorders cost our nation over $3.8 million each year on treatment alone. Individuals who visit these websites while in treatment are prolonging their disorder and reducing their chances for a successful recovery, and those who are exposed to these websites following treatment are bound to relapse quickly.

It is quite impossible for me to adequately convey the potential harm for those who view these websites through a single letter. But at the same time, not doing anything is neglectful of individuals who cannot make better judgments for their own health. Just as we would not want suicidal individuals to looks up ‘tips and tricks’ on the best ways to commit suicide, we do not want individuals with eating disorders to find ways of sustaining their disorders.

This issue is personally relevant to me. My cousin has been suffering from Anorexia Nervosa for the past six years. She has enrolled and un-enrolled at a university three times within the past two years. Her health insurance recently cut her off because she was not improving, so she is not sitting at home, with no insurance or a means to afford needed treatment. She spends hours each day on pro-ana websites, which serve as her only support system. While she cannot see herself surviving without these websites, I know that they are inadvertently prolonging her disorder and preventing her from getting better and moving on with her life.

If there is anything at all that can be done about these websites, I beg you to take this issue into consideration. The purpose of the First Amendment is to protect our rights as human beings, but I think it crosses the line when it endangers the lives of others.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I know you are extremely busy, but I would love to hear your thoughts on this issue.

Sincerely,

Sapir Sasson
Madison, WI