Satirical skit depicting children with a terminal illness

This segment appeared on Australian TV six days ago and has resulted in a huge amount of negative feedback from the public and media here. In summary, it shows a spokesman for a fictional children’s’ charity, the ‘Make a Realistic Wish foundation’ visiting kids hospitalized with a terminal illness. Instead of their actual wish, they are given some pathetic alternative (eg a pencil case instead of a trip to Disneyland). It closes with the message ‘Why go to any trouble when they’re only going to die anyway?’

The criticisms have been pretty obvious; basically that it’s a cheap shot at a vulnerable target. The main defense has been that the skit is misunderstood and was intended as satire.

I’d like to know what people outside Australia think of this. The people behind this often make skits that are in bad taste but for some reason this one has ignited and it’s not clear to me why. For example, the week before they did a skit with an African-American women being lynched by the Ku Klux Klan. At the time I thought there might be some backlash but nothing ever came of it.

So, are dying children off-limits as a subject of comedy or are people being too sensitive?

Way too sensitive. Obviously, the skit wasn’t mocking dying kids; why would anyone take it that way?

This is the first time I saw it, but I agree people are being too sensitive. I blame the social conservatives.

Who knew Aussies were so sensitive? Kids in the Hall used dead and dying children for comedy and I don’t remember any backlash. Of course that was many years ago and the public outrage machine was not as finely tuned or highly automated.

(I didn’t find this sketch in the least bit funny, but that wasn’t the question.)

This spoof is certainly is unusual. It struck me as deeply disturbing and liable to offend large number of people. There’s no question that it trivializes the suffering of the terminally ill and shows no respect at all for their plight.

However, I’m going to offer an alternative view. I do not know the work of The Chasers but, like good satire (which this sketch may perhaps be a bit too flippant to accomplish), it suggests several questions to the audience. Here are a few.

The closing question, the fictional charity’s tag line, is a valid one. Not in the (rhetorical) comedic sense being implied by the sketch, but as a subject for introspection: we spend a great deal of effort and money to make the last days of the terminally ill as pleasant as possible. Why? We know it to be the correct thing to do, but why, exactly?

The sketch is not really challenging the fact that these children should be taken care of and that at least some of their dreams should be realized before they die. I think everyone agrees these things are highly desirable.

The writers of the sketch seem to be impugning people (like the clearly farcical Make a Realistic Wish Foundation) who skimp and pinch pennies rather than bring happiness to a terminally ill patient’s final days. The extremely sensitive subject matter of the sketch ends up eclipsing other considerations.

Perhaps this was their intention, at which point we have to consider whether charities could not accomplish more and do more good (by volume, at least) if they lowered their own and their beneficiaries’ expectations somewhat. The extreme lowering of expectations in the sketch - a stick instead of meeting Zac Evron - is clearly ironical. I’m not sure what point they are trying to make - should we lower expectations slightly, or do we mock those who advocate doing so - but I credit this sketch for making me think about such issues when I otherwise would have been doing something else.

I have zero knowledge of this comedy group and I could be spectacularly wrong, but my guess is they are trying to out-swift Swift. This sketch seems to me a variation of A Modest Proposal, a satire that was also thought to be in horribly poor taste. It presents a group’s plight to the audience, then offers a shocking “proposal” that actually has utilitarian benefit - a strong reminder of the conflict between amelioration and utilitarianism. Swift’s style all but asked the reader to despise the writer for the callousness of his arguments; this sketch does exactly the same thing.

So rather than getting cheap laughs out of a sad situation they may actually be pointing out that there are a lot of concepts to think about and no easy answers. If such was The Chasers’ intent, however, I imagine that it would be lost on the majority of the audience.

I think they just thought it would be a funny premise. Like Mr. Show did as well. Indeed, quite a few other comics have done similar or related riffs.

To say that it trivializes the suffering of the terminally ill and shows no respect at all for their plight, again, strikes me as a very odd reading. Should comedy not involve any situations where bad things happen to undeserving people, then? Again, it’s not as if the joke is “Ha ha, let’s laugh at those loser sick kids”; it’s “Ha ha, wouldn’t it be absurd and awful for a charitable organization to be so penny-pinching?”. Comedically tragic, like so much humor is.

Another “Ridiculously awful (and awfully ridiculous) wish-granting for a seriously ill kid” sketch not listed in the above link, from Dave Chappelle.

Way back in college, I knew a girl who hated SNL because she had an autistic brother and Gilda Radner did an autistic character.

I just watched the Aussie skit… I chuckled a couple of times. Not Comedy Gold, but OK. I expected the Onion “Child Bankrupts Make-A-Wish” skit to be better- it wasn’t.

Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal from two days ago.

Ricky Gervais starting his FAME show (Cancer kids, couple of mins starts around 2:50).

Parent checking in.

Making fun of actual, real-life dying children would not be funny.

Making fun of the Make-A-Wish foundation concept can be extremely funny. As a matter of fact it’s a potential joke goldmine. I think the “Make A Realistic Wish” sketch is hysterical.

Much of the very best comedy takes a realistic scenario, puts one twist in it, and then has it play out logically, with the component characters acting normally. For instance:

  • In the "Ministry of Silly Walks"sketch, everyone acts quite normally except for the fact that the government ministry’s purpose is absurd.
  • In one Second City skit my brother-in-law was in, everyone at a campfire sing-along acts normally except one guy brought a contrabass tuba instead of a guitar or a harmonica.
  • In the famed “Old Glory Robot Insurance” SNL commercial, the commercial is an absolutely straight-up copy of old fart insurance commercials except for the fact that it’s insurance against robot attacks.

What makes the “Make a Reasonable Wish” foundation sketch funny is not the dying kids, it’s the fact that it’s a charitable organization that’s run by skinflints. The skit’s otherwise played perfectly straight; the joke is a charity that isn’t at all charitable. It works best with a dying-kid charity because that makes the cheapness seem especially cruel and pointless. It’s not making a joke at anyone’s expense any more than the “Dead Parrot” sketch makes fun of pet shop owners.

Being funny excuses a lot.

The comedy group is asking a question people have been asking since they became aware of their own mortality - does life have any meaning in the face of death? Why should we bother about people who die - once they’re dead, it makes no difference if they got to go to Disneyland or got a pencil case.

Sure, you can play existentialist and assert that life has whatever meaning you assign to it, but the question of the skit - “why go to any trouble, if they are dying anyway?” is essentially unanswerable.

And therefore a fit topic for comedy. IMO.

Regards,
Shodan

This.

Hilarious.

Yikes. What was the substance of the skit?

I agree. I had a loved one die of cancer recently, so I’d be the first person to rip into someone that I thought was taking the suffering of cancer too lightly. I’m not offended by this though. The humor of that skit is not based on making fun of cancer patients. The offended people are just the sorts who probably think that making any joke at all in relation to cancer is taking it too lightly.

You can see it here. It seemed to me to be at least as inflammatory but didn’t raise a murmur, I guess because it’s not an issue in Australia. Would it be controversial in the US?

Wait, that’s a joke? I was at a campfire get-together about a year and a half ago where exactly that happened. Yes, seriously.

Nah, the gag was set up in a humorous fashion, and it’s obvious it was done for humor and not shock value. The Chappelle Show has done Klansmen sketches too. OTOH, this Chasers sketch is about real people, and makes light of one of the most horrific events to hit the nightly news. No one could claim only offenderati could get outraged about it.
Also, I laughed my ass off at it, so I guess that’s secured my eternal damnation.

I think the media just kicked up as much fuss as they could. It was only the 2nd week back on air and at the end of last season they were making the “news” (Today Tonight/ A Current Affair) almost every week. I didn’t find the sketch particularly offensive and they’ve done sketches with sick kids before in the CNNNN (their previous show) days that mocked Ronald McDonald House.

I think the KKK sketch would of kicked up as much fuss if the media had made it an issue.

I’m glad someone brought this skit up. I was beginning to wonder if I was the only person who found it funny. I don’t really get the level of outrage. The ABC has taken them off the air for two weeks. It’s ridiculous - like they are being sent to their rooms.