What no one is saying about that NBA Finals baby moment
It looked like a touching moment. Isaiah Hartenstein, fresh off an NBA championship win, carried his sleeping infant onto the podium to celebrate. Cameras panned. Fans cheered. But the sound levels on that stage were louder than a jet engine—reaching 120 to 130 decibels. That’s the threshold where irreversible hearing damage can happen in seconds. And millions of people watched, thinking this was what fatherhood should look like.
On top of that, Hartenstein held his infant with one hand around the middle while gesturing wildly with the other—a position that left the baby’s head and neck completely unsupported. Even teammates reminded him to support the baby’s head, but Hartenstein ignored the advice entirely.
This wasn’t just an excited dad caught up in the moment. It was a deliberate choice to turn a baby into a symbol, an accessory to celebration—and the NBA gave tacit approval by allowing it to happen on center stage.
Pediatricians have warned for decades that infants should not be exposed to sounds above 85 decibels without protection. Their developing ear canals amplify sound to be louder than it sounds to adults. The World Health Organization states that exposure to 120 decibels—common in sports arenas and concerts—can cause permanent hearing loss in just seconds. Yet there was Hartenstein, holding his baby like a trophy among deafening crowds. The NBA didn’t just allow it. They featured it.
The NBA’s Missed Opportunity
The NBA has implemented comprehensive concussion protocols and zero-tolerance policies for domestic abuse. Yet when it comes to child endangerment happening in plain sight, the league remains silent.
Other athletes have shown it’s possible to include family safely. Patrick Mahomes’ child wears protective headphones at NFL games. And Shai Gilgeous-Alexander’s son wore protective headphones for the NBA semifinals. The solutions exist—companies manufacture protective gear specifically designed for children in loud environments.
The Broader Stakes
As a society, we don’t allow parents to leave children unattended in cars or expose them to other obvious dangers. Professional sports shouldn’t be exempt from these basic standards.
The fix is straightforward: leagues should prohibit infants from appearing at center-stage celebrations, and children who appear must wear appropriate protective equipment.
This is about recognizing that children’s safety can’t be compromised for the sake of a photo opportunity—no matter how historic the moment.
I can imagine some troll shaming you.
My answer: Back in the 1960’s, based on a childhood Readers Digest article I read then, we knew it would be decades, not years, before society caught up to Europe in condemning drunk driving. Nevertheless, it was appropriate to tell the truth, even if people said our standards were too high, too premature, too idealistic or whatever.
Right now is the time to be caring about our baby’s heads and hearing.
A famous NHL goalie, Ken Dryden, wrote about how bank tellers would never let him line up with the public, that they thought that because he was better at hockey he was also (blank)-er. I remember “kinder” was one of the attributes. Nonsense, of course.
It’s fun to idolize athletic stars, but only if we keep our common sense gears running in the back of our minds
Sean, your comment is it’s own blog post — really. You cover so much ground so succintly. The idea that people must be better at everything because they’re good at one thing is a plague in our culture right now. I mean, the idea that people good at earning money will be good at governing is it’s the path to oligarchy or fascism. or both.
Babies and toddlers attending events with loud music and crowds….how can anyone possibly justify it on any grounds?
Photo ops…..the parents think they score popularity points when they show off their babies. There is no other reason for this trend.
Agree! I had other more character-assassination type observations that I cut from the post. It takes such incredible singular focus and a sense of self-importance to be able to achieve what these professional athletes achieve. But that personality trait leaves no room for parenting; the more focused a person is on their own goals the less they are able to see their child as anything but a distraction or an extension of themselves.
I saw World Cup games where children enter the field at the beginning of the game with their parents. WTF? This is not a bonding time because the parent is focused on their game and their team. This teaches the child that they get attention from their parent if the are celebrating their parent. If a parent gives a kid a lot of attention OFF the field, then the parent would have no interest in ALSO making the parent’s own special activity something the kid is there for.
I’m just ranting now, but I’m incensed. It’s not just athletes. Parents in all sorts of types of work bring kids to “family-friendly” work events. It’s just a thinly veiled attempt to spend time with a kid that is not boring, kid-focused activities. Just go do your work event and then go home and spend time with the kid.
I have a feeling Gen Z will untangle all this because it’s much harder to do these type of shennanigans when workers are remote.
Someone asked me last week, “When have you been wrong?” I’m almost never wrong in a blog post because I only write what is so obvious to me I can’t believe it would ever be controversial. So I think where I risk being wrong is like right now, in the comments – where I take the argument a little farther, into unsure territory, because I’m so agitated.
The children who enter the field along with players at World Cup matches are not the players’ children. They are called “mascots” or “child escorts.” Most of them won some type of competition to be there.
Oh. Really? Well, there you go. As I said, I’m wrong in the comments a lot :)
I actually think that’s nice. I mean, the kids earned it. I feel like I’m reverting to some Victorian carmudgeon complaining that kids need to earn their way or whatever. What has become of me.
As I said before, I don’t agree with a lot of things you say and because I am not interested in arguing or trying to make a point on your personal blog, I don’t comment that way. In this case, I agree completely.
I hope someone will take it to heart and think twice.
Thank You !
I don’t have children (and don’t like being around them), but very much noticed this situation. All of the aspects that you mentioned.