News

In the Calgary home of Werner Patels, all eyes were not on the Olympic Games TV behemoth in recent days. As his mother-in-law watched the lavish opening ceremonies, Mr. Patels and the others in the household sat it out in protest.

“Awarding the Olympics to China was certainly motivated and inspired by a noble idea, but the experiment has failed,” says Mr. Patels, who also blogs about politics at Wernerpatels.ca and has written notes of support to other abstainers, such as Laura Kaminker, a Toronto-based American who outlined her own boycott plans back in March on her blog. Since then, he has grown more sure of his decision.

“China is not any more open or transparent or democratic, and from the looks of it, it may actually take a few steps backwards after the Games are over,” Mr. Patels says.

While controversy has been raging since 2001, when the International Olympic Committee awarded Beijing the 2008 Games, many Canadians have now downloaded the debate into their living rooms.

Upset with everything from China's human rights record to IOC politics, many have decided not to watch the Games as a personal protest. Others say that while they may take issue with China, they will be watching to support the athletes. Still others believe it's all a bunch of nonsense and they'd like to watch a little cycling, thank you very much.

So what's a family to do when it can't reach a consensus? And who has the moral authority to rule the remote control?

In Mr. Patels's case, he and his fellow boycotters decided to vacate the living room. Mr. Patels and his wife, both translators, worked upstairs during the opening ceremonies. His father-in-law watched DVDs in another room.

A similar principle of respect rules in Richard Devitt's Nepean, Ont., home. The software developer has decided not to watch any of the Games because of China's human rights record. While his wife was “disappointed,” she is watching summer reruns with him instead of the Olympics, for now.

“I'm not sure that's going to last because Olympic season has just started,” he says. “I feel that so far I've been the unbending one and she's been quite tolerant.”

Two of their three children still live at home. His 19-year-old daughter agrees with his position – and Mr. Devitt says she even inspired a renewed interest in politics in him – but she is interested in the Games and manages to watch when he is not around. (His 15-year-old son isn't interested.)

“Everyone should make their own decision,” he says.

Vancouver meat inspector John Dixon, his wife and his two kids were never planning to watch the Olympics. But they rent out rooms to two Chinese women who bought a TV so they could watch.

“The Olympics are a very big deal for these folks, and they share the sentiments of most Chinese that protesters and critics are being unfair to China,” Mr. Dixon says. “It is a touchy point, no question.”

Human rights advocates and family experts agree that a difference of opinion isn't necessarily a disruptive force. If you and your in-laws are heading toward a scuffle over any issue, the key is learning to have a healthy exchange, not a shouting match, according to Toronto child and family therapist Jennifer Kolari. The risk with political or religious arguments is that they can easily escalate into agitated, emotional jousts. “It can get really ugly,” she says.

In families in which older children or teens are testing out their activist wings, Ms. Kolari counsels parents to listen.

“We think because they're kids, they don't know enough,” she says.

It is important to give them a voice, she says, and if that includes not watching the Games, “we should respect that,” she says.

Many advocacy groups have been using the Games as an opportunity to broadcast their complaints to a wide audience. But some, including Amnesty International, tell their members that once the Games began, they became a venue for the athletes.

Law professor Sarah Perkins, acting director of the University of Toronto's International Human Rights Program, says she hopes that either way, China's human rights record will spark a discussion in Canadian homes.

“You could certainly watch it and sit down with your family and use it as a forum to discuss broader issues,” she says.

Reaching a consensus isn't necessary either, Ms. Kolari says. A freewheeling debate can be a valuable lesson for families in how to have different opinions and feel heard and not “squashed.”

“If you can agree to disagree, that's a healthy family,” she says.