It was national news when four adopted brothers in New Jersey ages 9, 10, 14 and 19 -- were so malnourished that they ate insulation, wallboard and dry pancake batter to survive. The 19-year-old weighed just 45 pounds. Their horrible treatment and the child welfare system's failure to protect them deserved national coverage.

What was undeserved -- and unnecessary -- was the news media's decision to identify them by name and photograph. A sad and troubling irony for those four boys -- and every abused or neglected child -- is that media would protect their identities if only their years of physical abuse or severe neglect included just one incident of sexual abuse. Newspapers and television stations do that every day in reporting about child and adult victims of sexual assault. Why should it be different for a child victim of abuse or neglect?

Each year our agency, KidsVoice, represents more than 5,000 abused and neglected and at-risk children in Allegheny County. Our clients already have been victimized -- often by the very people who are supposed to protect them.

Media further victimize these vulnerable children by naming them and printing their photos alongside the intimate details of their struggles. Recently, media coverage about one client caused so much embarrassment and ridicule from insensitive classmates that she stayed home from school. She is now in a different school district where classmates don't know her past. Her name wasn't used, but her grade, age and nationality were and that was enough for her classmates to identify her.

Recently, the Post-Gazette published a Sunday front-page photo of one of our other clients, Katie, as part of a story about her mother's drug addiction. Katie's name, along with details of her life and her psychological assessment, remained front-page news for three days. ("Juvenile Court Journal," October 12th-14th). She was upset by the thought that her friends, teachers, classmates and neighbors could now know her deepest secrets -- even some horrible details that she didn't know or remember until she read about them in the Post-Gazette.

Put yourself in her shoes. Imagine being a 2-year-old child whose mother is so consumed by addiction that she cannot take care of you. You move from foster home to foster home. For a while, you even go back to your mom who says she loves you. But it seems like she loves crack cocaine more. A government worker takes you away again.

Now imagine being 16 and attempting to move ahead with your life and put those tough memories behind you. You're trying hard to fit in with friends and at school and where people know nothing about your past.

There is a devastating harm to children like those brothers in New Jersey and our clients -- like Katie -- when their names and pictures are on "Good Morning America," "60 Minutes" or the front page of the Post-Gazette. They fear returning to school to face teasing and insults about them and their families. Kids can be cruel. Teens can be worse. Along with harmful taunts and snickers will come constant wondering about what people everywhere know and think about them.

It doesn't have to be this way. Media can follow the lead of the Chicago Tribune and report on child abuse and neglect without identifying the victim.

KidsVoice is not asking newspapers to stop writing about our cases or to stay out of juvenile court. Opening juvenile courts to media can increase public awareness of the issues our clients and their families face and allow the public to scrutinize our courts and child welfare system -- including the practices of our agency and others. But opening courtrooms never was meant to deprive abused and neglected children of their right to privacy.

Few states open juvenile courts to media and the public. New Mexico grants access to juvenile court on the condition that the media not report identifying information about the child or parents. To do so is a criminal offense. The same is true in New Hampshire.

The Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges Commission supports "the concept of opening dependency proceedings and termination of parental rights proceedings to the press provided that the court would have broad discretion to close the proceedings and otherwise limit access to protect the identity of the child."

Earlier this year, the Pennsylvania Superior Court decided two appeals of cases in which the Post-Gazette was denied access to juvenile courts. The Superior Court determined that excluding media is appropriate whenever a judge determines that protecting children from negative publicity and ridicule is a compelling state interest in a specific case.

It is not a crime in Pennsylvania -- unlike New Mexico and New Hampshire -- to identify our abused and neglected clients in the media. But it feels like a crime to children whose feelings and lives are violated.

Newspapers can stop children from being further victimized and violated by adopting a policy of protecting the identities of abused and neglected children in the same way media protect the identities of child and adult victims of sexual assault and rape.

Another way to prevent children from being traumatized by media coverage is to enact legislation like New Mexico and New Hampshire. Until then, whenever reporters seek to be present in court for an abuse or neglect case, judges could grant court access but prohibit disclosure of identifying information about the child and family.

The Pennsylvania Juvenile Court Judges Commission could adopt that policy as consistent with its stated position regarding open courts.

By the way, Katie is not the real name of our client. Did her story seem any less compelling or credible because of that? If your answer is no, that's exactly the point. News media need not identify a child for a story to have meaning. Even if it were more compelling or credible, any value in identifying the child is overwhelmingly outweighed by the harm it causes.