I like what I’ve seen of Jack Quaid’s work well enough and, no matter my opinion of his parents’ output, they certainly made a life for themselves.

What gets me is that people conflate work ethics, opportunity, and talent as merit for success. Loads of actors with equal “work ethic” to the ones we see on screens are unable to find full time work as actors. Same in other sectors where opportunities are outnumbered by candidates.

In no way can I accept that the son of two film stars “deserve” his opportunities more than anybody who has trained as hard, has the same amount of talent (however you measure that), and who probably only has a menial job to fall back on if they don’t get the part. That is not Jack Quaid’s fault, though, nor do I think his parents at any point stopped to think “Y’know, imma pull a nepo for Jack”.

I do think Meg Ryan turns a blind eye on the structural advantages that her son has had growing up as he has. It will never hurt an upcoming actor to share a last name and possible likeness with established stars but, more importantly, actors’ kids grow up knowing what agents are, where to get headshots, how much time goes into auditioning and networking — and through their parents’ friends and colleagues they have ample opportunity to climb the ladder faster than others who have to elbow themselves into acting circles from the outside.

So on the one hand children of actors know the ropes from square one, or have seasoned professionals who will mentor them. At the same time, they will probably have opportunities offered to them from producers, directors or casting agents who want to curry favour with their more famous parents. Dismissing those obvious advantages is so tone deaf and privileged that Ryan really undermines her own argument.