Not allowed photography at school play??

starnight_2

This happened to my sis with her DS and we couldn't understand it either. On the other hand, my DS school send around a letter about 2 wks before the school play asking if any parent doesn't want their childs photo taken. Which I think is far better, as I know I love to take pocs of my DS in the play then him and his friends get them taken together.

Curious_George_2

shellsuit wrote: »

Paprika, you used to work with p a edophiles?

somebody has too...

at my DDs school the head always makes the same speech and i always think its worded wrong, she says "you can take photos as long as they are for your own personal use"

if your a perv... then surely thats the problem!!

Paparika

shellsuit wrote: »

Paprika, you used to work with p a edophiles?

Yes, doesn't make me condone what they have done, far from it, but I got an insight into how they work, they way they groom people, had one try to groom me, i thought he just wanted to wash my car... far from it, he wanted to see what information i had in my car he could use.. thank god i never mentioned i had children, i chose to keep that very quiet

mrcow

Paparika wrote: »

been like this for years

Unfortunately it is amazing some lengths !!!!!philes will go to get pictures of children,

But you can get pictures of children anywhere you like.

Sit outside a school at chucking out time with your camcorder if you're that desperate. Or go to the local park. That's got to be easier?

What's appealing about tripping over yourself to get picture of children dressed in sheets and teatowels? Surely common sense has to prevail somewhere?

Dave101t

Paparika wrote: »

been like this for years

Unfortunately it is amazing some lengths !!!!!philes will go to get pictures of children, I know, i worked with them in the past and the training told you all about the grooming the will do.

but....doesnt that mean the pedo has to be a parent? the school are calling you all suspects?

morg_monster

mrcow wrote: »

But you can get pictures of children anywhere you like.

Sit outside a school at chucking out time with your camcorder if you're that desperate. Or go to the local park. That's got to be easier?

What's appealing about tripping over yourself to get picture of children dressed in sheets and teatowels? Surely common sense has to prevail somewhere?

but any random person taking photos or videos of kids is going to get asked what they are doing and probably asked to stop or get the police called on them if they can't give a decent reason. I mean !!!!!! the police can stop you taking photos of virtually anything these days just by citing anti terrorism laws.
I doubt it is a big problem - but probably yes it would be easier to just turn up at a school play with a camera looking like a proud parent like the other 100s there, than to stand in a playpark taking photos. Any parent would be on you like a shot.

Anyway I don't think it is the p-phile issue, I think it is like others have said, with children in care, domestic isues, etc there are often valid reasons for a child's photo not to be taken and sometimes yes it is easier to impose a blanket ban. We have the same thing at Brownies - there is a photos consent box for them to tick when they sign up, so I can take photos of the girls in my own pack, but when we go to an event with other Brownies I have to be very careful not to get unknown girls in the shot!

PolishBigSpender

I think it's sick. Soon the kids themselves won't be allowed to take cameras on school trips as well.

morg_monster wrote: »

Anyway I don't think it is the p-phile issue, I think it is like others have said, with children in care, domestic isues, etc there are often valid reasons for a child's photo not to be taken and sometimes yes it is easier to impose a blanket ban. We have the same thing at Brownies - there is a photos consent box for them to tick when they sign up, so I can take photos of the girls in my own pack, but when we go to an event with other Brownies I have to be very careful not to get unknown girls in the shot!

This is completely weird to me as well. Thank God, we can still take pictures of our children whenever and wherever they are, and so can their scouting masters on the camps, teachers during school events or friends on the ice rink.

PrincessPlaty

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

I think it's sick. Soon the kids themselves won't be allowed to take cameras on school trips as well.

Sorry i disagree with you there is nothing sick about it at all. If my daughter was caught in a photograph taken by another person and was then identified by her father that would put her, my other daughter and myself in extreme danger.

How is then anything sick about protecting children? Ok not everyones situation is the same as mine put as a previous poster said what about children that are 'looked after' nobody knows the circumstances of these children or what risk they could be at if they were identified.

Why is it ok to put another child at risk just for the sake of taking a few photographs of a school play?

Paparika

ok I'm going to tell you a story, it's real, and it happens every single day.

Imagine a mum with lets say three children 1, 3, and 8 youngest is in a buggy, mum has dragged the kids to a supermarket to do the weekly shop, she is a lone parent, no one to look after the kids whilst she shops so she takes them with her, when she leaves the store it has started to tip down.


A man nicely dressed, looks cheerful, walks past, he notices she is struggling with the bags of shopping and the children, the rain is really falling now, and the mum is trying to get to the bus stop, he asks if she needs any help, she says no thanks, he asks, are you going to the bus stop, she says yes, hes kind in his manner and says look let me help you, your getting soaked, (the kids are screaming, the bags look like they are about to split) so she agrees that yes just to the bus stop. He helps her, asks where she is going, she doesn't want to say, he leaves it like that.

The following week he finds her again at the supermarket, says hello to her and the children, she remembers him so doesn't see his as much of a stranger now. He tells her his name, and where he lives, she tells him where she lives.....

oh he says, I'm going that way after the shopping want a lift, no she says still unsure, he produces some sweets for the children and asks is it ok for them to have them, yes she says, the children are happy. he continues to have friendly chatter and asks again, look i am going your way, it's raining, be quicker to get you and the kids home, she says ok yes thanks.

He drives her home, lots of friendly chat, asking questions, helps the bags to the door, he notices the light isn't working in the hall way, oh he says, do you have a light bulb, yes she says, just haven't got around to it. Oh give it here, i'll do it, won't take a second, then i must go.

She gives him a light bulb and he replaces the bulb for her, he smiles and says i must go, but I'd like to see you again, she agrees, and they do meet up, he becomes her boyfriend, but what she didn't know... he is buying his time, what he really wants is the 3 year old, but he waits, he prefers 5 year old girls, he will wait until she is 5. once he has finished, he will dump the woman, and pass information on to the next man, who will again befriend the woman to get at her children, if they fit the ages he desires.

This isn't made up. Scare you, so it should. that man spent a few years being the perfect boyfriend, went to the school plays, took pictures, passed those pictures on to his 'friends'.

You can criticise the way the woman allowed him into her life, but in all honesty....she was lonely, he was paying her attention, made it clear he wanted to see her, they became boyfriend / girlfriend, she didn't know what his motives were until after he left.

Vomityspice

You could perhaps simply ask them to which Act they are referring to and perhaps what Section? Regulations are often European Law but my quick search on Westlaw shows nothing....

Is it the overzealous fear of pedophiles? Yes probably, as they could simply photograph children in the playground from over the fence and be committing no offence (however much people might dislike it!). Yes the police might turn up but they can actually do very little. Potentially they could 'suggest' that it is an offence under the Terrorism Act, but in reality, they know this is a bluff and any court would simply laugh it out, and then award costs against the police. Something most constabularies are keen to avoid, looking like complete fools! The chief of police at the press conference won't be having a good time.....

Perhaps a better solution is to refuse to let your children be part of a nativity plan (or you buy any tickets) until such a stupid idea is removed. If no parents were willing to go alone with this type of non sense, the quicker schools might show some common sense. One of the pleasures of Christmas was the school play and the silly photo's we all took! Removing this 'pleasure' on the guise of 'protection' is disingenuous and should be resisted.