Not allowed photography at school play??

MrsE_2

bestpud wrote: »

I know how they work and I know they are very difficult to spot, and I take precautions with my children, but I do not feel they are at risk from parents taking their photo within school.

As I said, the reasoning behind the bans is often nothing to do with !!!!!philes.

Sadly, it happens, but there isn't one waiting on every corner, whatever you'd have us believe!

I would guess that they are just as much at risk from other parents as from anyone.

Most people become parents at some point, so I guess most pedos are parents.

bexbex

why would a !!!!!!!!blahblah what a picture of a fully clothes child? Surely that is defeating the object?

mikey72

jenner wrote: »

no, its not an offence, but they would be seriously questioned about their child protection procedures, they havent broken any 'law' but they have neglected their duties to assess risk and protect the child. if it had an impact on the safety of the child, they would need to explain themselves to ofsted, the local safeguarding children's board etc. i dont know the ins and outs of what penalties schools would face, but the head or the child protection officer would need to examine their policies and procedures and look at why they managed to distribute pictures of a child they shouldnt have.

if the worst came to the worst and that child was injured or killed due to a parent finding the child, then yes, they would have to be part of the inquiry into that

So there is no specific law, just the consequences of their actions by publishing the photo. It's near enough what would happen to them for any kid that they publish photos of, even up to the worst, if it could be linked to the photo being published.

lynzpower

mikey72 wrote: »

It was you that switched from parent to father, in your remark about abuse.

Originally Posted by lynzpower
I have worked in social care, and the vast mjority of Peadophiles were the parents of the child or extended family member. So I dont get at all why a father cant take a picture of his own child, yet abuse him at home

(And the photos are nothing about abuse, right to privacy, Human Rights Act 1998 this thread is seriously sidetracked)

Im really confused- are you trying to suggest that a child has the right to privacy- and this can mean that thier own parent cant take video of them? And that is clear in the HRA,

Why then can for example, the bbc be filming on a street in london and many people will pass by. Dont I have the right to privacy. What about CCTV.

Wild goose chase, this is nothing to do with privacy. the DPA is there and is adhered to, your own data is not included ( eg if I write a diary, it hardly comes under the DPA)

mikey72

If you are in a public place, ie the street, no, you are reasonably expected to be viewed by the public. A school football match in the park is another public place. So if you are filmed, your privacy has not been invaded. If you are in private, such as your home, you do not reasonably expect others to be filming you. A school is private, you do not expect your child to be photographed or filmed, but to be left in private. School plays fall into this, whether they should or not is another matter, and subject to the head to decide on his view normally.
Freedom of expression, and public interest give the right to take the public photos by the way.
So for the play, if the head thinks public interest outways privacy, you can film, if it doesn't you can't. That's why eveyone has a different rule, and why we'll always be able to quote "the other school says"
Nothing to do with the DPA.
And everyone has a right to privacy, (even children, why would you expect them not to?)

bestpud

MrsE wrote: »

I would guess that they are just as much at risk from other parents as from anyone.

Most people become parents at some point, so I guess most pedos are parents.

I agree,

However, the point I was making is they are no more at risk from having their photos taken during the school play iyswim?

There are far more effective ways of reducing the risk of abuse - banning photos will achieve nothing as I see it.

All it does is feed the hype and possibly the myth that children are more at risk outside the home.

lynzpower

And everyone has a right to privacy, (even children, why would you expect them not to?)

Because children are at risk ( by their very nature, they are vulerable) therefore thier needs clearly are discussed/ protected/ documented way more than any adults would.

bestpud

tandraig wrote: »

to answer a couple of posters questions - no, he wasnt asked specifically if his girls photos could go on website. and to be fair to headteacher - he immediately removed their names after son pointed out that the schools address is there plus kids tend to trust people who know their names! all of which would make it too easy for local !!!!!philes wouldnt it?
for post 76
the situation you describe is all too familiar to me - happened when my kids were at school (same school as GDs). Now parents are NOT allowed to photograph children during the performance and parents wishing to film them must ask permission prior to the big day and they stand in a designated spot. so well done school for that - us considerate parents and grandparents can now enjoy the whole performance in peace.

We have to sign a form, annually, to have photos published on the website and/or in the local media.

We can choose to say no altogether, or if we say yes, we can choose whether to have their full name or just first name.

I have personal reasons for my dd only having her first name printed, but I don't think a full name places children at more risk in general tbh.

Interestingly, in Austria, many schools post a photo with full name of all their pupils and many of those pupils walk to school and back, or use public transport at a much earlier age than we do here.

I'd love to know how many !!!!!philes use this opportunity to access their victims...

I bet it's very few, if any.

I put that bit before, but it disappeared for some reason...?

hardpressed

What's the difference between a parent taking a photo of the school play and the school allowing a photographer in to take a class or whole school photo. If one of the parents wants a photo for unlawful purposes then what's to stop them buying the official school photo?

mikey72

lynzpower wrote: »

Because children are at risk ( by their very nature, they are vulerable) therefore thier needs clearly are discussed/ protected/ documented way more than any adults would.

So you are saying you don't believe children have any right to privacy?