Facebook and children

thegirlintheattic

thunderbird wrote: »

In what way was it photoshopped?

I think just taking a photo of an ill child is pretty weird - in what way does someone's mind work that they think of getting a camera when their child is 'so ill' :eek:

There are popular internet meme's which take a photo and are captioned. Sound like the mum was doing one of those - the 'so ill' is in an almost sarcastic sense.

It's the same as my parents having pictures of me covered in chickenpox spots, which they show to family/friends in the album. I'm sure in this day and age my parents might have captioned them 'so itchy', instead they just go on about how cute it was to see me in gloves and desperately trying to itch.

No harm - no foul. If you find them uncomfortable either defriend her or don't look at the pictures.

A_Phoenix_of_Tangerine

There's a loophole on Facebook where, despite setting all your privacy settings to maximum and only allowing friends to view your photos etc, strangers will be able to see your photos on their news feed if a mutual friend makes a comment on your photo. Something to bear in mind when children are concerned.

jellyhead

Yes, yesterday I saw a photo posted by a girl I don't know that my teenager had been tagged in, and his friend had commented.

pelirocco

A_Phoenix_of_Tangerine wrote: »

There's a loophole on Facebook where, despite setting all your privacy settings to maximum and only allowing friends to view your photos etc, strangers will be able to see your photos on their news feed if a mutual friend makes a comment on your photo. Something to bear in mind when children are concerned.

Why would a child be in danger because of this exactly?

ETanny

I see nothing wrong with putting a photo of a sick child on facebook... Not like it was a photo of her kid with its head in the toilet while throwing up. That I can understand as being inapropriate.

As for children having facebook profiles... There is an age limit for a reason.

peachyprice

ETanny wrote: »

Not like it was a photo of her kid with its head in the toilet while throwing up. That I can understand as being inapropriate.

Oh, I don't know, I'd be very rempted to do that to my 17yo (if I facebooked) when he'd 'over-indulged'

Bad mummy.

Peater

Could be worse - My pal's other half got into a genuine 'hump' with me because i refused to accept a 'friendship request' from her pet cat that she had made a profile for.....

Lotus-eater

Peater wrote: »

Could be worse - My pal's other half got into a genuine 'hump' with me because i refused to accept a 'friendship request' from her pet cat that she had made a profile for.....

That is a bit bizzare.

Some of my mates and family get annoyed because I refuse to have an account, which means I don't get to look at all the interesting things they do...... like which restaurant they went to ..... and what they are doing tonight..... fascinating.

elvis86

pelirocco wrote: »

Why would a child be in danger because of this exactly?

Because hysterical parents seem to have this weird idea that an army of p*********s are poised to pounce on pictures of their children and electronically s3xually abuse them via the photograph on the computer screen..?:cool:

Saying that, people do post some awfully inappropriate stuff on Facebook. As someone else suggested, most of us had the priviledge of being able to forget the bits of our childhood/past that we'd rather forget (be that because of dodgy outfits or more serious reasons), and the opportunity to go out in the world and reinvent ourselves or become what we want to be. I do worry about how today's kids will do this if their friends can Google them and find their umbilical cord immortalised online and every bad haircut documented on their Facebook account (which their mum set up whilst their dad was still inside her at conception)..?

I logged in on Christmas day to discover that relatives of mine had posted pictures of their gaunt, cancer-riddled elderley mother/grandmother in her nightie on her death bed (literally - she died 2 days later).

Besides the general distastefulness of it, I know for a fact that the poor woman would have hated for anyone to see her like that. And yet, despite disrespecting and exposing a proud woman to all and sundry on Facebook in her dying days, the photos received several "Aaaaaw, bless her" type comments from other people who obviously saw nothing wrong with it. It absolutely outraged other members of my family (but unlike others, they didn't feel the need to communicate their anger via a loaded status update - family arguments are another thing that I can't understand people choosing to do via Facebook).

sashadesade

I dunno, seems like facebook has the unfortunate effect of turning people's brains into mush. They think they have to document every little thing for people to gawp at, which would be fine if sent in a private email to people who actually want to know. When I was a kid my mum never whipped out the camera when I was sick, because who the heck cares let alone needs photographic evidence? Why is this woman messing about photoshopping pictures to post on facebook rather than looking after her sick kid?