PC gone mad when you cannot even take pictures of your own kids!!

daska

adouglasmhor wrote: »

You can't just assume everybody is going to do wrong either; you seem to be missing that point, in fact there is a presumption of innocence in British law. No laws were being broken except possibly a breach of the peace by the idiotic woman who shouted at the OP.
Perhaps as well if a child is in some situation where they need protection and anonymity perhaps on a stage in front of an audience is not the best place.

Yes, in this particular instance I would agree wholeheartedly, as I previously said it would appear the venue were being overly officious and rude and the behaviour of the second woman in particular is unforgivable.

But in general (i.e. NOT specifically talking about this event) there are good and genuine reasons why the taking of photographs might need to be restricted. And why should a child be punished for the misdeeds of others by having miss out on performances like this when there are simple measures that can be put in place to protect them. It doesn't stop photos being taken of the event because they can be taken officially and the risky ones taken out before publication. N.B. I'm not arguing for one minute that it should be the norm!

picnmix

op the way this was dealt with seems a bit strange with ranting at you a quiet word should have been enough. However I fully understand the no picture policy, whilst those of us think this situation is PC gone mad, sadly there are more instances of children needing this type of protection than we realise, it tends not to be something people chat about in the playground due to the sensitive nature, so unless you were really close to someone you may not know. I have had this situation at my Dd's bday party we couldn't let anyone take pictures due to child protection issues with one of her friends I didn't even take pics.

adouglasmhor

daska wrote: »

And why should a child be punished for the misdeeds of others by having miss out on performances like this when there are simple measures that can be put in place to protect them.

It's not a punishment it's personal security, it's the far lesser of two evils. Measures can fail, what if someone who knows the child and is in contact with the dad was there for some reason, what if a mistake is made.

Any

adouglasmhor wrote: »

It's not a punishment it's personal security, it's the far lesser of two evils. Measures can fail, what if someone who knows the child and is in contact with the dad was there for some reason, what if a mistake is made.

Wholeheartedly agree with this...
And also how if the argument is "why to punish this child", what about all the others that are punished by not having a photo of their own children in such an important moment???

dizziblonde

My old head used to have quite a decent workaround to it all (we did have kids who were under very very strict protection - we're talking levels of witness relocation here - not just someone with an antsy ex-partner)... no photos during the actual performance (also eliminates that prat in the middle front who stands up the entire time to record Johnny picking his nose in extreme close up and stops everyone else from seeing) - but afterwards she'd leave time with the kids in costume and the set up or whatever for parents to organise among themselves for shots of individual kids and groups of friends to be taken (as long as all the parents of the kids in the group shot consented to this).

We had the BBC in to film one school assembly and their way of doing it was to get us to organise it that all the parents who'd stipulated no photos for the media were seated to one side of the hall - and if they had to do any "audience" shots they'd make sure to film the opposite side. Sadly they wouldn't let the camera-phobic teachers sit over there as well despite me begging!

victory

I remember when the little one was at primary school, he had a letter sent home that you ticked boxes yes or no to, do you want your son in the school paper? Do you want your son in the local paper? Do you want your son on the internet promoting the school? etc you get the idea, I ticked no to all, next time I was in the school grounds got collared by the head, she said there had never been anyone that said no to all and why had I?

Well I will tell you, I always remember the story of my friend who had a very abusive ex, she tried her hardest to move about and not let him know where she was or her kids, her kids photos ended up on facebook, he tracked them down and was trying to put one of his children in the back of the car when he was stopped, arrested and bailed... all that from one photo put on the internet, so yes it can do a lot of harm

adouglasmhor

victory wrote: »

I remember when the little one was at primary school, he had a letter sent home that you ticked boxes yes or no to, do you want your son in the school paper? Do you want your son in the local paper? Do you want your son on the internet promoting the school? etc you get the idea, I ticked no to all, next time I was in the school grounds got collared by the head, she said there had never been anyone that said no to all and why had I?

Well I will tell you, I always remember the story of my friend who had a very abusive ex, she tried her hardest to move about and not let him know where she was or her kids, her kids photos ended up on facebook, he tracked them down and was trying to put one of his children in the back of the car when he was stopped, arrested and bailed... all that from one photo put on the internet, so yes it can do a lot of harm

How did her kids' photos end up on facebook?

blue_monkey_2

To clear something up because the argument that is ensuing does not apply in THIS case - there were NO issues of any child personal safety or otherwise. Which is why we were asked if our children could be photographed and why their photo's have been plastered over several local newspapers last week (and more due for this week), facebook and the choir website.

I can totally understand for SOME there may be this issue, in THIS case there were none of these issues so they are irrelvent, let's not argue about something that does not apply IN THIS CASE. Save them for another time, that argument does not apply.

The person who had a go at me had no reason to do so as I had already done as I had been asked 75 minutes previously and I had not got my camera out of my bag since. She could have chosen the time when they audatorium was empty and most people had gone to the loo/bar but she chose when it was busy and she simply went out of her way to humiliate me in front of as many people as possible for taking a picture of MY child. When I questioned why she shouted at me some more. My husband did say she was not having my camera (which was in my bag anyway!!)

And her reasons for not taking the picture were nonsense - wants more this was not enough for them, they knew I was a parent and then went out of their way to try and brand me as some kind of pa edo to the choir leaders. They could have said 'the parents are taking pictures, did you know' but instead they said 'someone is trying to take photos of the children'. They phrased it that way for a reason and that was to make me look out to be something I was not.

Any

adouglasmhor wrote: »

How did her kids' photos end up on facebook?

And with full tagged names, location, school address....

I am sorry, but either you are hiding and you do not set up unprotected FB account and have family cooperate or you don't.

There would have to be full names on the pictures etc for google or anything register it. Otherwise he was tracking pictures through family members or their friends so he already knew where to look.

You don't just get a random photo pop up on the internet, there is millions!!

And for papers (where there would be higher possibility and also possibly names mentioned) there are procedures and the question IS asked.

victory

adouglasmhor wrote: »

How did her kids' photos end up on facebook?

From what I can remember it was not school related which this thread is about:D it was I think at a friends wedding and they were guests there, the wedding photos were uploaded even though the person doing the upload knew they had a very delicate relatonship with their father and the mother was trying to protect them, I guess she did not think what it could lead to, didn't see the harm, beautiful wedding snaps, kids in it, dad looking, dad tracked them down, found their school and tried to get one of them in the back of his car without any kind of permission.....