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

dizziblonde

See if this thread sums up one thing to me - it's how utterly selfish some parents are - how as long as THEY get photos of THEIR kids - screw those kids and families whose safety is put at risk, and screw those in the rows behind them who can't see their own kids as they stand up for the entire show to take photos... because you know - a violent ex making it back into the lives of a family who've moved on from domestic violence (and my ex's mind games were very much of the death threats, attempted burglary and general stalking and being a pain in the !!!! variety) and their kid trying to have a normal childhood just simply doesn't matter - they should be forced to sit quietly while all their classmates practice for plays and concerts and fun stuff and be punished their entire childhood for the sins of one of their parents - because it might inconvenience the rest to have to wait till the end and get their children to pose for photos in a controlled group, or for the school to take photos of the children not at risk.

Pretty much any school in any part of the country has notices in registers or on staffroom noticeboards regarding kids in or having left care, or kids at risk with restrictions for who can pick them up or similar - it's not rare, it's not confined to the "rough" estates - it's actually fairly widespread but because it's not the sort of thing schools trumpet from the rooftops - people assume it doesn't happen around their neck of the woods and concoct all sorts of conspiracy theories - the only one of which is generally true is that it stops the prat in row 3 standing up the entire performance with a camcorder annoying the living daylights out of everyone else.

Or shall we have a world where teachers have to read holiday news such as the following (true from my own career - was passed up the relevant child protection lines and dealt with, the only thing I'm changing is the fact it's actually better spelt): "On Tuesday the police came to our house to fit an alarm cos my dad said he's going to slit mum's throat." Just make that family, in the process of leaving the area, have an entire childhood of never being able to participate in plays, sports days, concerts or whatever - because of the waster father. Yep - the "I'm all right Jack" brigade at their most morally reprehensible.

Derivative

dizziblonde wrote: »

screw those in the rows behind them who can't see their own kids as they stand up for the entire show to take photos

Has anyone in this thread claimed such actions are fine? I agree that ruining others' enjoyment of the show is rather distasteful.

as long as THEY get photos of THEIR kids - screw those kids and families whose safety is put at risk

Yes. Screw them.

It is not my responsibility to keep your children safe. That is the core issue.

The other issue is the fact that you are vastly, vastly overestimating the risk posed by group photographs being taken.

On Tuesday the police came to our house to fit an alarm cos my dad said he's going to slit mum's throat.

Slam the bloody father in prison then. Seriously. Why should his activities cause inconvenience for hundreds of other families?

When I am walking down the high street and decide to take a picture of a beautiful building - should I stop because a missing person may be in the photograph? Should we just not take photographs anywhere that people may happen to pass by? Seriously - I want to know your answer to this question. You are bringing up incredibly contrived scenarios to justify your case.

they should be forced to sit quietly while all their classmates practice for plays and concerts and fun stuff and be punished their entire childhood for the sins of one of their parents

No, they should get on with their lives, and the perpetrator, i.e. the parent responsible, should be the one held to account. Be it with imprisonment, or a movement restricting order.

taurusgb

adouglasmhor wrote: »

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.

:T:T:T:T:T:T:T

Well Said!!!

I'm sad to the core of having no photos of wonderful school moments because the PC gone mad brigade have decided that everyone and anyone is a danger to every child walking the planet.

The real problem is this Country's obsession with so called fairness. Why should a majority of parents not be able to have a keepsake because a few other parents are convinced that their child is at risk of something or other every waking moment? Perhaps the time has come for the obsessive few to keep their children out of the way for the five minutes it would take to let parents who want a picture take one?

Sometimes life is just not fair - that is life! Why should the majority always be expected to stand aside because the minority shout louder?

daska

It's already been clarified that when managed appropriately an appropriate photo policy infringes fewer people's rights than exluding the affected children. To continue to argue that black is white just to raise a reaction, in my view makes Derivative a troll.

Derivative

daska wrote: »

It's already been clarified that when managed appropriately an appropriate photo policy infringes fewer people's rights than exluding the affected children.

Firstly, that statement is a strawman. Where exactly did I mention that the affected children should be excluded? The person perpetrating the abuse on said child should be excluded from society.

To continue to argue that black is white just to raise a reaction, in my view makes Derivative a troll.

I take the view that the rights of the many should outweigh the rights of the few. At least, that individual freedom should not be restricted apart from when it affects others materially. I do not think that the small possibility of a child being identified outweighs the benefits in these circumstances.

How that makes me a troll, I am not quite sure.

And I am trying to raise a reaction no more than the calls to emotion expressed by many in this thread.

Your childrens' safety is precious. Similarly, a parent's right to photograph their own children is precious.

When these clash, you will see differences in opinion.

FunnySaving

It seems that, at least in the OP's case, it was a question of one person acting inappropriately and beyond their remit rather than a case of 'PC gone mad' or any of the other issues which have been mooted. For the other scenarios which have been described (child protection etc) schools usually have much more sensible policies allowing a compromise between sacrificing a child's anonymity and allowing parents to enjoy events which don't involve anyone feeling as though they're being accused.

thunderbird

Genuine question here -

With children who aren't to be photographed at school, what happens when they go round to a friends house or to a birthday party or anywhere when they don't have their parents with them? Do the parents have to tell people all the time that they mustn't take photos of them? Or do they just not go in the first place?

GobbledyGook

What is sad is that this issue always ends up coming down to two screaming sides "PC gone mad!!!" and "Protect the poor kiddies" when nine times out of ten there is no need for it.

The clear issue in the OP is the fact that there is no set, clear policy being carried out at the occasion. That is the only issue - not the policies themselves.

Most schools and the likes now have a clear policy to save any confusion. The problem normally is the confusion rather than the photos.

GobbledyGook

thunderbird wrote: »

Genuine question here -

With children who aren't to be photographed at school, what happens when they go round to a friends house or to a birthday party or anywhere when they don't have their parents with them? Do the parents have to tell people all the time that they mustn't take photos of them? Or do they just not go in the first place?

I know some children who don't go to birthday parties and the likes. It's really sad, and one of the reasons some HT's see it as even more important that they get to take part in school occasions.

Sometimes parents will tell people though, and it depends what the reason is foster carers for example will often be open about not wanting them in photos, and sometimes people will twig (often school staff other than the SMT don't know, but eventually you twig to something) eventually.

One very common trait seems to be for the parent to be quite standoffish to other parents. Parents don't invite children to parties and the likes if they don't like the other parent.

WhiteHorse

Definately make a formal written complaint.

Another example of spiteful jobsworth trying to be important and making it up as they go along.

Taking the camera would be either theft or the tort of trespass to goods. Which would depend on what she proposed to do with your camera once she had got hold of it.

The taking of the camera could be robbery (theft occasioned by the use, or threat of, force).

In any event, as you feared the application of unlawful force to your person, you have already been assaulted.

Point all this out in your complaint.

Check the internet - there are photographers websites that give clear statements as to the law. You could cite these as well.