AIBU to be very annoyed that I have just found a newspaper photo of my DC's on the internet.

[nolembit]

I have just been looking at our local paper online and found a picture of the entire school including my DC's with the local MP.

I fill in a photographic permission slip every year which states that my DC's picture cannot be used on the web.

I am fuming and don't know whether to speak to the school or the newspaper. I am also annoyed that this put's me in a very difficult position wrt other parents/school as they will not have the opportunity to take another picture without my DC's. I am so mad in fact I am livid!!!!!!!

[thefirstMrsDeVere]

Well if you have specifically refused permission for your DD's photo to go on the web YANBU.

Why particularly do you object though, just out of interest.

I would be incandescent but my DS in adopted and a photo of him in his school uniform would be a fecking disaster.
But I dont mind my other kids being on the internet particularly.

[LostMyIdentityAlongTheWay]

as a teacher, I'd say that's what we, in the trade, refer to as a monumental fuck up.

Contact the school, first off. It doesn't put them in a difficult position. It just means your DCs will be hauled out of any future group pictures. If that's what you want, that's your right.

May I ask what your problem with this might be, out of interest. Are your DCs vulnerable in any way? (not intended to insult, genuine ?)

[Sirzy]

I would contact the school as the first port of call as they should have ensured the paper was only allowed to use photos they had permission from all parents to use.

Was the photo taken by the school or by the paper

[iamnotsuperwoman]

I can understand you being upset as you didn't give permission, but really, what do you think will happen as a result of this? I doubt the school realises the pictures go online and where's the harm?

[upahill]

What are your reasons?

I understand there are many different reasons why some parents wouldn't want their kids being identified.

Personally I would be thrilled if I came across a picture of my kids in that situation but I haven't got any issues.

[squeakytoy]

Is there a good reason for your concern? Is your childs name on the photo?

[Sirzy]

Depending on the family circumstances there is the possibility for a lot of harm, and even if it is just a case of OP not being comfy with her childs photo on the internet then that is her decision to make and it should be respected.

[Hassled]

The school have breached policy and are absolutely in the wrong. That said, I can see why the mistake was made - if you have 200 kids, say, and just one hasn't got photographic permission, you can see why there's a danger that could slip through the net - but someone should be checking this.

Talk to the school first - up to them to approach the newspaper. Sod the other parents - they'll have their copy of the photo by now if they want it. All you're asking is that it's removed from the website.

[nolembit]

It's to do with my DH's last job. He couldn't even have photo's of DC's in his office in case it attracted his client's 'unnatural' attention. He has now moved jobs but we are still living in the same area.

[squeakytoy]

I dont see how a school photo in the paper could possibly be linked to your husbands job though?

I can understand not having photos on a desk, but I dont understand how a group school photo would be of any worry.

[nolembit]

sirzy the newspaper took the photo

squeakytoy my DC's look like my husband and it identifies which school they go to.

[Hassled]

The reasons are irrelevant - nolembit has the right not to give permission, she hasn't given permission, and the school have fucked up.

[ScaredyDog]

The school should have observed your wishes.

However, unless your DH was also in the photo with two arrows pointing to your DCs saying "these are DH's kids" - they aren't at any risk with regards to his former job and clients.

If it's the whole school in the photo, their names won't be in the picture caption even so they aren't identifiable or linked to your DH in any way.

But like I say, it's your choice as to whether you consent to having photographs of your DCs taken at school and published.

It's the school you need to be having words with and ensuring that their teacher/s know that they are not to appear in any photos taken in the future for the local paper. That's your right.

[HarrietSchulenberg]

YANBU - you have refused permission for your DCs pictures to be used on the internet. Did you also refuse permission for their pics to be used in local newspapers too? If not, then that's where the problem might have arisen - school assumed pic was just for local paper, but local paper stuck it on their website too. Were your DCs named in a caption?

FWIW I have problems with school as I asked that I be notified if their pics are going to be used in local papers or any other publication. It's because their father works with young offenders in a residential setting and although we are now pretty low risk it can sometimes be the case that he could be targeted by ex-residents. We just need to know what pics of our children are out there and when. But school never remember this and take the easy option of hauling my DSs out of every press photo opportunity "to be on the safe side". DS1 was upset only last week when he was asked to leave a group of children filling the school pond because a photographer was coming.

[iggagog]

I'm assuming from what you've posted that a photo in the local press would be ok? (as you've just refused permission for photos on the web). If a local press photographer came to photograph kids at school it wouldn't honestly occur to me that it would end up on the web (I will know better now though).

[iggagog]

cross posts with Harriet

[ScaredyDog]

Schools who have children fill in consent forms for this sort of thing should now ensure that the forms include consent for photos to be used on the internet (newspaper's website) and even social media (many papers have Facebook pages on which they share news stories), as well as in a newspaper.

[glassescase]

Does it give their names? I find it rether precious, in the main, when follks do not want photos.

[littleducks]

I refused permission for any pics of dd, she was in the newspaper as part of their 'my first day at school' thing

We changed schools (diff issue, had been on waiting list all along) so never persued it as no harm could/would come from it

I think you need to contact the school, if you think it is necessary the picture could be possibly removed if you havent given consent

[ScaredyDog]

Harriet - I can't blame your child's school for removing him from the photo - it's too much hassle to have to let you know who has taken photos and where they will be used. And you knowing that doesn't give you any control over who may or may not see it.

You either consent to photos in the local rag (and therefore on their website and potentially their Facebook page) or you don't.

[glassescase]

If it is a photo of the whole school, someone would really have to be looking hard to discern a family resemblance and I imagine they could find out which school your DC attend more easily, if they REALLY wanted to.

[AuntiePickleBottom]

i'm intrested now on what your DH job was.

but yanbu, if you have not given permission then they shouldn't of have taken the pic

[nolembit]

HarrietSchulenberg I gave permission for the school to take photo's for use internally. My DH came into contact with convicted paedophiles in the course of his work which is why we did not want the DC's pictures published externally. As I said before we still live in the same area.

[Kewcumber]

glasses people often have very good reasons for not wanting photos of their DC's in school uniform and thereofre very identifiable on the web.localpaper etc. Just because they don;t share those reasons with you doesn;t make them "precious".

And people who have some cause to have concern over their family safety or privacy often err on teh side of caution and that is perfectly normal.

My ex kept virtually all mention of his name off the internet for very good reasons, he was very active in a political party and was constrained by that to working behind the scenes. He wasn;t being precious he was being justifiably cautious.