Child Protection over Friends Only Facebook Pics

[HarrietSchulenberg]

At the nursery Christmas play parents were asked not to put photos on the internet in order to respect the privacy of other parents and children. I take internet security VERY seriously due to my paid work and that of my H, which requires absolute confidentiality. I am also a School Governor.

I put some pictures of my son on Facebook. My photos and profile are accessible only to my Friends, which comprise of a very small group of personal friends and family. The photos did not contain any reference to the school, the children (other than my son's first name), year group or other identifiable information. I never tag photos.

I received a phone call from the Child Protection officer from the School today. My photos had come to their attention and I was formally reminded of the need for internet security.

Through a process of elimination of my Facebook Friends (wasn't hard) I have worked out who is responsible. I am very hurt and surprised that this person has put me in this position, seeing as her own internet security is, at best, lax.

Have I been very stupid, or AIBU to think that I have not breached any child protection measures? I could just have well have printed the pics and shown them round at the school gates.

maryz, no-one can 'back-trace' pictures of your kids. If someone recognises your kids, then they don't need Facebook photos to know who/where they are.

What maryz said.

maryz - But what is the chance of this actually happening? We can't protect against all risks - it's POSSIBLE that someone might use the electoral roll to pick me at random to murder, but I'm still on the electoral roll - we have to make sure that out precautions are proportional.

What risk assessments have been done on this - in particular with reference to at risk children, or is it all just CYA (in terms of institutional regulations)?

maryz - That's part of the issue - you don't see the point of facebook. But other people do - so it's a question of balancing conflicting interests in an appropriate way.

Does the school have a website and are there pictures of children on it? If so then their rules are hypocritical

I don't think so. Most schools send out permission slips, asking parents if it is OK to use photos/videos of their children for publicity. If the parents said it was OK, then these children can be featured in school newsletters, school correspondence & any form of advertising for the school.

If any parents say no, the school is then responsible for keeping that child off the publicity etc.

The OP & others were specifically asked NOT to post photos on fb & the like. And this would have been run by & agreed the Governors. Because I have done similar stuff as governor for dds school.

It stinks of 'one rule for them & another for us'!

Wouldn't a common sense approach to balancing conflicting interests be achieved if people were to simply ask the parents of the children in the pictures they want to post whether or not they consent? That's what the school has to ask when it sends out permission slips, after all.

BreconBeBuggered -
How do you go about making sure that the person taking the picture has the contact details of everyone in the picture?

How long does a record of that permission need to be stored for?

What if someone doesn't want to refuse permission for fear that this marks them as someone with something to hide/wants to go along with what other people are doing?

Where would this apply? I take photos of my child in the park/on the beach/at the zoo - other children are in the background and I post pictures in facebook.

The park in particular potentially ties a child to a location.

I think the common sense approach is to start with a proper risk assessment.

I wasn't suggesting it was an easy option, Coalition, far from it. But if it's that important to some people, surely the hassle and paperwork is worth it?

No?

No - not without some evidence that there is a risk to be protected from.

If you took photos at the student demos, lots of those would feature children. Are you suggesting that if I took a photo, to put it on facebook I would have to track down their parents? That a newspaper would have to?

That any photos of my daughter in the playground should only be taken in extreme close up?

This would mean that anyone doing anything they didn't want publicized would just have to ensure that an under 16 year old was in the photo.

So no I don't think that would be a common sense approach. I think it is still incumbent on those who object to photos being published to demonstrate that this causes a significant increase in risk in order to justify limiting rights to free speech and expression.

It's currently incumbent on those taking pictures in what is not a public place to comply with the restrictions imposed. That's it, really. Why should anyone provide you with private information about why their child might be at risk, anyway? The head teacher certainly can't divulge that information.

I've not suggested that anyone divulge anything. I've suggested that institutions should have a transparent policy based on good risk assesment.

There has been no evidence presented or examples given of posting pictures on Facebook actually increasing the risk of harm to a child.

I think without that it will be percieved as just CYA. Where people feel that it IS just CYA they are likely to feel able to disregard at.

To OP: I am afraid you have been very stupid. Sorry.

As a school gov you should have followed the letter and the spirit of the law as the school now looks unprofessional by your action.

It has no bearing how lax the other person's security is, I am afraid. This is about you and not anyone else.

Food for thought: since that person's security is lax, your photos can be compromised through her lack of security.

AND: FB is lax. Despite the settings you have set. I know this from first hand. I have high security, I also work in education, last night I loaded up some photos for friends only. Only a friend can see the photos, and one sent me a request to tag herself in my photos. In this case, I don't mind because she is family but we are not FB friends.

It really does matter in education. There are some children who cannot have their photos taken at all due to child protection issues. If one of those children is on the stage, even unnamed, the school runs the risk of breaking the order by the courts or SS. In your role you cannot be seen doing this.

Yes of course the OP is entitled to do what she likes with photos she is taken if they have been taken in a pblic place.

however school is private property. A school play/production is private. Audience members in a theatre are not alolowed to take photos. The school has the right to determine who takes wehat photos on their propert. They have reasonablt allowed it as long as they are not put on facebook.

I run drama classes for children and allow videoing on condition they do not end up on youtube or social networking sites. They are for private use only. If I found anyone breaking that rule I would ask them to remove them, If they refused I would ask the child to leave the group or even in extreme cases sue for breach of copyright. (Schoo plays are copyright of the director/writer etc). That is the extreme example, it would never happen but I would have the right to do so.

I don;t have the right to ask HMV to remove the photo of my dd taken at one of their events. We entered the store of our own free will. They had the right to ask me not to take photos of the stars(in fact they allowed me as dd was so young but didn't allow others attending)as it is their property, their rules.

School property, school rules.

YANBU. I hate this obsession with misunderstanding child protection. I hope you've stuck to your guns. Grr!

I think the common sense approach is to start with a proper risk assessment.

Niceguy2 - That' why you have a proper risk assesment. So far no one has provided any evidence or cited any incidents where posting pictures on facebook has caused a significant increase in risk to a child.

You don't own the images of your children. Its not actually up to you if other people post pics of your kids. there is no law against it, and the best you can do is ask nicely if you don't like it.

I like my schools approach to this. On the letter that went out about the school christmas concert it said that parents take pictures and the school is fine with it, if anyone has a problem with that they can can remove their child from the concert.

I never understand why people are so precious about it. A blurry picture of a nativity with your kid in the background is dangerous HOW to you and yours exactly?

Isn't it Facebook policy to remove all pictures of children under 13 if they find out they've been posted without parental consent?
Or have I misunderstood something?

Don't think so. if they are your photos you own the rights to them, no-one can say what you can do with them.

Yes they can if they have been taken at a private event

Once you post them to Facebook they are not your photos, they are Facebook's photos. Read their terms and conditions.

Hah, that's what I get for asking an 8-year-old to do my technical support. I'm not even on FB.

MrManager makes the best point - when you post pictures on facebook, the rights belong to facebook- that's the T&C you all (foolishly) sign up to.

at what? That just brings me to my profile.

MrManager read it yourself. It quite clearly states that the person who posts the pictures owns those pictures, and the faq's also state that they only remove pictures in countries that have laws that require them to do so, and many don't. You give FB a license to use your pics, they do not own them.