Is it unreasonable to expect parents to NOT take pictures at soft play when it is well posted that the centre forbids it?

[CurlyBoy]

I took my 2 yo boy to soft play today. One reason I like this one is that it has a policy of no photographs (the other is that they have proper coffee). This policy is well signed and is on the "rules" sheet that everyone should read and sign that they have done so. Our little guy is adopted and I can't risk any pics of him posted online. We really don't want the birth family to be nosing around. For all I know the photographer could be friends with the sister of birth dad or something.

Today I saw two different families photoing their kid. The first time I didn't say anything because my boy wasn't in the area but the second time he was. I asked a staffer if I was right about their policy (I was) and then asked her to make an announcement over the PA system to remind everyone.

If people can't follow the rules of an establishment then they shouldn't go. The policy is there for a reason!

Well, if the birth parents are such great detectives, and are prepared to "stake out the place", then I think they are going to find you anyway.
What are you going to do as he gets older? How are you going to police this no photo rule when he is at friends houses, birthday parties, visiting the zoo, school plays etc ?

I understand completely you feeling this way especially in your circumstances, plus you've chosen to go there because they have a no photos policy so why shouldn't you say something when someone is breaking the rules?

Good for you for speaking up.

Actually it's a real bugbear of mine when there are clear rules and signs displayed about anything and some people seem to think the rules can't apply to them and go ahead and break them.

As he gets older and less obviously resembles his baby self, presumably it will be less of a risk.

I'm a bit bemused at the people calling the poster 'hysterical' and 'people like you', when in fact he's a presumably ordinary person with a child who is more vulnerable than most.

ive been in that situation recently. i was an innocent mum just wanting to take a photo of my baby playing.

i respected the rules and sought permission to quickly take a couple of photos , but i ensured that no other child was in the pic and held the camera down whilst not shooting.

ALSO
i know of a couple who are going through the mill to say the least and he has used a secret button sized camera to film people to get evidence for his case...my point is there are many ways to take photos of people without them knowing........if your people in question wanted to, they could easily.

stop worrying and get on with enjoying life, it will only get you more and more worked up. Concentrate of the children having a relaxed childhood because before you know it they are grown up and gone xx

If that is the rule, then yes people should follow it but that doesn't mean everybody will. Just the same as some people don't follow the supervise your child, or always wear socks rules. It is good in this case that the staff did enforce the rules.

I do however think the reason for the rule is stupid as it will be nothing to do with the issues the OP has and everything to do with suspecting any picture of a child will end up in the hands of a paedophile.

yabu, unless you vet everyone in there (and indeed everyone on the street you walk past) I dont see how it makes much of a difference, I mean the brothers sisters uncle of the child could be in there and recognise the child.

Someone who works in the back office of a shopping centre might know the child if they spot her on cctv

Someone at the school might know the child

etc

I go to a softplay and take pics of my own child, there are signs up asking people not to but I personally dont put any pics online so I wont stop taking the odd pic of my own DC.

True, there are many risks for us having our boy recognised in many places, and the risk gets smaller as he gets older. As I have said before, it is about managing risk which is why I want to a place that has this policy.

Frankly I'm a bit astounded how many people have said "This is a stupid rule so I'll ignore it". What has happened to consideration in our society? Do you apply this mantra to every rule you think is stupid? What about actual laws, or you do stop at criminality? Oh, I think a 20mph zone is stupid so I'll speed. Oh, I think banning mobile phone use in cars is stupid so I'll use mine anyway. Rules are there for a reason weather you like them or not. Show some consideration to those around you and follow them, or go somewhere else that doesn't have them.

I would never break the law. But I would break a no photo rule like this. I would make sure it is only my children in the photos and I don't put any photos online. So I wouldn't be putting any child at risk.

I am guessing that this isn't a straightforward adoption, so you have a genuine risk that your son might be recognised. Most people wouldn't know the birth parents
I think in the case of a regular adoption, the chances of a child being recognised are minimal.
However, I don't think that's what these photography rules are about, I think they are designed to prevent images of children from becoming available on the internet, for whatever reason.
However, them's the rules, I would never have thought about your situation before this post.

I don't think you are being unreasonable, but it must be really stressful for you, and I am sure in your situation, I would consider moving away

When I don't want myself or my DCs to be in anyone else's photo, I move us out of the way. It's easy.

I'm sure the people taking photos are only interested in pictures of their own DCs. I doubt they would tag you in them IF they were to post them online!

I dont break the law much

But I ignore this stupid rule because I personally dont present any risk (I dont share my pics online, no-one outside my very small family sees them).

I dont take the pic if another child is in the shot, not really out of consideration (because as I say I dont share my pics anywhere), more because I have no interest in an everlasting memory of someone elses chocolate covered child.

As a devil's advocate, image recognition software and net walkers are getting very good now (My photos are organised by who's in them automatically)- if someone really wanted to, it's not unlikely they could find you by some casual pic.

HOWEVER - I think that out in public that's the risk you take (not that I can see an alternative - staying indoors isn't feasible). I would like to have pics of my child at softplay, and a centre that stops me taking them will not get my business.

lostboysfallin It is a straightforward adoption but the risks are the same. You may be right about the reason for the rule.

BluddyMoFo the attitude is the same. It's a lack of consideration for others and possibly just as dangerous to me and my family.

I think you are being unreasonable, sorry.

Whatever the circumstances of your child's adoption a random photograph with your child somewhere in the background - probably not facing the camera, behind a toy, out of focus is not going to be the thing that "outs" your child to his biol. parents. In the wierd circumstance that the bio parent did recognise the child, they still don't know your names, your house, any details of your life. It's really hard to find a photo online without some identifying tag (name, school etc labelled on pic) and the stranger who took the photo won't be able to give them anything like that.

I have heard parents of children that have died always "seeing" children that they imagine look like theirs. Presumably the real bio parents might experience this all the time and be wrong... so even seeing a pic they would most likely assume this was another mistaken identity.

And for this slim chance of being recognised, you are impinging on everyone's behaviour. I agree that noone needs to take a pic, but sometimes it's the first ladder climbed, friends from afar meeting each others kids for the first time - small milestones. Or the photo may be more significant to the person taking it... in my mind it's as likely that this is the last photo of someone's own kid before a tragedy occurs (house fire, car accident, diagnosis of serious illness) than your adopted child being recognised in the background of some stranger's photo.

If your worried about it, move in front of your child, distract them to another area where there is no camera or stay home... but let other people enjoy themselves and take pics of their own kids if they want. For all you know it could be significant to them.

If someone tried to take a closeup shot of your kid, then sure whinge away, but a random shot in your vicinity is unreasonable to whinge about.

no its not just as dangerous, its YOUR responsibility to move your son out of the way if you dont want him in photos or say something to the person taking the photo, you cant enforce blanket bans on photographs in public places, life isnt like that.

you can manage the risk yourself but other parents have every right to take photos of THEIR children is they choose to do.

YANBU

Many parents dont want their children photographed in identifiable places for child protection reasons. These can relate to adoption, fostering, access, whatever. The primary school my DCs attended handled this very well (there were a lot of children who couldnt be photographed). Children were discretely moved out of the way when photographs were being taken.

I am shocked that so many people wilfully break a perfectly sensible rule. If you want to be able to photograph your children then go to a place which allows this.

Given that the rule exists, the OP should not be required to dive in and haul his son out of the way every time someone gets a mobile phone out.

Sorry I hate it when I can't take pictures of my children having fun. Trust me if your boy happened to be in the pic I would prob crop him out anyway. Having said that I only put pics of my kids on fb and never any from parties or school or with other children.

Op I will ask have you considered moving in all seriousness when he starts school people will take photos, do you really want him to have to be the only one the teacher removes before any pic.
The older he gets he will be aware of you asking...

Also I genuinely thought children weren't adopted in their local area o avoid things like this.

Jenny70 and 4madboys - I seem to be repeating this over and over. I did not set the policy at the soft play centre. I chose to go to this one because of that policy. Like TheGrimGardener says, if you want to photo your kid go somewhere that allows. Society is based on rules and people following them. If you don't agree with the rule don't break it, just go away.

seventieschick Most adoptions are through your local authority. They usually try to find a match with one of their local kids. When matching they make sure the adopter lives in another part of the authority than any birth relatives. Children are only not adopted locally if a match cannot be found.

Unfortunately we will be the ones not taking part in school pictures. As he gets older it should be less of an issue as his face changes and hopefully will not be recognisable.

Ah ok I didn't realise that I thought that it couldn't be done within your area.

School pictures wise it will only be your loss, they will just remove the child at the end so that everyone else can still take their pics. Will you also remove him from the official class picture. It's a shame that he won't have these to look back on. I would have to move many miles away I'm afraid o we old live a normal life.

That should be so we could live a normal life ...