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!

mishtake yes my 12 and 10 year olds know the danger a photo in their school uniform or area that identifies their school can bring so will step out their friends are aware and tbh respect their privacy so far [am waiting for the whole FB issues but will cross that bridge when it comes].
My 4 yro also checks with me about being in pictures, They are not the only children with child protection issues so the school already had a policy about cameras, mobile phones etc which meet our requirements and each term we send in a letter stating that they cannot be photographed without written permission from us, the scouts and sport groups they joined had similar policies to the school so we accept that we have protected the DC the best we can once people follow the rules.

I'm not so worried about public places like zoos or trips because they would be a one off. It's only places we go regularly that I'm concerned about.

IUseTooMuchKitchenRoll I have done this once before and I got asked "Why?" and then they got arsey. That's why I let a staff member remind people of their policy.

Whatmeworry - Wrong. I feel confident that info I have on here cannot lead the birth family to me. There is no way they could know that I am talking about their ex-child. A photo would do that easily. I am not going to move town as this is where our life and family and jobs are. I am managing our risk, not living in fear.

Canyou - Three of my cousins are adopted but there was nothing contentious about it and so the need to protect is not something I have ever considered in relation to adopted/fostered children. (Idiot that I am.)
I am surprised that in areas where there is significant risk from birth family that children are placed with other families in the same area.
I have never randomly included other people's kids in our photos and I never post photos online - but I will be even more circumspect in future having read of your experiences.

mishtake we have guardianship of a relations DC so it is some what unique but it kept the DC together [it should have been short term but the parent did not get the help they needed]and we have lost contact with some family to a degree because of it so we were extra wary for a long time but we are learning to manage the risk and we do relax more now and TBH the only place we are ultra strict is school and public photo's for their activities, We are lucky unlike CurlyBoy our DC are older and aware of why we do what we do.
We are in contact with most of our families again but they do not know our address but they do know the county so keeping our location as a need to know to avoid contact with those we cannot allow have access to the DC.

Frankly, nearly EVERY child adopted is at risk if it's done through your local authority. These children have been removed from their birth families against their wishes so there will be at least some risk to every placement. We are trained to manage this risk, as well as how to a child with potential issues.

I think these rules are perfectly fair. It makes me really uncomfortable when parents are snapping away knowing that the pics will almost certainly end up on FB. It has got nothing to do with me thinking that they may be a paedophile or anything like that. The reason is that I don't want my son in the background of someone else's picture just as I wouldn't want to be in the background of someone else's picture and try to avoid where possible when I'm out.

why is it almost certain that these pics will end up on facebook marmite.

Does everyone who takes pics do it solely for the purpose of posting it on facebook?
I dont even have facebook
Neither do i go round snapping pics of other peoples kids.
i would take a pic of mine, i am not interested in anyone elses children.
i think you will find i am in the majority here,

I don't put any photos on facebook, even of adults. And tbh I think adults are becoming more aware of the lack of privacy offered by fb and I know other adults who will not post photos on fb for this reason. I know quite a large number of adults who would not post photos of heir children on fb - but I am older, so don't know if that has a bearing.

Whatmeworry - Wrong. I feel confident that info I have on here cannot lead the birth family to me.

Please take my advice and get all references to your child off the internet, and never refer to him again online, especially not his adopted status and circumstances.

I have taken pics of my DS1 at soft play, BUT I do make sure he is on his own in the picture. I wouldn't take a pic with someone else's child in. Just as I wouldn't want other people taking pics with my child in.

Completely see your point of view OP, and had never thought of that reason for not taking pics before. Will bear in mind for the future!

Well the OP asked If people should follow a rule that a private establishment have applied.. Well yes they should or they can choose not to go! However, I'm surprised at the number of people who think its a 'stupid rule' actually. I assume most places who enforce it do so because they cannot be arsed with dealing with photograph issues/allegations so the easiest way is to ban it altogether.
My parents adopted my youngest DB who comes from a very violent family. They have been known to track down his foster carers in the past and issue threats and damage property. Therefore we keep his profile very low key. No photos on pegs at nursery for example, no Internet pics, no newsletter pics. It's a shame, and a pain sometimes, but definitely better than the family turning up on my parents doorstep / at DBs nursery. As a result I've always been mindful when taking pics in public. With social networking and such a free flow of information around its actually surprisingly easy to come across pics- and especially if you're actively looking as some birth families are. Many adopted children live in the same area as the birth family which automatically makes them easier to trace. You posting a pic on Facebook with an unknown child in the background could easily be seen by a friend of a friend... who might be that child's cousin's stepmothers aunt.. you never know! Degrees of separation and all that. I hear you, OP.

" It's not 'arrogant' to take photos exclusively of your own child ""

Fair enough but surely the point of this AIBU is that this is on private property where access is granted with very clearly defined rules, not something open for debate.

Photography is not allowed therefore photographing anything is not acceptable and to assume that one has the "right" to ignore the rule is in fact, arrogant.