Son's teacher asking me to vary privacy preferences

[DustBunnyFarmer]

My son's teacher (primary) caught me outside school this morning and initiated conversation about whether I would agree to her posting a video of the whole class made during a recent topic on the school website so all the parents could enjoy it. She said there had been a few other parents who'd signed a 'no photos' clause like us that she'd had to speak to, but I was the only one left

DH and I expressed preference for no photos in school publicity/on web when both of our boys started. There was a reason for this (family issue), but also we guard our online privacy jealously. We don't facebook, twitter or photoshare and have spoken to relatives about plastering pictures of our kids all over their FB account with their full names in the past.

AIBU to think that, if a parent has clearly expressed a view on this, the school - or an isolated teacher in this case - should not be trying to renegotiate and definitely not by tring to guilt 'the last man standing'?

For info, the video would not be posted in a password protected area - it would be on the main website, open for the whole world to see.

[TrueStory]

i think ok to ask again - but saying" its just you" is a kond of pressure. just decline again

[carabos]

Agree with others who have said that the solution to this was to make sure that the no photos children weren't videoed in the first place. Having not thought that through properly, the teacher should be kicking herself, not trying to retrospectively get parents to change their minds.

It is important that you hold your ground, because if you don't then it's the thin end of the wedge and next time, same thing will happen on the grounds that well it was ok last time...

[mummytime]

I think it was fine to ask.

I did the same in Infants because I wasn't willing to sign the form with the wording used. I did get a Mum from the PTA who was shocked when I told her that no I stood by my decision and didn't want my DDs photo in the school cook book.

[phantomnamechanger]

I do agree that the teacher went about this in the wrong way, and should take no for an answer. Personally unless there were concerns for the child's safety, then a video in which their individual face is not linked to their name, i dont see as an issue. I also think it is NOT POSSIBLE to completely prevent the odd thing getting through the net - you may be in a crowd scene on the TV news or in the paper, without even knowing, for example. So its a good thing they did ask.

OP, what about parties etc your child goes to? do you inform parents they must not show photos or clips from these around to people you do not know? not post them online anywhere?

what was your child's role in the play - was it something that will be played over and over again when he's a celeb/the PM?

[comingalongnicely]

The teacher asked, you said no. End of.

As to those complaining about her asking at the school gates, would you be happier if the mum had been summoned to the classroom, staff room etc? Surely that would have put even more pressure on? I think the informal setting of the school gates emphasises that it wasn't a major deal.

[ParsingFancy]

Facebook is already using face recognition software to for "Tag suggest", and is considering expanding that to suck in profile pics.

What it means is that if you have a pic of someone, you can upload it and there will be a good (and increasing) chance Facebook will tell you who they are.

There's another site you can upload to which searches the whole web, but I can't remember its name.

Similarly, if you know a name but don't know what the person looks like or where they are, the chance of finding them on Facebook is increasing. Because even if they're careful about the security of their own page, they may be named in someone else's Facebook pics. I haven't used "tag suggest" so don't know how it presents to users, but if someone accepts all the tag suggestions eventually this will mean naming passers-by in the street, never mind all the other children in the class photo.

[HappyMummyOfOne]

I think teachers cant win whatever they do. Dont ask and parents kick off that little Johnny missed out or follow the parents wishes and still get moaned at (christmas play thread).

I see nothing wrong with the teacher asking, i ticked no on the form but they ask on odd occasions if i mind and i have said yes to a few. Form only has yes or no so very restrictive.

[FreckledLeopard]

I suppose it's annoying for the teacher, and presumably the other parents who might like a video of their children performing, that your 'principles' are preventing this, for no reason other than a paranoia about privacy. Safeguarding issues I can understand, but given you've admitted there are no such issues, then I don't see why your children's privacy is so much more important than any other child's in that class, all of whose parents have presumably consented to a video.

I'm afraid I can't see the problem myself. Unless you dress your children in full-face veils everytime you leave the house, you have no control over anyone else taking a photo of them and using that image. Your children could be playing in a park, a stranger could take their photo and put it online and you have no say in the matter because you don't own the copyright. So why be so difficult when it's a school matter, who I assume are making a video that a lot of parents, grandparents etc would enjoy, but you are kicking up a fuss about?

[MikeOxard]

OP you go on about them having no idea the reason for you saying no photos in the first place, so why can't you understand that some people might change their mind or be ok with a group video without names? Why is it such an affront that she asked? She's not a teacher not a bloody psychic. YAB arsey, if the answer is no, just say no ffs.

[TeenAndTween]

I think the teacher WNBU to ask, and YWNBU to reject.

We have a no photos policy for our DDs, but have always told the teacher, that if it will cause complications for them then they are to ask us, and on a case by case basis we will review.

Mainly, the teacher was foolish not to have checked before videoing. It would often be possible during an activity to tactfully group the non-photo children together and then not film them (or edit them out).

Our school manages no photos with numerous children, eg. after nativity play, they send a few children back to class first, then the photographer takes the picture for the local paper.

[Pachacuti]

I don't think it's unreasonable of her to ask -- partly because, as you yourself said, the school has absolutely no idea why a person has ticked the box and hence whether this is the sort of video that they would object to or something they'd be perfectly happy with in spite of ticking the "no photos" box. But it should be in a "just clarifying" way rather than any kind of attempt to guilt you into agreeing. And they should absolutely have filmed the video in the knowledge of who the "no photos" children were so that they could edit together a video that didn't include them.

[RaspberryRuffle]

YANBU OP, and the teacher should have asked you before filming started so your child and any other (bit cynical as to whether you are the 'last one') could have been edited out.

I don't like the idea of pixelating a particular child's face, it draws attention to them.

You are not being difficult, you are protecting your children as you see fit and I would do the same.
There don't have to be any other reasons than that. As soon as your DC is in the video/school photos you can do nothing about other parents posting them online.

I think it would be good idea for schools to do an annual check of parents'/guardians' preferences for this, say in October (before Christmas play season) and if there is no reply keep the previous year's answer as the norm.

[phantomnamechanger]

trouble is, OP would probably not be happy for her kids to be left out of such activities either, so ALL the kids have to miss out on these experiences, or have no photographic/video record of them, at least. Wont be long before there are no nativity plays or sports days any more because of the whole internet/ID thing!

[WorrySighWorrySigh]

Completely badly organised by the teacher. Permission could have been sought up front and if not available then the activity should have been planned around those children who could not be published.

My DCs' primary school had a large number of children who were not allowed to be filmed/photographed. The Bursar used to look after the list, she was a genius in action. Children would be moved in and out of groups and never knew what had happened it was so subtly done!

[Echocave]

Given the relatively small number of children to whom the privacy setting apply and the seriousness of the reasons behind it, I think the teacher's out of order.
I also totally agree that they should have thought about the issue of including children under privacy agreements before they made the video. The way the teacher pressurised you about it (its just you left etc) is also unacceptable.
This teacher needs reminding why people make these choices rather than seeing it as an obstacle to their perfect lesson etc. If you are asked this again in relation to this or any other project, I would speak to the head teacher.

[SoupDragon]

I do not see the problem with her asking provided she doesn't harass you.

Out of interest, how would you feel if they provided each child with a DVD with the video on?

[SoupDragon]

The teacher may have thought it worth checking as it may just have been clear images of your child that you objected to (as may have been the case with the other parents who said this video was OK). She may have thought you'd be OK with group shots where your child is not clearly identifiable.

[DustBunnyFarmer]

Soupdragon - I would be more comfortable with this because all of the parents have a legitimate interest, rather than open to everyone with web access, but some donut would probably upload it to youtube so there's no difference really.

In response to what everyone has said about spoiling it for everyone else, first of all (setting aside legislative constraints) if you were the only smoker in an office of twenty smokers, do you think that one non-smoker should just suck it up to keep the smokers happy? Since when did seeing what our kids get up to in a normal school day ( note: not a play) a right?

[DustBunnyFarmer]

That should have said "become a right"

[pixiepotter]

Hopefully they can pixelate him out and then it won't spoil it for everyone else and next time they will just leave him out of the performance I guess
YABU, awkward and precious IMO.

[lljkk]

Out of curiousity, genuine question, but do you take your kid out in public with a mask on? If they were in a crowd scene at a big public event would you be outraged to see their recognisable photo in the paper later or in the background on telly news coverage?

I just don't get this privacy thing about one's image.

DS was flag-bearer at a scout-swearing-in ceremony. I took loads of pictures of DS as proud parent but later I deleted many and the video because the girl being sworn in, her mother had clicked no image sharing on all the forms (I asked the leader if he thought there would be a problem & he asked me not to use them because he didn't want to be blamed since it was a formal scout event even if I was in effect, just a standing-around member of the public on the quayside). So I just deleted them rather than take a chance on where i might show them later. I couldn't possibly keep track of which video had to be treated in a super special private way. Still seemed like a shame.

[WorrySighWorrySigh]

From what I understand of CP reasons for not publishing images is that photos/videos in school place individual children very accurately in a particular location. This can be a huge issue where a child is being adopted, fostered or where there is a risk of abduction.

Just being photographed out in the street may well be less of an issue as it is more anonymous.

I do remember there was a thread a little while ago where a poster was concerned about photographs being taken in a soft play centre which didnt allow photographs. The OP was concerned because of issues surrounding his son's adoption. He had chosen the particular soft play centre because it didnt allow photography.

[Mojavewonderer]

She asked and you said no so what's the problem?
Have you never heard of 'If you don't ask, you don't get'.

[NicknameIncomplete]

This happened to me last year.

I had requested no photos of my dd. One day the head phoned me up and said that the school had made a film about something and the local news were interested in it. She said that she didnt know what piece of clip the news were going to show but it may contain images of my dd. She asked for my permission to show it.

I gave my permission because the problems we have are not local. The news didnt show the film in the end.

I didnt see a problem with the head teacher asking because it was the first and only time that she has asked in five years of my dd being at the school. So i didnt see it as her disrespecting my wishes.

[TiredDog]

I think you have every right to refuse. And should not be badgered. In my workplace adults have to sign a disclaimer if a photograph of them is likely to be published.

It's ironic that every single event at school is prefaced by the headmistress telling us we cannot use images on Facebook etc and then plastering her own images of our kids where she sees fit!

I was looking at Twitter the other day and found a governor had used a picture from an event on Twitter advertising his connection with the 'school' yet parents are categorically and specifically told they cannot. Nuts