to think THIS is why you shouldn't complain if you can't take pictures of your DC on stage in their nativity play

[Wolfbasher]

There's always a few threads this time of year complaining about schools that have a 'no photo' rule at the nativity play.

Some children need to be protected from having their image spread around, because there are unpleasant people trying to find them. This was one.

BBC link

Obviously there's no suggestion that it was a school photo that helped this particular abuser to track down this mother and child. But there are children in UK schools today who are at this kind of risk. I just don't get why people think their right to bob about taking blurry pictures/video during a performance trumps another family's safety. Take your picture of your child in costume before/after the performance. You don't need to record every second of it.

We didn't have video cameras when i was a child and i am really not scarred by not having a recording of my second-angel-on-left debut.

soverylucky

Could it be that these school pictures either feature your own child, or are group photos that have been carefully policed to not feature the child(ren) at the school who are at risk?

It seems to me if a school or a village hall or anywhere else is putting on a play it has a perfect right to tell viewers (can't think of the right name for people viewing a play - the audience!!) not to take photos full stop. That is the case in the cinema and theatre and certain art exhibitions, and probably most swimming pools and London underground.

Why should anyone feel they have a right to capture an image of their child alongside anyone else or do as they like with the images. If the school has a rule, no photos, parents should respct it, and so should pupils. Is there an idea that parents and students just do whatever they like and choose which rules to stick to?

Yes, it may well be hard to enforce a no camers/phone filming or whatever. but it is not impossible and parents who use cameras might expect to be asked to leave. If parents understood the issue I would hope they would be happy to take a photo of their child dressed as a shepherd or the Christmas octopus before or after the play.

I was 'told off' for photographing clothing in a supermarket to show to someone! I stopped doing it. I had not realised the shop would not want me to! But once told, I stopped. Is it really so hard for parents and others to see that children's safety could be put at risk if they appear in pictures on the Intranet? Especially pictures linked to a certain school. Totally identifying.

The massive bulk of photos we have (I have) acquired over the last few decades may well not end up being viewed by us or anyone else (speaking for myself here!) as I am so busy taking photos of my loved ones, no time to look at them!

Parents who, for whatever reason, do not want their kids photo to go out where they cannot control who sees the image will almost certainly choose for their child not to be in a class photo. Sad for their child and for them. My son is adopted and this is what we will have to do. But really missing out on a photo session once a year is no real hardship. Not being able to be in the play or other school events because parents want to take photos of the play is a different thing!

Children at risk or who don't have signed consent forms do not appear in class photos.

The school will know who those children are.

You won't.

At my sons last school, where there were a high number of looked after children and children at risk, parents received regular letters home saying that if they were caught putting other children's photos on social media then the police would be involved.

That is why my DD is on facebook with a nickname rather than actual name. that seems sensible, but how does it stop a friend mentioning on her facebook that she has a friend called so and so?

I was making the point that people mentioning names of classmates must be much more risker than blurry photos. I know about facial recognition, but it only works that well in Hollywood films. Especially as we're talking about someone who hasn't seen the person they are looking for in a while and they have grown/changed.

OwlCapone if you had read the thread you would have seen someone mention something that someone else had once said one time that this might have been how they were found.

.Dad knows mums parents live in somewhere particular where there are three primary schools.
He starts looking up people who live in that area. He might add a few as friends or just use the ones who have everything public. He invests a few hours into scouring photos around Christmas time in the hope that someone posts a nativity photo.

Or he simply goes and stands down the road from each school for 20mins and spots her on the 1st,2nd or 3rd try.

Sorry to pick your post. There are a lot in a similar vein.

Sometimes people who do not want to be found change their names. I am not sure how often children tell people their friends' full names. It is a risk. Of course. IMHO very few people have totally identifying first names but we are all unique to look at.

I am not sure you can ban people talking!

But you can tell people not to take photos of school plays.

Yeah, let's wait for women and children to be abused before we put in measures to prevent it.

It was an example. Dad could do the same with somewhere with twenty or thirty schools. Social media may help him do it from miles away or another country. It may help him reduce the number of days he has to loiter outside schools.

He could do it for several towns or cities not knowing which his children have moved to. He could do it for months. Social media and people being selfish with pictures they upload could make it a lot easier for him especially if hasn't got the money to travel to them all.

Surely the fact that there are many ways for people to find children or adults who are at risk does not mean we should fail to protect children in the simplest way possible.

In defence of parents filming and photographing children in assemblies and plays (when they are allowed to by the school): I think it is perfectly reasonable and acceptable for parents to want to record their child's performance, whether it is for their own enjoyment in 20 yrs time or to show the other parent who was prevented from being there or whatever. You have no idea why people are recording the event- you don't know if the parent they are going to show it too could get time off work or is ill or deployed. People don't just record things for sharing with their 900 "friends" on FB.

Obviously if the school has a policy of no photos/ videos then their shouldn't be any. But if they are allowed, I do t think parents who take them should be judged.

Oh, and that's before you get into the topic of those "help me find so and so" pages. A man pretends to be a dad whos had his children "kidnapped" by his ex. Posts a pic of them. Someone remembers seeing the same child in a nativity photo their friend uploaded. They tell the man. He finds them.

It's a school play. All quite cute and all, but not exactly an earth-shattering must-see. (And I speak as someone who enjoys school plays and has helped out at them - and has also had to miss some because of work.) It's not an inalienable right to see your child playing the Third Innkeeper. Whereas there is a recognisable risk; and there's also an equal chance that some kids/parents will feel v uneasy and unhappy about this even if in reality they aren't tracked down by a violent ex or other dodgy situation.

It is a risk. Of course.

Italiangreyhound, you see that names are a risk too, but sensibly decide that this is such an unlikely risk that it can be discounted in practical terms. And you are right of course. If someone is in a position to find out the full name from a classmate they probably have six easier ways to find their target.

does not mean we should fail to protect children in the simplest way possible.

But it's not the simplest way possible. People have cameras and photo albums for a reason. They want to take pictures of events to preserve that memory. The argument here is that even if it doesn't really reduce the risk very much we may as well ban it anyway since they don't matter.

The simplest way probably includes giving them a mask or beard or something as part of their costume. That also avoids the chance of someone in the audience recognising them. You don't want them going home and saying "I saw your cousin's, sister's kid playing jesus in the play"

Anyone want to suggest that to their school?

People would probably find nativity plays easier to remember if they focused on them, rather than viewing the whole thing through a tablet screen (while blocking every other parent's view, natch).

Just sayin'.

Oh I agree with that bit. I'd like to see it filmed/photographed by one person and then shared rather than all the parents jumping up and down.

Having escaped an abusive situation I understand the need to protect vulnerable children and although it is nice to have a photo of DS I won't facebook or otherwise share anything with other kids in unless I have agreed it with their parent/career eg for DS's parties.

At our school they ask before the show whether anyone objects to photos/film being taken. They also ask parents not to put anything online.

I agree not everything has to be recorded. However, not all parents can get time off to watch their children in school shows. My DH can never get time off unless he books the whole day off which is pointless for a half hour show so I record bits on my phone so he can watch it at home with the kids. If I didn't then he'd never get to see anything that the kids do at school.

I've never seen any photos/videos o our school shows online unless its been a photo of a friends child taken after the show.

Every year I post on this subject. If you think you know me or recognise my story PLEASE don't out me.

My dc are 'no photo kids'. And yes I am well aware that I am a killjoy (as I have been called in the past).

And no photos means exactly that. No photos taken by anyone else but school staff, and photos and their names NEVER published anywhere

Because I have someone who has turned seeing my children into an obsession of theirs not DH, he is downstairs washing up!

And has gone to extraordinary lengths to do so. Involving such activities as canvassing my employers to get my name/address, canvassing the clients I work with to do the same, standing outside schools in my area to see if any info can be gained (my dc are educated out of area because of this), and trawling anyone on fb with a connection to my local area.

And on one occasion got lucky. It was a picture of me stood behind one of my dc at a birthday party that shouldn't have been posted.

This person has made threats which are believed to be credible to take my dc from their school 'as they have a right to see them'. Aka kidnap.

So to anyone who thinks that they have a right to video/film/photograph their dc in a Childs play at school, and then post said media on social media/show around work/to their next door neighbour 'because who can identify children from a blurry picture' its not ok, and could have extremely serious consequences.

As for class photos, my dc don't even appear in these.

Yes OP I see your point. I know of a child in my son's class who isn't allowed in school photos for a similar reason. However, for school nativities, his mother has asked that his face be obscured at all times (I.e wearing a mask) so she doesn't have to worry about patents taking videos or photos. I think this is such a sensible idea. Because even if the school imposed a no photos/video rule, there's bound to be one idiot who takes a sneaky pic.

This has never been an issue, either at my children's schools or where I teach. Sledgehammer to crack a nut, if you ask me. Do we arrange our lives around worst case scenarios, or likely things to happen? We argue that we should not be intimidated by men who see women in short skirts as potential rape victims, that we should be able to wear what we like without being blamed for any aggression that results. Surely, photographing children is similar. We should not have our freedom to photograph our kids, sometimes in group settings, curtailed by dangerous men. Women and children should be protected by the law from vengeful exes, not by curtailing the freedoms of other families.

Rose

Is it just women and children you are going to dismiss there, or the whole concept of witness protection as a whole?

I have to say, without the existence of witness protection, I can only foresee the law becoming less able to protect anyone.

Cast them as donkeys and give'em a mask.
Problem solved

'some parents are so selfish that their photo of their precious child is far more important than a risk to another child'

If they don't share it, how is that selfish?