Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think this woman overreacted?

112 replies

Theluckiestagain · 14/12/2014 19:45

Took dcs to see Santa today. Think 'naice' middle-class, National Trust type venue. Was ticketed so we turned up at the allotted time with approx 20 other kids & respective parents / grandparents.

They usher us in to a room, kids sit on floor, adults on chairs around room. So far, so lovely. Kids all very excited. Most adults taking pics of their kids and Santa. A woman then pipes up VERY loudly 'Do NOT take pictures of my child!!' to an older guy across the room. The man says that he was just taking pics of his granddaughter not the woman's child. She says, very aggressively 'I do NOT give you permission to take photos of my child!!! Stop it immediately!!'

The bloke taking pics looked very bemused and reiterated that he was taking a pic of his grandchild. To be honest, it was very dark in the room and judging by the angle, he would probably have got the back of his grandchild's head. The woman's child wasn't really in shot. He said this and the woman just shouted at him more. He got rather upset, said he was leaving before he got cross then it all looked like it was kicking off. My DH (ever the peacemaker) said that they were spoiling what should be a lovely event for the kids, couldn't we act like adults? The older man left to find his wife, visibly upset and angry. The shouty woman then sat looking like someone had taken a shit in her handbag for the whole event.

There was a horrible, strained atmosphere until Santa stepped up and then it was all about the kids anyway.

Now, before you say it, I immediately thought about adoption/child protection issues (I work in a school, this is par for the course). But this woman was so aggressive, seemed like she just wanted a fight. She turned a lovely, innocent event into a near bloody fight.

The event guide actually thanked DH for diffusing the situation afterwards but I felt really sorry for the older bloke. I saw him and his family outside later....he looked bloody angry and shook up. The shouty lady was seen leaving her kids (aged about 9 and 6) to charge around unattended while she had a mulled wine and listened to carols.

I have just realised how dreadfully middle class this is, but if I'm honest, I immediately thought of MN when this happened. Who was BU in this situation?

OP posts:
aermingers · 14/12/2014 22:20

God, it's not that hard to know how to respond. 'Okay, I will not take a picture of your child'. She hadn't bloody assaulted him.

Look I know people who are in this situation. After the court case people found pictures of the child concerned on the social media accounts of some of the people involved in the case who had been jailed. Even after the accounts were deactivated they still remained online on other sites which held cached accounts of the social media account pictures. There were a lot of very odd people following that case and it was very distressing for them that this child was seen and his anonimity compromised.

It really, genuinely is a problem for some people and the consequences of a child being tracked down are just too dire to risk taking any chances.

If someone asks you not to take a picture of their child the only acceptable response is 'Okay, I will not take a picture of your child.' She asked him to stop, she didn't ask nicely which was wrong. But she had every right to ask and for him just to dismiss her by saying 'I am taking photos of my grandchild was wrong'. If he had said 'I'm taking photographs of my grandchild but I will make sure that your child is not in the picture' I would think he had a point. But he dismissed her and basically gave the impression that he would continue taking pictures of his grandchild regardless of whether or not her child was pictured.

ThereIsAPartridgeInTheKitchen · 14/12/2014 22:22

God, it's not that hard to know how to respond.

It is for some people.

puntasticusername · 14/12/2014 22:23

But could the child have been famous, perhaps?

YANBU; if you are out in public, there is a reasonable expectation that your child might get into the back of someone else's photos. If you aren't comfortable with that "risk", you don't take the child out in public. If you think your child has inadvertently appeared prominently in someone's photos, then it might be appropriate to politely approach the person who took the photos and have a discussion about it.

ThereIsAPartridgeInTheKitchen · 14/12/2014 22:26

Also I don't think anyone has said that she didn't have the right to tell him not to take pictures. It's the way she went about it that people are objecting to and think is unreasonable.

Rainbunny · 14/12/2014 22:51

I"m curious. Wouldn't this venue (commercial not private since people are paying to see Santa) be viewed as a public space? I live in the States where it is clearly established that you have no expectation of privacy in a public space such as this, her "permission" would be meaningless here. Is this not the case back in the UK?

RubberDuck · 14/12/2014 23:02

Technically, commercial places are private property. Photographers have fallen foul of this in, for example, shopping malls. Note: it's not permission from the parent you need, it's permission from the landowner. However, if using the image commercially most agencies will also require a model release (which in the event of a minor would have to be signed by the parent or guardian).

There are also additional harassment laws regarding multiple photos of one person and anti-terrorism laws - neither of which apply in this instance.

puntasticusername · 14/12/2014 23:04

Partridge er, yes. I said exactly that. Also, what rainbunny said.

RubberDuck · 14/12/2014 23:05

This is an excellent overview of the law in the uk regarding photography: www.sirimo.co.uk/2009/05/14/uk-photographers-rights-v2/

ThereIsAPartridgeInTheKitchen · 14/12/2014 23:06
Confused
Rainbunny · 14/12/2014 23:11

Thanks RubberDuck, that's very interesting. Quite different from here then!

vanessalightyear · 14/12/2014 23:16

Genuine question re the child protection angle; how does appearing in the background of a random strangers photo increase the risk to the child? I realise I must be missing something but I don't quite understand.

vestandknickers · 14/12/2014 23:29

Sorry.

The shouty woman was me.

I'm Angelina Jolie, but don't tell anyone.

I was a bit jumpy because my child is famous.

Can't believe nobody picked up on that.

Original poster
Theluckiestagain · 14/12/2014 23:30

Well, I go away for a bit and when I return, I've missed some lively debate!!!

Ok. So yes, it was a rather middle class venue & occasion. Not that important but didn't expect anything to kick off.. in fact, when we left another parent got chatting and couldn't believe the fuss from this woman either. I also actually said to DH that we must tell Mumsnet...

I just think she was very rude. DH and I agreed that she may have had her reasons but there are more reasonable ways of politely letting your feelings known...

And sorry to disappoint..there was not the hint of fame! Definitely not a Beckham..or this wee chap...www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/14/prince-george-christmas-photos

To think this woman overreacted?
OP posts:
aermingers · 14/12/2014 23:51

It increases the risk to a child because photos often don't stay private these days. If a photo goes on Facebook they could be seen and recognised and someone who is a danger to them could discover which area they are in and potentially who they are living with. The chances of it happening might be quite remote, but if there a is a chance it might expose a child (or their carer) to the risk of kidnap, violence or a foster placement being abandoned you just wouldn't take the chance.

I know often people who have a problem with this are victims of domestic abuse who have had to flee to new areas to start new lives away from abusers. It would just take one mate of the ex to see a picture on Facebook for them to find out the new area their victim is in and they would be a hell of a lot closer to tracking them down. That could mean a victim having to flee again, uproot their children and lose employment or accommodation. Which is probably a hell of a lot harder than simply agreeing not to get a child in shot when you're taking pictures.

SoleSource · 15/12/2014 00:11

She overrated the fookin lunatic.

i would have battered her in the car park.

Nanny0gg · 15/12/2014 00:21

The shouty lady was seen leaving her kids (aged about 9 and 6) to charge around unattended while she had a mulled wine and listened to carols.

That doesn't seem to imply that she was worried about child protection as I presume people could be gleefully taking photos to their hearts' content and she wouldn't have noticed.

PhaedraIsMyName · 15/12/2014 00:31

Perfectly legal to photograph someone else child without permission anyway

It is. Obviously if asked not to is a different matter. The NT venue is a private place to which members of the public may take access subject to whatever rules the venue has, including whether or not one can take photos. In some NT venues you may well not be permitted but that will be more to do with not allowing flash photography which can cause damage than privacy.

LoisHatesChristmas · 15/12/2014 00:42

solesource
Grin
She should have asked nicely op. yanbu.

DixieNormas · 15/12/2014 00:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ClumsyFool · 15/12/2014 00:55

I get that people have real reasons for not wanting their children's pictures taken, as mentioned by other posters. However, if someone thought it was acceptable to shout at me and be so rude then I wouldn't feel the need to respond particularly politely. So you don't want your kid photographed, fine, be polite and discreetly speak to the person taking photos or remove your child, don't be an arsehole and try to humiliate someone.

Kaekae · 15/12/2014 01:08

I would have shouted at her back, silly cow. No one would ever dare try to prevent me from taking a photo of my children. I always try to angle my camera away from other kids because I actually don't want them ruining my photos! She needed a good shove off that high horse.

DixieNormas · 15/12/2014 01:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FlourArranger · 15/12/2014 09:03

But it wasn't a random kid. It was a famous kid.

Ifyourawizardwhydouwearglasses · 15/12/2014 09:09

i would have battered her in the car park.

This nearly made me spit my tea! Grin

She was BU.

But have you considered that the child could have been famous?

invisibleperson · 15/12/2014 09:19

My DD just went on an art trip to a gallery where they all had to take photos of art works for their coursework, all OKed with gallery. Now she's no great photographer and it was busy loads of her photos have random children walking in front of artworks. She came back with loads of photos of unknown kids....the thought of her experiencing this woman at any point of the day makes me shudder!