That someone is using a made up law to stop me taking a photo of my child

[Spero]

My daughter is in her first ever drama festival. She is very proud and nervous. I want to take a photo of her. I am told I cannot due to the 'Child protection Act'. I am a family lawyer. I have never heard of this Act. Nor has Google.

So the objection is not that I may disrupt proceedings with annoying camera but that the mere act of taking an photo of my own child is somehow a child protection issue.

I am angry - not so much that I can't take a photo of my precious first born, but for what this reveals about the sloppy muddleheaded approach we seem to have about what 'child protection' really means.

AIBU to be so cross? Am contemplating stern letter of complaint. Making up legislation really isn't on.

I spend at least 10 hours a week maintaining a website to assist parents involved in care proceedings; setting out general information as to the law, signposting them to other information etc. I provide advice on appeal etc for free - that probably takes up another five hours.

If I have time, I am happy to assist with a safeguarding policy.

Please don't make snide comments about what I do or do not do with my 'vast knowledge' unless you can actually be bothered to find out what I do.

But this isn't about increasing knowledge or understanding is it? This is about some people who hide behind their keyboards and make unpleasant comments. Vast waste of time.

I have learned a lot from this thread, for which I am grateful. But what on earth is the point of all these nasty kind of digs? What positive aim will you ever secure?

But of course, that's not the point is it.

Remind them that the ASA fully supports swimming for children with disabilities and that they should have completed an assessment of need for him in consultation with you.

Number one: ASD is not considered under disabled swimming by the ASA - there is no criteria for it in their policies. He can either be included or not and is protected by the 2010 Equality Act, which I have had to evoke before now.

The CPSU advice for sharing changing rooms allows for the fact that some children may need additional support and that the other groups may be in the changing rooms at the same time. You need to make a complaint to the Club child protection or welfare officer - they can provide a work around for you, either you would need to be CRB checked, have signed up to a club code of conduct, and there would need to be a second adult present, or it can be seen as a private arrangement if you are responsible only for your own child.

But this is the point! It's an unisex changing village with individual cubicle shared by the GENERAL PUBLIC why the hell do I need a DBS (not CRB by the way) to support my OWN child? Why also do I need a second adult present to be in a public place just because some of the childrens here are members of the ASA?

I did make a complaint and they offered to do a DBS - I had three recent DBS certificates from different roles, including one which was in process of being registered - not good enough as I would need a swimming one but in the meantime they would give me 'special permissions'....

Bullshit...... Utter bullshit.... I don't need ANY of that. None of it. I am a parent, in a public place looking after my child. I appreciate that some parents interfere but THAT is NOT child protection and safeguarding should NEVER EVER be used as a convenient excuse for managing behaviour of parents.

As for DBS - all it tells you is that the person has not been caught. It does NOT guarantee safety. I teach my child protective behaviours to do go some way towards that. The ASA would be better making protective behaviour teaching mandatory for all children than making senseless policies about bloody changing rooms and poolside.

And for what it's worth.... All the nonsense has led to my son no longer swimming - the coaches were great and I could get round it at the pool he trained at but even if we got him to competitions his potential need for support could have caused him and me serious problems.

There is no law about the ages when children must use the correct sex changing room - the CPSU suggests the age of 8.

i know there is no law hence my use of 'the law' - that was what was quoted to me when I challenged it and was to,d they would call the police if I breached it.... If I went into the men's I would be seen as inappropriate and my don would be deemed inappropriate if I took him in the ladies....

But you live in your little dream wor,d that it's ok Squirrel - it's not though

I was at an event yesterday where it stated repeatedly that there would be photographs taken.
Those of us wanting to take them for our own purposes had to be careful not to include children's faces unless we had clearance and authorisation forms.
It was easy to comply with
but hundreds of people were taking pictures and I have no idea how careful others were

blanket bans are NOT a constructive approach

As for DBS - all it tells you is that the person has not been caught. It does NOT guarantee safety. I teach my child protective behaviours to do go some way towards that. The ASA would be better making protective behaviour teaching mandatory for all children than making senseless policies about bloody changing rooms and poolside

Exactly. That's why I am so annoyed. All this flim-flannel waffle about the Human Rights Act/other irrelevant Acts in a child protection policy diverts the time and energy away from doing things that would actually make a different to keeping children safe.

Sorry need to add that he is also covered by the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) - have used that too in the past.

No, the 1999 Act set up the list of unsuitable persons for CRB checks - you know the ones that the volunteers need to go through? Nothing to do with indecent photographs, you seem to have got muddled up with an earlier act with the same name. Only the 1999 Act is stated on the safeguarding policy.

I am not muddled. I know what Acts are listed in the policy and the Act that was in the announcement.

Do please tell me - seriously. I want to learn. I want to know.

What section of the 1999 Act will assist in the formulation of a child protection policy at an event when parents want to photograph their own children?

If you can't or won't tell me, do you accept I may have just a teensy weeny point?

You are wasting your breath with some people though Spero - I have challenged this crap but my friends think I am bonkers... Yet interestingly they either have children the same sex as them and / or have children who develop at age expected rates thus the considerations have not been necessary for them.

As my son has become older and the gap has widened it has truly opened my eyes and it's frightening that it is some of the child protection policies invoked by organisations that put him most at risk.

OP, I hope you'll be gracious enough to concede that the sarcastic and dismissive manner in which you've responded to many posters on here who have had the temerity to disagree with you will inevitably result in some of them replying in kind.

Haven't read the whole thread, but I imagine that the NO PHOTO rule is part of the Child Protection Policy, not Act.

I am sure, working with vulnerable children, you are aware there has been a huge increase of adopted or looked after children accessing birth parents through social media with often disastrous consequences.

If the blanked ban can help prevent that happen, surely you can be understanding that you are welcome to take a photo of your own child outside of the festival, and therefore leaving the organisers less to do than to police possible infringements of this policy and thus putting the whole festival at risk of closure?

Totally agree myonly and really don't get the OPs concern/aggression about it. If you're not happy, pull your child out of the festival and move on with your life

Suburban - I accept I am sarcastic. I don't accept I am dismissive.

I certainly don't accept that anything I have said or done has merited some of the frankly over the top and abusive responses I got.

And it remains a source of sadness to me that there is still a strong minority of people on the internet who behave in this way.

MyoneandYoni - sorry, thread has moved on a bit from that. I accept the concerns about identification of vulnerable children. That is not what I am complaining about and that is not how the protection policy in this particular instance (and in many others) is framed.

what an enjoyable coffee break that was! You are right Tinklypink, sometimes I have to think more carefully about the energy I expend with my typing fingers as it has clearly been wasted for the last page or so.

...as flowergirlmum so aptly demonstrates....

No wonder its o so easy to sleep walk into disaster. Because none of this matters does it? foolish me. I will just get on with my life. And hope no one with any power ever points their misguided lack of understanding in my direction.

Flowergirl

All well and good to 'pull them out' but when you have a child that struggles to access things then you are suddenly at a disadvantage. Anything we do is very precious - it takes a lot of work for him to access anything so it's not that easy....

But you too carry on in your Ivory tower unaffected by the issues of people who are vulnerable to exclusion or harm....

It's a drama festival Spero, probably run by volunteers who got the wording wrong. The principle is what matters and they were entirely right to request no photos should be taken.

Tinkly you're correct in that ASD cannot get a disability classification for competition (there are very few non physical disabilities that can be classified - although Jessica-Jane Applegate for instance has an S14 classification), but your son would still come under the ASA's disability definition for requiring additional support.

I'm sorry that your club hasn't been able to accommodate him, others would but I guess that option that would depend on whether there is a suitable alternative club within travelling distance.

Ticklypink I think you may have misunderstood my comment which was referring to ops post about photographs??

Spero You're right, this thread is going round in circles. We will just have to agree to differ on the interpretation of whether the photo ban is due to safeguarding or not.

I certainly don't accept that anything I have said or done has merited some of the frankly over the top and abusive responses I got.

Well, you must be completely blameless, then.

I don't think Spero is dismissive.

I like the idea that there are people who say: 'This is what the law says, and anything else it doesn't say, you can do.'

Otherwise, what's the point of having laws if people are going to make it up as they go along?

Squirrelled

There should be no JUSTIIATION for a club not accommodating him - he simply did not cope and there is very little support from anyone, even the ASA.

As for your local club hopes - every other club in the local area has communal changing rooms which I would not be able to enter unless I volunteered, was DBS checked and then was on rota to support all the children. I was already travelling 8 miles from home to the nearest unisex changing village the next nearest is 16 miles away.

My son is an extremely talented swimmer and I get the impression that his failure to you is collateral damage in the fight for greater good - it's just a shame that you don't understand that the fight is entirely out of context and thatthe policies written are creating barriers to inclusion and preventing the safeguarding of children.

Flower girl - I didn't misunderstand at all - your opinion is if a parent doesn't like a policy or how things are run then they should shut up, find another event & move the hell on. I was pointing out that it is not that easy and actually by not raising it you just make then you make it worse for the lone voices who ARE trying to protect those are vulnerable and at risk of exclusion.

By the way, I am one of those unpaid volunteers that spends hundreds of hours every year ensuring that children can enjoy and participate in sport and fulfill their potential. I am quite familiar with how safeguarding works, and how photography issues can be handled. We don't have a blanket ban on photographs, but there are guidelines to be followed.

And I don't appreciate throwaway comments about leering at children in swimsuits.

Well Squirrel I am sure there is a law somewhere you can rely upon?

The Inappropriate Joke (Immediate Imprisonment) Act 2015 maybe?

I don't appreciate living in a culture where every adult interaction with a child now comes tainted with the spectre of that adult being sexually aroused by said child... but hey. We don't always get what we want.

Are you going to answer my question about the 1999 Act btw?

I have to leave shortly for another festival - o joy! - so this whole thing will no doubt start up again.