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.

Because if the op sits in the theatre with a camera in her hand, countess, nobody can actually police who's picture she's taking. Same goes for every other member of the audience who will also be allowed in with cameras.

Because then other selfish self involved parents will then use it an excuse to then start taking photos, it can't be one rule especially for Sperro. The only way this sort of rule works is a blanket ban.

That was @ londonrach

I suspect the real reason for this might be that the school want to sell photos/video.

I'm finding it difficult to believe so many people are missing the answer to this.

If they let one parent take pictures of a child, it's harder to prevent people mid performance whipping out their own phones and cameras and deciding to take shots of group performance.

So while OP taking a picture doesn't put anyone at risk at that exact moment in time, the fact that a lot of people will get the hump and take pictures of whoever is on stage with their children does put children at risk.

I am not yet bored enough to read entire Children and Families Act but glance down list of contents reveals nothing about photography or any related area. Perhaps you could help me with the particular section?

I am alarmed to think some people think I am putting children at risk of death by taking a photograph of my child. Could you explain that link a little better so I can understand? Seems a bit far fetched to me.

Only in the UK is it deadly to children to have their photos taken while at school. NO other country I know of seems to have a problem with it.
Funny that...UK, land of the pointless rules.

Put a child's life in danger? By taking a photo? Oh FFS.

YANBU to object to the quoting of a non existent law but YABU in not accepting the common sense reasons that may have lead up to it and complying.

Eg, drama festival has some children for whom child protection is a real concern and who cannot safely be photographed. The options are a) trying to keep certain children out of all group photos (leading to those children being upset, separated and even more noticeable), b) trying to police a system where everyone can only take a photo of their own children (cameras snapping everywhere, parents insisting it's only their child in shot, arguments about if she can photograph her child why can't I? etc) or having a blanket no photo policy for everyone.

Although quoting the 'Child Protection Act ' may be the result of muddled thinking, the request is clearly for child protection reasons and perhaps you are muddling things further by taking issue with a technicality and not the spirit of the request.

Of course YANBU. Mass hysteria at its best on this thread. I'd take a photo if I were you (subtly, so as not to disturb anyone else) and if challenged, mention the fact you're a barrister, know the law pretty bloody well, and ask them to explain quite what law you're breaking?

This is an Drama festival. Each child is on stage alone for five minutes. No one else is flogging photos.

I get a ban might just be easiest for the organisers but the fact they are ignorant or making up the the legal basis for their actions makes me seriously worried about any children they are charged with protecting.

I think it is a blanket ban to be extra careful. Imagine a mum is taking a few photos of her child, snap snap snap. The next performer starts to come on stage and is caught on the edge of an image the mum has taken. She whacks it on fb because this other child is only right on the edge and it's surely fine, and then a child who is adopted or who has fled D&V with parent and in hiding is spotted on said fb and found ... It's not hard to understand that it may happen. Child waiting in the wings could show up in background of photo etc. it is much much safer to have a blanket ban on ALL photographs because the implications of a child that should be protected being found are incredibly serious!

Imagine if everyone was taking pictures. It would ruin the show for people wanting to, y'know, watch it.

If I were you I would approach them to see if you can take a photo after the show.

As an aside (and as you haven't given all the info on the show) there are also restrictions placed on photography/video recording of licenced shows (ie just about anything an AmDram company would do)

Put down the camera or the phone, watch your beautiful child on the stage, marvel at her talent, let your heart fill to bursting with joy and pride, and record it all in perfect detail your mind without being distracted by a phone or camera.

YANBU. I'm surprised they haven't rolled out the hackneyed "health and safety" crap. It's used by people with little imagination, even less knowledge, and sod all understanding about why they are doing what they're doing.

Boils my piss as well.

You really should know Spero that some children are removed from their local area because they have violent fathers who will beat the crap out of their mothers if they ever find them. Or perhaps they are in care and have been removed for their safety.

If you can take photos of your DD so can anyone else. They can also take photos of any of the other performers. They can also publish these photos on social media. One of these children may be at risk if this happens. So yes, YABU even if they are citing a made-up law.

It's up to the organisers. Whatever their reasons they can forbid photography. They hire the building - their rules.

It's probably easier to make up a pretend legal sounding reason to put off the majority who believe it than to debate the issue of photos with parent after parent after parent.

"affect",verb, to have an effect on something or someone "The camera flash affects the child's performance".
"effect", verb, to make something happen " the headteacher effected a change in the photography policy".

LittleBairn
Why is child A in danger if Spero only take a picture of child Spero?

I could understand if Spero started taking photos of all children, but I am certain that isnt the case.

Unless of course you assume that there will be people there specifically taking pictures of all the children? which could happen either way, as its not hard to take a photo steathily

What they should say is all camera away until the end when you can take a picture fo your child after the event?

Unless it is in a genuinely public space like a road then the owners can put restrictions on photography by people who are in the place. You can stand on a road and photograph into private land but not take unauthorised photographs when in that place yourself. If you take a photograph without the permission the most realistic sanction they could use is to ask you to leave and use trespass laws if you don't comply.

The Data Protection Act does cover some photography taken in school, such as ID badges, or images stored on file, but this does not cover pictures taken by parents for personal use.

The school can however write its own policy on photography usage, which doesn't necessarily need to be covered by law, just on what they think is best practice. You'd be right to challenge them on a made up law, but they do have the right to implement any policy they feel, such as uniform, homework, behaviour expectations etc.

And for those asking for an explanation, in some cases children have been removed from highly abusive or dangerous situations where their identity and location has to be withheld from their birth family to prevent them being put at risk by family members tracking them down. The potential for them being recognised and traced through social media is massively increased if they are photographed in X event happening in Y town and posted on someone's Facebook, the local newspaper, the school or Drama Festival website or wherever.

I think what the OP is getting at is the organisers are saying no photography for safeguarding laws, it's i silting that they think it's ok to just lie and make laws up, of corse they are perfectly entitled to say no photography and give no reason why but to out and out lie and make up their own imaginary laws is unprofessional and tabvu. I would ask them to tell you exactly what these laws are and how they found out about them, this kind of thing drives me nuts