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.

Just to let you know where we are - and thanks again to those of you who've reported posts. As we hope you know, we're always happy to put our hands up and listen when we've got the tone of something wrong, which has obviously happened here. We are on the case with this - but it may take a while to get back to you.
Thanks
MNHQ

Oh, and
RIPA
sod off backatcha, Spero, you uppitty bloody lawyer, coming here with your long words and your book-learning and telling us stuff you know about and we don't.

WILL NOBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN?

I am not intending to patronise. I am making my argument. If their argument is based on an invalid premise, a mistaken fact or a dodgy opinion elevated way, way beyond what it should be, then I point that out.

I particularly enjoyed your censure of me for using domestic laws governing energetic pearl manipulation as 'one that would disgrace a first year law student'.

I would also like to point out that I have just invented a law proscribing the use of references to poor education in the process of arguing against made up legislation. Under the Imputations Of Jejeune Bilge (Defense of Made Up Laws) Act 2015 I must ask that you must now refrain from further posts unless each paragraph of said posts is prefaced with 'Apologies if I'm wrong', and appended with at least two 'X's.

RIPA FFS Bore. FGS. Coming on here boasting about your eclipse experience, trying to make everyone else feel inferior. I've been sitting in a murky room desparate for a wee but I can't get up because I am covered in dogs. And do you know what? that makes me a better person than you. O yes. True Fact.

But some people can't handle THE TRUTH.

Yes, good post Manatee, especially where you say nice things about me, those were my favourite bits.

According to another thread on here, if someone feels bullied then they are. Perhaps the complainers said they "experienced Spero as a bully".

This should have been such a simple thread.
Spero: OP
A handful of other posters: YANBU but remember that the people organising the festival are volunteers so try being kind and constructive when you write to them.
Spero: Point taken. Will do.

I'm utterly amazed at the number of people who are prepared to take on a lawyer in her area of expertise. It's the Dunning-Kruger effect in action.

RIPA Manatee, I believe I used the word 'shame' and not 'disgrace'.

Your sloppy disregard for the correct terminology now brings into question the validity of all your posts. And I am afraid I find that quite offensive.

You will I am sure do the decent thing. Close down your mumsnet account, burn your lap top and climb into a gibbet hung from a nearby tree where you will swing for the next few years, a grim and decomposing reminder to the rest of us.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias wherein unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly assessing their ability to be much higher than is accurate. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their ineptitude. Conversely, highly skilled individuals tend to underestimate their relative competence, erroneously assuming that tasks which are easy for them are also easy for others.[1]

As David Dunning and Justin Kruger of Cornell University conclude: "The miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others.

EXCESSIVE RIPA DONT SAY I DIDN'T WARN YOU

hahahaha. I did enjoy that. Perhaps we need a new acronym? MIURI

(metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their ineptitude.)

So HQ could just say, stop being so mean to the poster demonstrating MIRUI. They can't help it.

Back when I was wondering what to do with my life, I believed my decision not to train as a barrister was taken because I feared it would make me take to the bottle like pretty much every barrister I have ever met.

I now realise that it was in fact because my middleweight grammar pedantry and predilection for long words is and always has been a poor disguise for a weak attention span and lackadaisical absence of focus on detail.

I will do as you suggest, Spero. Kindly ensure my personal effects are given to an anti-bullying charity.

'Imputations of jejeune bilge'

Dunning-Kruger thingy

The thing is spero that beliefs about this mythical act and its prohibitions are now so ingrained and well accepted that by challenging it's very exisitence you are challenging some pretty deeply held core understanding. People, on the whole, trust that those in authority will tell the truth - if we are constantly told by those in a position of authority that X law prevents us doing Y action most of us won't check the facts. Some of us, like you, know enough to spot the lie, others of us know enough to not accept everything we are told as being true and we do the research.

You pointing out the facts will make some people feel stupid for having believed the lie. The anger is then turned on the person pointing out the facts. There is a reason why the phase "don't shoot the messenger" came into being!

That is all.

Tee hee. Thought you would!

Cross posted with Dunning-Kruger effect.

Oh I like that. Useful!

Manatee, of course. I give you some belated credit for doing the right thing even at this late stage. Make sure that knots nice and tight.

any remnants of your charred lap top will be salvaged and auctioned on ebay to go to fund to provide replacement pearls for all those that have no doubt been frenetically wrangled to the point of destruction during this thread.

I've just complained to Mumsnet about their ridiculous EM to spero
I really value her calm and informative posts on threads. Mumsnet needs to encourage experts, rather than pandering to the delicate blossoms.

Noone has a right not to be offended by different opinions, obviously excluding hate speech and extreme personal attacks.
Some folk get very emotional when their sacred cows are not venerated.

I like the C.P. Scott quote above the Guardian's comment section:

"Comment is free .... but facts are sacred"

I'm a scientist (STEM PhD) and I feel a comparable irritation about Junk Science to that which spero feels about Junk Law.

People can become very aggressive when I explain why their pet belief has been proved wrong (sometimes in the 19th century or earlier !) and give references to peer-reviewed papers.
It is staggering the views that so many supposedly educated people apparently have on climate change, evolution, vaccination ......
and don't get me started on the statistics miscalculations .....

< takes blood pressure and leaves thread for a >

As well as using the internet for those old fashioned art of discussion and debate, I use it because its generally quite transparent - what you see is what you get ie you post, you discuss, you debate. I am really uncomfortable with all this behind the scenes manipulation on woolly, vague grounds which are unquantifiable and therefore incapable of being proved on other than a very subjective basis.

In other words, its an unfair process, and I cannot think of anything that comes closer to bullying than posting personal insults on a forum which are cleverly or wittily batted away, then resorting to complaining about a poster for doing so.

And honestly, its very pathetic. To think there are people out there who have nothing better to do with their time than post complaints about another poster on an internet site - let it wash over you, and you will have forgotten all about it in a few days! Sense of perspective anyone?

OTOH someone who does it as a job will obviously have a real and genuine interest in seeing the law upheld and not misrepresented - I assume MN are not in favour of the law on photographing children being misrepresented?

Lets just say this is something that wouldn't happen in "real life" - most of these behind the scenes pearl clutchers would be much too timid to take on someone without a computer to hide behind. I would have thought that Mumsnet HQ, since they base their business around running an internet forum, would be pretty well versed in this, and would learn how to placate convincingly and sort the wheat from the chaff.

I honestly do wonder about people's motivation in making such complaints - what do they seek to gain from it? Its an odd pattern of behaviour...

I'm too far south to have seen much of the eclipse, but so focussed was I this morning in my office that I was heard to complain that it was "bloody dark today" (note offensive word) in aggrieved tones, and then "why are the damned lights so dim?" moments later.

"I know that I know nothing" - Socrates said that a little while ago.

I think it's true that the semblance of knowledge being peddled as fact is very dangerous.
Particularly to the messengers that it is Not So

BigChocFrenzy, I feel your pain.

It affects all sorts of areas of life and it is very hard to challenge.
The 'Child Protection Act' and all it supposedly entails, makes people feel that they are doing something to protect vulnerable children. Enforcing the (non-existing) act with made-up restrictions gives a sense of control over a situation that is far scarier and more difficult to get a handle on than photographs by friends and family of their own children.

MIRUI is why I am sceptical about some examples of ALL stakeholders getting a say in various settings. Using a service does not necessarily give you an understanding of the bigger picture and much as people MUST be listened to and often do have valuable input, a depressing number of people cannot look beyond their own personal circumstances.

This day has already been worth living as I've just had a peanut butter and jelly sandwich learnt about the Dunning-kruger effect

I'm a STEM PhD as well big choc and share your irritation. My main bugbear is around the missuse of "average" in education as in "he is only average" "we expect all our children to score above average".

When I was told that my youngest dc age 5 (summer baby) was "below average in reading for her year" I responded with "well someone has to be" and declined to be bothered (three As at A level and doing well at uni thanks Miss x). I have also been known to ask "mean, mode or median?" when similar things have been trotted out at parents'evenings. If you don't understand what you are talking about then FFS do some research. average is not an insult so stop using it like one

But of course if you are well practised in the art of bullying, with the usual bullying traits of being unable to continue bullying someone who stands up to you, especially in public, what better thing to do than make a secretive complaint behind closed doors claiming that it is in fact your would-be victim who is at fault?

That's exactly what rather an expert bully would do.

There is nothing on this thread written by the more lets say measured posters that could possibly upset anyone with a normal disposition.

That's not to say there aren't one or two unusually fragile individuals out there, but perhaps the internet is not the best place for them.

If anyone has ever attended you bog standard university debating society, what has passed on here is pretty tame debate. Or even some company meetings.

How do these posters who claim they feel bullied by a bit of polite internet, gently mocking, or ironic debate actually manage to cope in the outside world?

I just Googled "Dunning–Kruger"
Thank you, I love learning something new from a thread so this thread gets an A** rating for that alone.
Wiki tells of a bank robber covering his face in lemon juice, which of course CCTV couldn't record Another joy.

It affects all sorts of areas of life and it is very hard to challenge.
The 'Child Protection Act' and all it supposedly entails, makes people feel that they are doing something to protect vulnerable children. Enforcing the (non-existing) act with made-up restrictions gives a sense of control over a situation that is far scarier and more difficult to get a handle on than photographs by friends and family of their own children.

Note Ofsted's handling of the Rotherham Council workers, a truly tragic example of being blinded by paperwork and workers serving themselves instead of the public.

I tried to post something similar but felt scared to incase you all jumped down my post and blithered on about not being precise or factual or legal enough. There's probably a term for it in web forum speak but I really can't be arsed to go into the whys and wherefores, it simply stifles discussion and makes those less able to articulate their views disappear. That's nothing to be proud of or feel superior about and teaches nobody nothing.

I can see where the bullying accusations have happened and can't understand why Spero is in denial of this. The tone of this thread is that people are picking posts apart - this is a discussion, not a university debate, not a boardroom, not a courtroom. Many of you come across as being completely anal and are not looking at the reality of Spero's original post.

Following the law is important but in this context Spero is as I said earlier just causing the rolling of eyebrows in the staffroom, possibly getting the secretary a ticking off and a ranty divisive discussion on here.

And no I didn't report anything, I know Spero and what she (assuming it's a she)'s like and she's always got right up my nose for precisely this reason, this is just another true to form post! But as Will Self said last night on Question Time, I've got nothing to lose so am quite happy saying so.

If my modified letter (modified because I did listen to criticisms about my first draft and I did take them on board) just causes 'rolling of the eyes' I will be very sad and disappointed. This is so far removed from tedious pedantry.

In my view at least.

I take your point about people feeling scared off if they dont feel articulate enough to make their point but I also note that the majority of the people having a pop seemed more than capable of stringing a sentence together - so what's their excuse?

But at least you have then balls to say it to my face (screen) so kudos for that.

And btw I am not 'in denial' that people have felt bullied.

RIPA I just think they they are being massively over sensitive and have resorted to quite a nasty stealthy form of bullying themselves in return. I agree with everything TheChandler says.