To think some things should be kept private (warning upsetting)

[ReginaBlitz]

I was scrolling down newsfeed on fb and a "friend" had shared a post it was a picture of a one day old baby that had passed away, with the headline please share to say Thankyou to the staff of such and such hospital, this was posted by the baby's dad. Obviously this is awful and the parents are going through hell, but I think this is so inappropriate. I think photos like this should be private not shared by randoms all over Facebook it's upsetting (yes I know it's upsetting having it happen) but why not use a photo of her alive I am actually in shock it's seriously got to me and can't imagine how someone this has happened to would feel seeing these pictures. So Aibu to think these photos should be kept private?

So how many of the people telling the op she is unreasonable would share this picture? A picture of the dead baby of a random stranger you have never met and are never likely to meet?

IMO this isn't about how someone grieves. It's about random strangers taking on that grief as their own and sharing that one picture of someone else's precious dead child to make it go viral on the internet.

A number of people on this thread have seen this picture. To the best of my knowledge none of them knew the parents or even anyone who knew the parents. So to those strangers it is a picture of a dead baby they can never identify with.

Someone made the comparison to putting a picture of a stillborn baby on your mantle piece and allowing your close friends and family to see it when they visited. People would understand that. But would people think it was still appropriate if one of those friends then gave the picture to be published on the front of a national newspaper? to be published in the news leaflets which are distributed on aeroplanes so that it could be seen globally? I can't imagine that many people would feel comfortable with that, and in fact I don't imagine that many would even feel they could do it because it's a physical picture iyswim.

But with a picture on the internet you don't have a physical piece of paper with the picture on it, it's an image on a screen, and it is just a click away from sharing to the world. The internet makes people detach from reality. It's not a real picture therefore clicking and sharing is easy. I have little doubt that if this picture was published on the front of a magazine or newspaper people wouldn't be so quick to photo copy it and distribute it to their friends.

However sharing a picture of the dead baby of a random stranger that has happened upon your timeline by a million degrees of separation is crass

Disagree. This morning I've looked at dozens of other people's children, including several newborns: one is in intensive care. I have only met 3 of those children, none of the babies, and fewer than 10% of the parents.

Are they all crass? Or is it just what people do in the 21st century?

OP you aren't really showing a compassionate side here tbh, "my DM sees a lot worse than this"?!

Of course I have no idea what you DM does for a living but can't you understand how this phrasing could cause upset to others?

Well, I can only answer for myself wannaBe, and I'm not on Facebook so not massively familiar with "sharing" culture.

But I think I'd be more likely to share the picture in question, assuming it is what the parents want (so people can see their lovely child, or to raise awareness, or whatever their motivation might be), than I would most other things. What the parents want is what matters. And to call the picture "a picture of a dead baby they can never identify with" is very odd (to phrase it politely). I imagine that, to most people, it will be deeply affecting.

Ffs banjo I was trying to explain the use of the word hardy. Probably shouldn't have said worse should have said same level actually I do agree that sounded awful

Perhaps people are upset because they've never (to their knowledge) seen a dead baby before. I have - mine, as it goes - but that's irrelevant. We see new things every hour on the internet. I've seen body parts scattered around a shopping street, piles of emaciated Nazi victims, 200 dead schoolchildren, people of all ages dying of all kinds of things, and a great many more pictures of happier occasions.

If the depth & breadth of life on planet Earth is too much for anyone to handle, perhaps they should put themselves on a media ban and stfu.

To me this is like me asking the op to keep her baby indoors for only her to see. My children died, I may find it upsetting to see your healthy child in a supermarket or at the park or wherever.

Would you really keep your child away from anyone else to avoid possibly upsetting anyone? Of course not, but that's exactly what people expect bereaved parents to do.

Thing is OP, I'm sure the parents would happily swap places with you and sit there cuddling their newborn and bemoaning their lack of choice in seeing a picture of a baby. Because they will be choosing a coffin and funeral music and headstone. Those aren't choices and parent wants to make.

The thing is you HAVE to see babies/kids everyday in the supermarket etc no one is choosing to see the image

duckduck I feel the same as you. I only had miscarriages, but I remember that the social pressure to shut the fuck up and appear happy was immense. If these parents want to share a picture of their baby who died then the rest of the world can just feel upset and bloody deal with it. What matters is the wishes of the parents.

I would just rather have the choice in what I see

Then Facebook really isn't the place for you.

How shielded from 'distasteful' and 'upsetting' images do we need to be? Think of all the horrific things we see on the news. The stories we hear about child abuse and murder. Pictures of war, famine.

Where is the awfulness in a parent sharing their loving photograph of their baby, who has tragically died at birth, in hospital. Why recoil from it? Why shouldn't they share their child? Why not let the child be seen by many people, and touch some lives, rather than end up as a just picture in a box and a memory for only 2 people?

In our culture we no longer 'see' death routinely. Thankfully the mortality rate has fallen and it is no longer the norm for most families to have children die young. It's more usual for our elderly to die in hospital, rather than at home - again for few to see. The bodies of our loved ones are now whisked away, whereas in the past a body would have been laid out in the home for family and neighbors (including children) to come to see, to say good bye to and to pay respects to the family.

At the moment it's not a usual thing for a family to post a picture of their dead child on face book and ask that it be shared, but maybe it will become more usual? Why would that be so awful? Maybe it would make grief less private. A good thing IMO. So many people have no idea what to say to someone who has recently gone through a tragedy like the death of a loved one, and will literally cross the road rather than face it. I've learned that first hand.

for all here who have lost a baby or child.

I wouldn't share it myself, because I wouldn't feel right about that, not being the owner of the image. But I would post a message of support on it, as well as sending cards, flowers etc. I don't think there's anything wrong with the parents for wanting to share it. Really, anything that can help them through an unimaginably painful time is good. It's the circles of care thing - the people who are closest to it and suffering most are at the heart of this, and whatever helps them comes first.

I used to be a voluntary grief counsellor, and many families get solace from all kinds of public sharing, be it flowers or some kind of shrine at the side of a roadside death (a relatively new phenomenon) or social media picture or even twitter coverage (a comedienne recently covered the death of her father in a series of surprisingly moving tragi-comic tweets on twitter)! When you think about it, it's only very recently that death became a very private phenomenon - for centuries, it would have been something much more communal (and still is in other cultures). You could argue that it's our sense of weirdness about it being public that is historically unusual.

YABU.

I am 'a parent like this'. I wish I could share my baby with the world. I didn't put my baby's photo on FB although I was desperate to, mainly because of people like you judging me.

If I saw a photo of a stillborn baby on my feed tbh it wouldn't upset me, I would feel for the parents, it would bring feelings back about my loss but I would be grateful that that baby now exists to more people than just it's parents.

Loosing a baby is the worst thing that can happen to you. People grieve in very different ways. Often you are desperate for others to see your baby. I know it might be an odd view but I don't see it as any different to a photo of a newborn sleeping.

If it helps them and that's how they want their baby to be seen then that's their choice. I don't think they should have to worry about upsetting others. It is upsetting but it's not happened to you. I think YABU

Yes Reg you have to see children everywhere because the parents make the choice not to shield the world from their prescence. These parents made a choice to share pictures of their child on Facebook and not shield the world from their child.

This thread has made me wonder; those parents who have lost a child or a baby maybe we see the photo differently to some other people.

When I look at photos of my dd2 and other babies that have died I see a beautiful baby, a tragic loss and I totally understand why people want to share it.

I'm not saying those who have not suffered loss don't feel those things, many do, but to those who don't want to see these photos I wonder if it is because it scares you? It makes you think about how it could have been/may be you and that's scary. I guess once it's happened to you it isn't scary anymore because the worst has already happened. I don't know if that makes any sense at all.

Well put, duckduck. The idea of bereaved parents having to "shield" others from their desperately loved and missed children is horrendous.

but to those who don't want to see these photos I wonder if it is because it scares you? It makes you think about how it could have been/may be you and that's scary

Got it in one. I also think that say a 5 year old (god forbid) doled, they parents would have 1000s of photos to celebrate their life, and grieve

But the loss for a new-born/still-born is just as intense, and yet you cant share it/their beauty because the photo offends people? How fucked up and sad

Such a though provoking thread, and its made me go to the loo and have a good cry for peoples losses-

YABU.

Let them do whatever they want on Facebook if it makes them feel even the tiniest bit better or the tiniest bit of peace or whatever. That poor baby was still their child, a child that they are proud of despite their terrible loss.

OP, while I chose to hide and not share the photo (which is my prerogative, just as it was the parents' to post and encourage sharing of the photo in the first place), I think you have unrealistic expectations of FB/social media. If you can't handle potentially seeing things that may upset or shock you on your timeline, then FB may not be the medium for you - you can't control everything that your friends share or post, so you either learn how to hide posts that you don't want to see, develop a thicker skin or deactivate your account.

It's strange; just after reading this thread I logged onto fb, scrolled down and saw a photo of a young girl (5 I think) obviously undergoing chemo with a 'how many likes can this girl who is beating cancer get?' type message.

It made me think, this photo made me so, so sad for the poor little girl, for her family, for all the children who go through illness and face the possibility or death. It made me think 'that could be my dd', it upset me, made me cry. At no point did I think her parents shouldn't have put that up because it's upsetting.

I wonder why reactions to stillborn babies are so different.

I don't think you're being unreasonable . Ive seen it too and I don't believe Facebook is the place for it for many, many reasons.