Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Pictures of migrant children on fb

263 replies

FuryFowler · 02/09/2015 20:54

Has anyone seen these pictures, of poor poor children washed up on the beaches of Libya and Greece, drowned from their failed crossing.

I know the pics are there to shock but it's devastating to see Sad

I signed a petition the other day, which had a pic of a drowned child on the front page. I signed and shared but then felt uncomfortable about sharing such a graphic picture.

It's makes me cry what is happening there, but was I U for sharing?

OP posts:
JassyRadlett · 04/09/2015 09:41

John - one idea I've seen is to have better asylum processing (with the promise of many more places) in places like Turkey and Jordan, with safe onward passage.

Families like the Kurdis had no hope - no travel or citizenship documents, because the Syrian government denied ethnic Kurds citizenship and even after some loosening made it very difficult (and threatening) to obtain ID cards, meaning that only around 6000 out of 300-500,000 got them before everything fell apart.

That in turn meant they are prevented from living outside the camps in Turkey and Jordan, and know that they would never get one of the vanishingly few asylum places available. So they are desperate, they want to reach a safe haven, and they have no hope of doing that unless they take drastic action.

I'm not sure th boats can be stopped entirely. But removing one of the major pull factors - a chance of asylum in Europe is only realistic once you reach Europe - may help.

IntheHeartoftheCity · 20/09/2015 22:00

I think it is right to use and to share these pictures, for three reasons:

  1. first, it humanises and puts a face on the 'swarms' of 'Moslem' 'migrants';

  2. secondly, A(y)lan's further gave his permission for this, hoping the glare of publicity might help bring all this to an end

We want the world’s attention on us, so that they can prevent the same from happening to others. Let this be the last,

and

  1. the picture of drowned A(y)lan has the same iconic quality as the picture of the naked Vietnamese girl running from a napalm attack. That picture is reported to have crystallised and turned public attitude against the war. If the picture of drowned A(y)lan shares even a small part of the impact, then that is good.

Incidentally, I have noticed a trend with recent 'migrant' / 'refugee' articles in the Mail Online. Basically, as you would expect, with 'regular' Mail reporting, any reader comments that are broadly compassionate to those fleeing Syria are virulently red arrowed. However, those articles that reference or involve a child attract almost only compassion- even the 'I voted UKIP at the last election but' comments are ones where the readers can only express humanity. If the publication of A(y)lan's photo has achieved that, then that is good.

AbeSaidYes · 20/09/2015 23:10

Phan Thi Kim Phuc and here family were fortunate to live in a time before social media and the rise of people mawkishly reposting images to their Facebook accounts like they are in some kind of empathy competition.

Autumnnights1 · 20/09/2015 23:14

Most of these parents are choosing to put their children in such danger, what about that then. This is really getting on my nerves.

Bulbasaur · 20/09/2015 23:19

Honestly, it seems a bit more like voyeurism the way they're plastered for shock value, than it seems to be about sensitively raising awareness. I would not want my drowned child plastered on social media for everyone to gawk at.

That's all it is really. You post it and then it gets lost and nothing is done except sharing a picture of a dead baby.

If social media slactivism really did anything useful, why have we been able to #bringbackourgirls?

Pictures of migrant children on fb
AbeSaidYes · 20/09/2015 23:34

"Most of these parents are choosing to put their children in such danger, what about that then. This is really getting on my nerves."

Most? How many? You seem to have information, what is it?

I would imagine their choice is to leave their children in a dangerous situation, alone, or take them to a safer place by undertaking a possibly dangerous journey together.

I know what I would choose. Hopefully they are helped by people more compassionate than you while making their journey.

AbeSaidYes · 20/09/2015 23:35

To Autumnnights, btw.

Autumnnights1 · 20/09/2015 23:52

It has been shown that most arent fleeing war Abe. They "want" a better life and are risking their children for this. So yes, it is their responsibility that they put their children in such grave danger.

Aridane · 20/09/2015 23:54

So sorry, Autumnnihghts1, that dead children and their desperate parents are getting on your nerves Hmm

Autumnnights1 · 21/09/2015 00:00

knee jerk reactions do not and are not working. Im not saying it isnt a terrible situation. Im saying this is clearly not the solution, so please dont turn things around to become saintly.

Bulbasaur · 21/09/2015 04:30

It has been shown that most arent fleeing war Abe. They "want" a better life and are risking their children for this. So yes, it is their responsibility that they put their children in such grave danger.

The refugees know that these boat rides are perilous. Yet they are still risking their lives and the lives of their family to do it. I would venture to say that if probable death is a risk they are willing to take vs. staying at home, things have gotten dire. If they're desperate enough to take their children on a boat crossing where they know they risk being mugged, deliberately drowned, or any other atrocity that might befall them or their family, as opposed to staying where they are, then they are not "wanting" a better life they NEED a better life to survive.

IntheHeartoftheCity · 21/09/2015 06:32

Autumnnights1 - no, not being saintly, just factual.

The UN Refugee Agency (UNCHR) has stated that, since the publication of the haunting picture of A(y)lan Kurdi, public support and donations to the UNCHR's humanitarian work for refugees has been 'unprecedented'. In eight days alone since the publication of those haunting photos, US$21 million was raised - and, if that is a 'knee jerk' reaction, it is working, and long may it continue.

Further, the UNCHR has said that whilst it is a 'deplorable and heartbreaking situation that has warranted this much attention and support', they hope it will be able to raise awareness and support for the nearly 60 million refugees worldwide.

I therefore suspect that the statements made by the UNCHR may be somewhat closer to the reality than assertions unsubstantiated by evidence.

MythicalKings · 21/09/2015 06:37

It has been shown that most arent fleeing war Abe.

Where? Evidence, please.

Otherwise you're talking bollocks.

LilyTucker · 21/09/2015 06:38

If I was living in Syria I'd take the risk in a second.

No life,no future,a country turned to rubble,no schools,no medicine,bombings,a struggle for food and the risk of either Isis or Asaad capturing,torturing and murdering us for some spurious reason.

Sorry I'd do everything I could to get my kids on a boat. I'd rather risk a quicker death than the above. I'm sure they've weighed it all up.They're in a lose,lose situation. I feel so sorry for them having to make such a hideous decision for their children. The thought of trying to reassure my 3 in either scenario frankly makes me want to cry.

BertieBotts · 21/09/2015 06:48

Referring to "A better life" doesn't necessarily mean "We had a pretty nice life before, but we want the chance to earn a bit more money", it can mean anything from that, to "I want to take my daughters somewhere they have a decent chance of not being raped as soon as they start puberty" or "I need to take my sons somewhere that a gun won't be placed in their hands at twelve years old" or "I want to go somewhere my family isn't under threat of torture or death" "I want to go somewhere I am allowed to work so my family doesn't starve" etc etc.

Have half a brain. What Bulbasaur says is true. Would YOU take your children on a leaky boat, no matter how bad your life became as life exists in Britain? No, because it is a safe country and it's highly unlikely that you would ever be so afraid that it seemed a viable alternative. They aren't stupid, they love their children just as much as we do, they are still people. Your judgement of that kind of risk doesn't evaporate because you don't live in a Western/European country.

LilyTucker · 21/09/2015 06:50

So Autumn what would you do if you had a severely asthmatic child whose inhalers had run out or were living in a village near to others Isis had swept through looking for their next victims to behead publicly,if you were pregnant and needed a c/s or frankly just wanted a future,an education for your children and life without fear and continual bombing?

LilyTucker · 21/09/2015 06:56

I suspect with getting on a boat there is an element of hope whereas with staying in Syria there is nothing.

Bambambini · 21/09/2015 08:39

Yip, those refugee camps look inviting. I'm sure we'd all be happy to raise our children there for god knows how long and with winter approaching.

Autumnnights1 · 22/09/2015 23:10

my child wouldnt have an inhaler in the first place Lily.. so stop it. The world is a huge place full of humans that get the chance and maybe not. There is a natural culling that is beyond us. No, I am not going to foresake my lucky birthright. I also dont bang on and on. Its a sad thing. But bringing everyone over to the UK is NOT the answer.

Autumnnights1 · 22/09/2015 23:13

bob geldoff does not live in poverty
bonno does not live in poverty
and as for that one that poked her nose in to the gypsie argument... umm who was it now. oh yes vanessa redgrave, she doesnt live in poverty either.

BertieBotts · 22/09/2015 23:21

WTAF? Hmm

You are very stupid if you think that any vague notions of a "natural culling" would stop you from doing absolutely anything that you could to ensure your children's safety if it came to it, even if it meant placing them temporarily in harms way. They're already in harms way, so there is no difference except that the boat has a chance of leading you all out of it whereas staying at home does not.

I mean by that logic, are parents who have lost children in atrocities that happened at home also to blame? If they knew it was happening, had a chance to escape but thought it too dangerous?

Autumnnights1 · 22/09/2015 23:25

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Autumnnights1 · 22/09/2015 23:28

I was born in England. I struggle to put food on the table, i struggle to give my son a better life. Charity does begin at home.

Autumnnights1 · 22/09/2015 23:39

you are the stupid idealistic one bertie. would you give up everything and go help. no you sit in your comfortable house and be some sort of do gooder that makes me quite ill really.

Autumnnights1 · 22/09/2015 23:41

do something then.. go to the boarders and give up your life for this. no, you wouldnt nor would any of you.

Swipe left for the next trending thread