Nativity and child protection issue

[DrMum83]

AIBU?

An acquaintance on Facebook (girl I went to primary school with) has posted a video of her child in the school nativity play. Her mother (the GM) has then shared it on her Facebook. The acquaintance commented that 'I know some people are against videos of children but it's largely focused on DS and its a sad world we live in if I can't do that'.

One of her friends commented that there are child protection issues surrounding this and that at her daughter's school, they are specifically requested to not video the play or post on social media photos of other kids. My acquaintance retorted with 'the headmaster announced at the beginning of the play that video taking is allowed as long as no parents present object'

This rang alarm bells for me.

A) as part of my role at work, I am involved with safeguarding children. Children can be found on fb and hunted down by parents when in care and this can be disastrous.
B) 'no parents present object' what about the parents not present? And what about those sharing the video forward (as in this case)?

I have managed to find the name of school and have typed a letter to headmaster. He may think I'm an interfering busybody but would I be unreasonable to send it?!

Thoughts?

(We have to leave our phones at the nursery office when we're in the building other than for a quick drop off/pick up of our DD)

Thank you for the support and suggestions, the thread isn't about me so I'll let it go now but no, Anchor, it didn't come across as anything other than informative - so thank you.

I can't think of an alternative either.

There was no --internet- facebook when dd was in infant years at primary but we had to deal with ginormous video cameras it was like a filmset the Ht would go around at performances tapping the offenders on the shoulder to get them to sit down it was a pita

The problem is that banning photographs and pictures on social media etc creates a false sense of security.

Fwiw I have never put pictures of other people's dc on social media nor do I put pictures of mine on there unless he's agreeable. And in fairness people snapping with their cameras and the like at concerts have always been just bloody annoying anyway.

However once children leave the completely safe haven of primary school and enter into the realms of secondary the taking and distributing of pictures becomes completely impossible to control. Because they and all of their mates then start into the world of social media themselves, selfies which are distributed via fb/instagram/snapchat, and we even now have live video streaming such as periscope

And secondary don't police the taking of pictures/video etc ours even has a live youtube channel where they broadcast e.g. on sportsday and so on.

Unfortunately we now live in such a public society that even if you never put pictures of your own children on social media and your school prevents it for the time they are in primary, it is in fact just a bubble of false security. Because we as humans are being photographed constantly. By CCTV in shops/the street/public transport, and quite aside from that there are millions of people out there with camera phones videoing and photographing the world around them and even inadvertantly photographing people who come into their line of view.

It's not something which can be policed any more.

My DC old school had a teacher who did if anyone objects say now in front of everyone.

The parental grape vine said the HT then spent most of the rest of the day on phone and in meetings dealing with very worried people - certainly by the end of the day the policy of no social media had been told to the DC who trotted it out and letters stating no photos on social media as it puts some children at the school at risk.

They were actually pretty good - or got good after they had a few families with adopted children start attending. We had to sign every year forms stating what level the school could use pictures.

Start of plays - they stated that picture were allowed but no social media and that it wasn't them being difficult by was serious for some of the children in the play - which wasn't as bad as it sound as there was at least 120 to 240 + children in each Christmas play. To report anyone not following those guideline - and if that wasn't followed they won't allow pictures next production.

The problem is that banning photographs and pictures on social media etc creates a false sense of security.

I agree you can't completely control pictures - but you can certainly make it less easy by at least putting in safe guards for children to young to object or protect themselves and not advertising their schools.

No body need to put pictures of other people children in their school plays on social media - it takes a bit of thought and empathy with other to see why.

Things round where I live are obviously very different to what a lot of you are talking about.

The local paper runs a pullout every year with photos of the new reception intake at all of the local schools

YANBU my two are adopted and we live in the same as birth parents, a video of them floating around on Facebook with logo school uniform could make them easily identifiable. Non of the other parents would know this, which is why they should request the schools wishes. This could cause a very real threat to my children.

Oh deidre that's really sad, the teacher should just be able to say 'no filming or pictures please' and that's that.
I hope you get to do something nice together instead.

moob, they do that here too, but it's easy enough in that situation to remove a 4yo before the photo is taken. My DC always get given special jobs to do. That's entirely different to 100+ parents at nativity filming and facebooking.

Moob Our school also does the reception starters and the nativity play for the local paper pull out.
Neither of which my child was able to be in.

Even if it is difficult to police in secondary, it is still worth doing in primary. The catchment areas for primaries are smaller (so more obvious where you live), and children haven't changed their looks so much (since being with their birth parents), so are more recognisable.

At our school the head always says either no photos videos please or yes you can take them please do not post on social media.

There is definitely a difference, and with 3 kids in the school I know which class she is much stricter about. I assume there is a child that they have to be more careful with.

If you informed our school, they would ask the parent to take it down.

'the headmaster announced at the beginning of the play that video taking is allowed as long as no parents present object'

I get really annoyed by this. Yes, the school ought to know in advance which children aren't to be filmed/photographed, but they might have forgotten to check the forms.

If you did object, how confident would you feel speaking up in response to that announcement, with a hundred other parents staring and tutting at you?

I think it should be standard that no photos or video are taken during the performance but groups (classes, etc) pose afterwards, with the children who can't be included quietly and discreetly taken out first.

Moob, our local paper does this too, but not every child is in the photo. As a pp said, a special job to help the teacher can easily be found.

My boys school says that it's fine to take photos/videos of school events but only post your own children on SM. That's fine with me and is the right balance I think, as long as everyone obeys the rules. I like to take photos/videos of my children in plays/sports day etc but I always crop any other children out if I post anything on SM.

YABU. I understand the child protection issues that apply but I think we, as a society, are doing the wrong thing.

If kids are in danger then the person who is a danger to them should be dealt with / locked up. Innocent people shouldn't be penalised for doing something perfectly normal and innocent such as taking pictures of their child in a nativity play and sharing them. It's a disproportionate response and breeds hysteria.

Saying 'please don't video this nativity' play is a disproportionate response but locking up a birth parent who hasn't committed a crime yet isn't?

Interesting view, grandma.

Moob can you not see that there is a world of difference between a planned posed newspaper photo, during which time the vulnerable DC can be occupied elsewhere, and a nativity they have a right to take part in?

Our local paper does the new class photos but for DD's first 2 years there was a blanket no photos rule at school events. They sold individual photos in costume for 50p each instead.

Wannabe,

when you state that people are being photographed all the time, that may be true to an extent however those photographs are generally random, not specifically of a group of named children, or children whose school is mentioned alongside them.

It doesn't bother me at all if ds is photographed on CCTV. Why would it? I'd be extremely bothered if he appeared in footage of a school play, with the name of the school easily identifiable, and could be found on local news or social media with tags to that school which would basically tell anyone who chose to search, that he attends it.

Can you not see the difference?

Nicole, thank you so much for such a kind comment.

If kids are in danger then the person who is a danger to them should be dealt with / locked up.

I don't think you have properly thought this through...!

If they haven't committed any crime, then how do you know they are a threat? Where is the evidence? Should large portions of the public be restricting their behaviour because someone imagines that someone, somewhere could potentially do something bad if they don't?

There are many freedoms we could restrict as a society to keep ourselves and others safe but we have to keep some sort of perspective / balance. I personally, think that the balance is off on this issue.

If they haven't committed any crime, then how do you know they are a threat?

Your naievity is absolutely astounding.

Oh FGS. Really?

Do you imagine that every incident of threatening behaviour, violence, drunken assault, intimidation, harrassment, sending nasty letters, stalking, and basic fucking around with children's wellbeing is punishable, or punished, by a custodial sentence?

And also - perhaps they may have actually made a threat, or threats, towards you or the children in question?

Would that be a minor clue?

Really, because threats, harrassment, emotional abuse etc are all crimes. If someone has committed a criminal act and is dangerous then they need to be locked up.

I realise that the legal system may not be fantastic at dealing with threats / abuse etc but that definitely won't be improved by shifting the onus for staying safe from the abuser onto the abused (or in this case, greater society) and eroding the freedoms of a whole population.

I stand by my original opinion that the OP is being unreasonable and the measures taken by many schools to stop photographs of children being taken and shared are disproportionately risk averse.