Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Nativity and child protection issue

332 replies

DrMum83 · 01/12/2015 22:09

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?

OP posts:
Dipankrispaneven · 02/12/2015 13:05

But, given that you can't object to someone taking your child's photo in the street, it's a trifle unreasonable to stop them photographing their own child in a public performance just because your child might get into shot.

ifgrandmahadawilly · 02/12/2015 13:07

If the kids or parents or whoever voted / come to some agreement about the issue then fair enough. Alternatively, kids can just chose not to take part. All far more proportionate than just outright banning photography.

OP, I'm sorry I seemed to have hi-jacked your thread - I didn't think my response create this kind of response. Anyway, it's clear from others' responses here that in public opinion, YANBU. My own opinion, which still stands, is overwhelmingly in the minority.

bearleftmonkeyright · 02/12/2015 13:10

But that's why there are child protection policies in place, for that very reason. It makes it very workable if people follow the rules. It's not so much about taking photos, its about the sharing on social media. That is where the problem lies and what many parents choose to ignore even though there are clear reasons for the school to not want parents to do this. Itsi utterly, utterly selfish.

bearleftmonkeyright · 02/12/2015 13:13

Kids not taking part is not a solution!

ElsaAintAsColdAsMe · 02/12/2015 13:18

Alternatively, kids can just chose not to take part. All far more proportionate than just outright banning photography.

My children lost their friends, family, dad, school, all their photos, toys, clothes and everything that ever meant anything to them.

Now you want to take away their right to be in a school play with their friends so other people can gain a few likes on FB?

Sharing things on FB is more important than a childs life? Is that really your stance?

Such a breathtakingly selfish attitude.

3point14159265359 · 02/12/2015 13:19

What elsa said.

And elsa, I'm so sorry for what you and your children went through.

motheroftwoboys · 02/12/2015 13:21

The school I work in is very, very hot on child protection. However, unless a parent has specifically asked for a child NOT to be photographed then parents are free to record and/or take photographs of shows or concerts and share on social media. If one child is under a protection order then no-one would be allowed to take photos. Also there are many shows that photos and/or recording are not allowed because of the rules of the license.

MrsJayy · 02/12/2015 13:25

I didnt say freedom was bollocks i said you were talking bollocks just to clarify we have no right to put somebody elses children on facebook without permission

Shockers · 02/12/2015 13:26

Good grief... how callous can you be?

Children who already feel 'different' should opt out because Granny wants to post a video on social media.

It's not Granny's school, or production... it's theirs!

I'm so annoyed.

Shockers · 02/12/2015 13:31

The point is, within school we have a duty of care to protect those children. It is not a public space, it is a safe space. This is why we lock the gates every morning and ask visitors to sign in. A school is a place that, during term time, a child will reliably attend almost daily. A photo in the street only identifies that child's whereabouts for that snap second.

Baconyum · 02/12/2015 13:39

Elsa well said!

Also very sorry for what you and your dc have been through and hoping life much better for you now.

PunkrockerGirl · 02/12/2015 13:47

Elsa I'm so sorry for what you and your children went through.

I'm astounded at the level of selfishness from some posters. Their right to plaster pictures of the nativity on social media trumps the right of Elsa, and others in her situation, to protect their children and keep them safe.
Unbelievable.

There was no social media when my dc were small. We survived.
And if I'm ever lucky enough to have gc I sure as hell won't be spoiling the performance for everyone else by getting in the way and taking photos and plastering them all over fb completely oblivious to other families' circumstances.
I always ask my adult dc if they mind before I post any pictures or information about them on fb. It's a pity people don't offer small children the same courtesy.

ElsaAintAsColdAsMe · 02/12/2015 13:52

Thanks, life is so much better now. We actually have a life now.

Sadly a lot of that is dependent on people following the rules.

This thread is terrifying me.

ifgrandmahadawilly · 02/12/2015 13:53

Sharing things on FB is more important than a childs life? Is that really your stance?

No, but we can't go making rules that impact everyone because of some unspecified future event that may happen, in the absence of any evidence that such an event is even a possibility. It would be a very strange precedent to set.

DeirdreDoo · 02/12/2015 13:59

Look Ifgranny if you persistently refuse to engage with people's rational and reasonable explanations of why these rules are important, and why peopel can be a threat and not be subject to police constraint, then I can only conclude that you're here to goad.

ElsaAintAsColdAsMe · 02/12/2015 13:59

No, but we can't go making rules that impact everyone because of some unspecified future event that may happen, in the absence of any evidence that such an event is even a possibility. It would be a very strange precedent to set.

To get evidence that my children and I are in danger I would need to allow my ex to harm us. That is an even worse precedent to set Confused

ASAS · 02/12/2015 14:00

We've shown you evidence in this thread grandma.

People DO stalk children. I met a nursery mum in a toy shop and she was angry. She was also drunk. Drunk enough to let slip she'd found out her son was fostered in GlenA. I immediately said, "Or maybe GlenN" which sounds similar as I just wanted to put her off/confuse her.

I had to tell nursery. She wasn't supposed to know that. Why would she want to find that out? How did she find that out?

Some people are dangerous and I'll tell you now my flesh crawls thinking of her.

3point14159265359 · 02/12/2015 14:01

Grandma, no one has an automatic right to go into a school and take photos. If you tried doing that on a normal day you'd not get far.

For some special days, the school may grant you the temporary right to take photos. Some schools may not.

How is that infringing your civil liberties? Continuing to not let you take photos just like every other day?

LibrariesGaveUsP0wer · 02/12/2015 14:02

I am not sure what the letter you actually sent said, but I assume it allowed for the possibility that the poster bullshitted you about what the head said. The head may very well have said no social media bit this twat thinks they know better.

MrsJayy · 02/12/2015 14:05

Child protection must always come first always no matter what ime if the tiny majority want to huff about their rights to post pictures and bugger everybody else then they are selfish at worst naive at best

ifgrandmahadawilly · 02/12/2015 14:20

Look Ifgranny if you persistently refuse to engage with people's rational and reasonable explanations of why these rules are important, and why peopel can be a threat and not be subject to police constraint, then I can only conclude that you're here to goad.

Errr, what? If I refuse to agree with you I'm being goady? The forum is called aibu - that rather implies there may be debate and / or a difference of opinion.

Regardless, I will now zip-it as I've already voiced my opinion, probably droned on a bit too much and it's clearly not really moving the discussion anywhere useful.

DeirdreDoo · 02/12/2015 14:24

Ok, so if you're not trying to wind people up and if we're meant to be having a debate - why won't you answer my question about privacy and how you would feel about photographs taken of yourself being put online?

Why do you keep saying that there is no reason to believe someone poses a threat unless they have already committed a crime?

People are trying to explain it to you but you don't seem able to take it on board that these rules are important.

TheWordOfBagheera · 02/12/2015 14:34

Surely even if you don't buy the child protection issue (Confused) then you can see that you've got the 'freedom to post pictures online' thing is totally backwards if you think it means you can post school pictures of multiple children.

What about the freedom of the other family to decide what of their child goes on facebook? A person is free to share pictures of the children for whom they are guardian, but it can never be their place to make that call about any other children!

Enjolrass · 02/12/2015 14:37

Personally I am quite happy to go into school and take photos of my child, or not.

I am more than happy to restrain myself and not put a photo on Social Media.

If it keeps a child safe. Even if there is only a very small chance that the child will come to harm.

Junoandthepeacock · 02/12/2015 14:38

How could a child be tracked down though? Unless they were tagged or something? Or their parent tagged? I don't get it?

Swipe left for the next trending thread