Parents who think rules don't apply to them

[mintinbox]

Just went to the harvest festival assembly at primary school where my kid was performing. The whole school was.

Announcement at the beginning no photographs or filming please turn your phone off.

Smug bitch in the second row filming the whole thing on her phone. A woman in front of her was caught taking a photograph and told not to by a member of staff (not made to delete it though) and said "oh I didn't know" of course you knew.

I have reasons for my child to be on social media with her school name attached and I'm sure I'm not the only one in the country who feels this way either.

Of course I didn't say anything to the filming mother as my child could be in a class with hers for years and so frictions are best avoided

I'm absolutely raging though.

Would i be ur to not allow my child to ever participate in school assembly's plays or anything like this again because of some selfish ignorant twat?

I really dislike Mumsnet when there is a pile on and everyone is harranguing a few errant posters but my goodness some people on this really thread deserve it.
As parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, whatever, surely we all recognise that the protection of vulnerable children is paramount and rightly overrides any desire to film or photograph your child in a school play.
Its not more complicated than that.

Religious reasons - abuse lots of reasons why no filming or social media and parents should respect it. Why should a child suffer because a parent wants to share a picture and this can happen. Many Parents do not care to think about other people children. Think how the staff feel telling off the same parent just to be ignored again and again (yes personal experience talking)

Our Primary did the same as Talkins school. Photos after the performance only, so my DDs didn't stand on stage for the photo call, but we could still get a quick picture off stage.

And by the way, blobbing out a child is OK if they are in the chorus, but when they have quite a major part it wouldn't work so well.

My AD1 had no social media presence until she went to a gigantic 6th form college. Both my ADs understand why we have this rule and know to not let friends take photos if they are going to upload them anywhere.

I also once had a parent at school coming up to me and saying 'I think I met a relative of your ADs over the weekend' Luckily this parent was clued up so didn't let on to the relative...

Glitter and China - arrogant and ignorant. Why not watch the actual play/show with your eyes rather than through a phone! There are real, genuine reasons why some kids cannot be filmed or photographed - child protection, safeguarding, domestic violence, child abuse etc. If you cannot see past another child's protection for your own selfish gain then that's very sad.

Yes their is safety issues but what if you know for a fact its simply because they dont want ANY pictures of there children being online at all EVER simply because thats their belief (my SiL basically thing government conpertry theorist and admits as much).

If there is a genuine reason fine but if its simply because you dont want them online its OTT and you are enforcing your wants on everyone else

I'm stunned and saddened at the ignorance and arrogance of a few posters here (luckily the minority). Why should my son's life be put at risk (yes, seriously) just because a parent wants to take pictures from school performances and put them on social media? It's not my DS's fault he's had to be adopted and kept well away from his dangerous birth family, so why should he be the one to go 'in hiding' as someone suggested earlier in this thread? People seem to have no idea of the harm adopted children (amongst others) are can suffer if their image and a location indicator (such as a school uniform) is available online. I know people who've had to be rehoused due to over-sharing on social media of a child who'd been in care. Even if you think it's fine to share 'just' with your friends, you never know who your friends' friends may know ... speaks from bitter experience

The unfortunate thing is it's going to take something awful to happen and new laws to stop these thick parents from continuing to put other children in danger.
A bit like road restrictions, notices and calming effects after somebody has been killed on a particular stretch of road.
Why not use your intelligence in the first place , so a child isn't harmed?
Oh, I forgot because those not getting it are thick.

It's health and safety gone mad. Personally I couldn't give two hoots of another parent catches my ds on film whilst filming their own child at our school play. My ds is fully dressed, not placed in an inappropriate position and is just as "at risk" as all children are.

I would be surprised if he's at the same level of risk as my DS and 1000s of other children in his circumstances. Your attitude actually frightens me.

It's not OTT at all. It's unfortunately the world we live in. Kids need to be protected and that's that. Dress them up as a sheep at home if necessary. People coped before mobile phones and social media.

Worridmum - it's not about parents not wanting an online presence for their child, the school are fulfilling their safeguarding responsibilities for vulnerable children.

Not if its done properly ....... 120 kids troop of the stage at the end of the show 118 troop back on for pictures every parent is only looking at their own child

Yes probably - I was actually thinking of pp suggesting child should be removed from the play/activity altogether. That seems unfair on a child who as well as highlighting their situation.

There are children in care, children whose family situations are dangerous and who’s families are vulnerable for all sorts of reasons - not least of which is DV. The reason this is an issue is because children and their mothers especially can be out in danger if unwanted images are put on social media.

As a teacher, it is often the parents who are harder work than the children in school performances.

We now film everything ourselves and give free copies to parents ( with children without permission pixilated) . We then suggest everyone enjoys watching without having to look through a phone- seems to be working at the moment.

There is a YouTube blogging family who somehow sneaks in a go pro and records school plays and boasts about how they break the rules. It really makes me mad.

There will always be mic takers, the ones who think they are somehow above and beyond the rulz. The more they are challenged hopefully the sooner they will see how selfish they are.

If my children are taking part I will record it. If you don't like it pull your child out!!!!!!! Why shouldn't parents capture moments of their children?

There needs to be the ban on filming because there's always some selfish twat who not only uploads photos of their precious little Mary or Joseph to Facebook, but lots of others in the pictures as well who might have valid reasons for not wanting their picture plastered all over social media.
(It DOES happen, every year without fail at ours the same few mums put pictures of their little darlings performances on FB after the event.) With lax privacy settings too so nearly everyone can see even if not a friend.
Not caring that not everyone wants their kids on there.
It's total, utter selfishness and absorbed in their own little world.
I'll take a picture at the end when we're allowed of MY child, but I wouldn't even dream of posting others on there without permission.
Not to mention the same people are holding in the air a great big Ipad thing or phone to film getting in the fucking way so people behind can't see a thing.
Sit your arse down and actually enjoy being in the moment instead of glued behind a screen watching it.

If I had a child in my care whose life could be threatened by appearing in someone else's film or photograph I don't think I would allow him to be in school plays [or any situation this would be possible). It would be hideously restricting and he would miss out but he would be safe.
Unfortunately people do break rules like this and I personally wouldn't risk it.

I don't have a child who needs protecting but actually I wouldn't film my child if the rule was not to (I wouldn't anyway as I'd prefer to just watch the play in real time). I also wonder what it would be like to be a child these days and have a camera or phone in your face constantly. I think I'd be fed up and just want my parents to watch me! It's all a bit much really imo.

I haven't got through all the thread yet so apologies if poster has reposted but

'Trueheart1

Why are you so against filming? If your child is in hiding it would seem sensible not to let her be in shows that are watched by the public.'

What??!!!

So kids in care or kids who've been abused and Dad isn't allowed to know where they are or adopted etc can't ever do plays.

There's a huge difference between Joe Bloggs sitting and watching a play with a vulnerable child in and Jane uploading it to the Internet on her Facebook with the 1500 friends she has added on public settings.

Seriously the right to upload your little darlings to Facebook does trump a kids right to a normal life.

Getreadyforit Speaking as an adoptive mum, thank you.

At our children's school they make a video and take loads of official pictures which can be purchased by parents. They can't be down loaded onto social media. Our children are adopted from a very abusive situation and may well be in real danger if they were found. It is a major child protection issue. End of.

This is a weird complaint: the OP actually watched a woman breaking a rule in a way that could put her own child in harm's way; and despite knowing that the staff would back her up, refrained from saying anything either to the woman filming, or to a member of staff, for fear of being thought awkward in the years to come. And is now raging. And lashing out at other posters who are saying, "I agree you're right, but you have to sort the problem, not seethe about it." Oh well.

Call me thick-skinned, but no way would I keep my lip buttoned in that circumstance.

DD's school have the same rule - no photography at events, and no filming. The head can be a bit of a dragon and she glares (a bit) at everyone and tells them this again before any event starts. Newsletters reinforce the message every month.
I've not known anyone to break the rules. There are some children at the school that do need to be kept clear of social media, so I completely understand the logic.

There is the opportunity for parents to buy a solo photo of their child, and one of the whole class, at different times in the academic year.

I'm surprised no-one's suggested doing the harvest festival wearing a donkey mask. Someone always says that on the nativity threads.

Our head always says 'don't take photos, we have vulnerable children who can't be photographed/filmed AND it distracts the children, you'll get a chance at the end' and there's still always some entitled prick who takes photos throughout.

brie

Our primary school films all of their productions and the PTA produces a dvd, this means that no ones view gets spoiled with everyone filming everything but wouldn't help if you didn't want your child on film.

I can't read these threads as they make me so angry.

All these parents that insist on their rights to film their kids probably have thousands of pictures of their kids at home. Is it really the end of the world to not have one of them dressed as a damn sheep or wise man?

My school strictly enforced the rule, however we filmed the shows and took photos as we knew who we could and couldn't film. I also like to think they were better quality than the ones taken trying to dodge round people's heads.

Grow up the lot of you. Start using your eyes and watch them. Save the occasions in your memories and not on an SD card somewhere that you'll probably forget about in a couple of years.

Cromwell1536
Because making everyone aware your child is the vulnerable child is also shit for a bunch of reasons.

For most of us, it's a trade off between absolutely certain but less serious shittiness (your kid losing their anonymity/privacy, it being your kid's 'fault') versus the more remote, but much more serious shittiness (being ided online).