Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be angry at photos at Nativity?

758 replies

MrsAnamCara · 14/12/2017 15:45

Just seen DC infant nativity. We were sent out letters, went to the office yo get tickets, had texts to remind people-all fine and well. No mention of needing permission to take photos/videos. Nothing mentioned before the start of the actual nativity performance either. The performance starts and several people whip their phones out and begin taking photos and videos but not of individual children, of all of the children on stage. It goes on throughout the performance and I can see in their view finder they are filming/recording video of 5+ children... A parent the right if the school Hall is stood filming the entire performance.

No one said they weren't allowed to but...neither was the guardian or parent of every single child asked either.

In my D's nursery, they asked for written permission, and if only one parent didn't give permission then no one was allowed to take photos or videos. Even if we were allowed, then it was photos and videos of your child only (zoom in) and if there were other children then you couldn't post it on social media and send to anyone else.

It really ruined the performance for me, as I don't know these people who are taking videos/photos of my child, I don't know where they will post them or send them to, I don't know who will see that photo or video. I did not give anyone permission to take his photo or record him?

I'm I being unreasonable to think the school should have asked for legal written permission for all children's parents or guardian's? And if some parents don't agree or give permission then that's too bad.

OP posts:
Blink66 · 16/12/2017 12:21

Ketzele

Actually its NOT any of my responsibility to keep your child safe - that is completely down to you. You should not expect me to change my behaviour at all. Stop feeling so entitled - I owe you nothing.

However, if you asked whether I could accommodate a reasonable request to help you to do so and it didn't inconvenience me considerably then it is very likely I would help you.

fatberg · 16/12/2017 12:22

It’s actually the school’s responsibility whilst they’re in school. So if the school says no photos, suck it up.

YetAnotherSpartacus · 16/12/2017 12:26

Some real nastiness here. Flowers to posters and their DCs for whom picture taking could have disastrous consequences.

JacquesHammer · 16/12/2017 12:27

*Ketzele

Actually its NOT any of my responsibility to keep your child safe - that is completely down to you. You should not expect me to change my behaviour at all. Stop feeling so entitled - I owe you nothing*

What a Fucking depressing attitude.

I consider it my responsibility to keep kids like Ketzele's safe because that's what a reasonable human being does.

And actually, it's even more so the schools. So when we say "no photos" you abide by it.

Your right to have a pic of little Johnny doesn't trump the safety rights of another child.

And before you start yes, I've missed out on many pics/vids of my child. Do I mind? No. Because i don't have to live every day minimising risk; it's a small price to pay.

Newname12 · 16/12/2017 12:28

There are a lot of people on this thread that would benefit from a week, or even a day in the local police forces safeguarding office.

We do not know about these cases because to make the public would be to compromise the child’s safety.

I only know about dd’s friend because the kids is 7, and has let things slip to dd. That plus the school’s total ban on phones makes me realise the threats the kid has let slip are very real, and are actually horrific.

It’s not uncommon. Frankly i see it as equally my responsibility to see that this, and every child is safeguarded.

Blink66 · 16/12/2017 12:28

fatberg

Nice deflection again - but remember not positing pictures, just taking them. No risk at all from me taking a photo. But a photo could be taken on the way into school at any time, but that's not a significant enough risk?

Seriously, don't see what the issue is with adoption - it's normal. Friends in our primary were adopted, nothing thought of it other than initial interest. Equally well, other children knew whose parents split up, who lived with their grandmother and whose dad was arrested. We all have phases in the playground.

fatberg · 16/12/2017 12:30

Given you’ve said you don’t give a shit, why would you (or someone else) hold back from posting?

JacquesHammer · 16/12/2017 12:31

Seriously, don't see what the issue is with adoption - it's normal. Friends in our primary were adopted, nothing thought of it other than initial interest

What IS it with the glut of "I can't understand a situation if it hasn't happened to me" posters at the moment?!

YetAnotherSpartacus · 16/12/2017 12:33

What IS it with the glut of "I can't understand a situation if it hasn't happened to me" posters at the moment?!

Fucked if I know but I have absolutely NO investment in this and it's doing my head in :(

Chimera246 · 16/12/2017 12:34

Seriously, don't see what the issue is with adoption - it's normal. Friends in our primary were adopted, nothing thought of it other than initial interest

What IS it with the glut of "I can't understand a situation if it hasn't happened to me" posters at the moment?!

I can deal with "I can't understand a situation if it hasn't happened to me"

What flabbergasts me is the glut of "I don't see an issue with it, therefore you shouldn't either, despite me having no experience whatsoever of the issue that you're dealing with"

Newname12 · 16/12/2017 12:36

*Actually its NOT any of my responsibility to keep your child safe - that is completely down to you. You should not expect me to change my behaviour at all. Stop feeling so entitled - I owe you nothing.

However, if you asked whether I could accommodate a reasonable request to help you to do so and it didn't inconvenience me considerably then it is very likely I would help you*

How fucking condescending. If it doesn’t inconvenience you.

So if you ever lose your child in a shop, I won’t bother helping you find them, or if I do taking them to a place of safety, because I might miss my bus and that would inconvenience me. I’ll just leave them.

If your child discloses to me that someone sexually assaulted them, I’ll just tell them to suck it up because the paperwork that comes with a police referral is just a massive pita.

Fucking hell.

We all owe every child a duty of care. Every single child.

If i have to change my behaviour to keep a child safe, however miniscule the risk, i absolutely will do so. Whether it’s my child, your child, any child.

Blink66 · 16/12/2017 12:36

fatberg

I didn't say that - but I don't like being told it is my responsibility - it's not. I may choose to help, but I didn't choose to accept your responsibility as my own.

As I said, if I were asked to (as we are at out school) then I don't post. But taking a picture and not positing doesn't present that risk and doesn't present a risk to the child in question.

I think our school has a good balance - choose to go to the performance with or without photos allowed. There is no risk at all then, but then another set of objections come top which are not safeguarding at all. Its a compromise that works for the other 119 children as well as the child with a special request.

fatberg · 16/12/2017 12:37

Who the fuck takes photos at the school gate? What even are you talking about? But if there was someone taking photos at the gate, we’d use the other gate.

The issue with adoption is that adopted kids have another family, often fairly close by (same local authority is normal) who think their kid was stolen by social services and want them back. Just because it wasn’t an issue for the one adoptive family you knew doesn’t mean it’s not an issue for all those families all over this thread saying repeatedly that it’s an issue.

MrsPestilence · 16/12/2017 12:39

Blink how dare you call Ketzele entitled, your post is amongst the most entitled I have seen. RTFT and attempt to intellectualise (think hard about) what has been said.

Kettzele, MrsA Flowers there are a lot of twats who will never understand, because they either don't want to or don't have the capacity to.

Blink66 · 16/12/2017 12:41

Newname12

If i have to change my behaviour to keep a child safe, however miniscule the risk, i absolutely will do so.

Nice words, but is it true? Do you never use any road transport or rail? Very minute risk of causing a child injury - but most people still choose to do so. If everyone didn't there would be no road accidents involving children.

Doesn't stand up - does it? You take the balance of risk/benefits into account.

JacquesHammer · 16/12/2017 12:43

You take the balance of risk/benefits into account

And the benefit is your NEED for a photo, seriously?

Rufus27 · 16/12/2017 12:44

Blink "Seriously, don't see what the issue is with adoption"

I am lost for words! As a teacher and an adoptive mum of a child who would be in grave danger if his picture (in uniform) went onto social media, I find your comments at best naive and actually down right offensive.

Just about every adopted child I know has, at some point, been teased for being adopted. I am still asked about my child's 'real mum'; I frequently get told things like 'what if his parents want him back' or asked why I couldnt have 'my own' child. Even some teachers fail to see the issue with asking an adopted child to bring in baby photos or do a family tree which can cause tremendous problems. You really think there is no issue with adoption these days? If there were no issues, adoptive children wouldn't qualify for Pupil Premium (Plus).

More seriously, there are adopted children all over the country who could be in danger if their birth families knew their location. I know someone whose adopted child was identified after a parent uploaded a school play onto social media and a friend of a friend spotted the child's uniform. It got back to birth family (recently released from long term jail sentence) and they arrived at the school gate. Luckily the Police arrived in time to stop anything horrendous happening, but the child and his adoptive family have had to relocate out of the county.

In my own very average school we have at least four families with children who would be in serious danger if their locations were revealed.

reallyanotherone · 16/12/2017 12:44

I think our school has a good balance - choose to go to the performance with or without photos allowed. There is no risk at all then, but then another set of objections come top which are not safeguarding at all. Its a compromise that works for the other 119 children as well as the child with a special request

Except now the whole school and the parents, friends and relatives have now worked out who the at risk child is.

I would think this effectively is a data protection breach by your school. That is information that only the school should know.

It is not a child with a “special request”. It is a child who’s life may be threatened or changed significantly if their whereabouts become public.

fatberg · 16/12/2017 12:47

And since we’re now doing risk assessments and comparisons (FML), the right of my kid to not be outed or bullied about being adopted still trumps your ‘need’ to take a photo.

Newname12 · 16/12/2017 12:49

*Nice words, but is it true? Do you never use any road transport or rail? Very minute risk of causing a child injury - but most people still choose to do so. If everyone didn't there would be no road accidents involving children.

Doesn't stand up - does it? You take the balance of risk/benefits into account.*

I refer you back to cory’s post upthread who explained the difference between population risk vs. Individual risk much better than i can.

Blink66 · 16/12/2017 12:53

entitled - "believing oneself to be inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment"

What special treatment do I want? It is "entitled" by definition to expect others to change their behaviour towards you just to meet their choices against your own.

It is possible to both understand the argument, and still make choices not in alignment with the argument. You will have seen on here, there is not universal agreement as is suggested - these "rights" being indicated do not actually exist. You cannot prevent me publishing your photograph if taken in a public space.

All I have suggested is that some compromise is in order to allow for safeguarding, but also for the vast majority of parents to take photos. But for some reason some children's desires are less worthy than others.

Blink66 · 16/12/2017 12:59

Newname12

But you said you would change your behaviour to keep a child safe? Are you now saying children can be killed by your choices as long as you don't know them by name?

Don't matter whether population or individual (and yes, I know about stats to post-degree level, so no need for a refresher), do you indeed risk any child's life by using road or rail transport?

If so, why? Why not change your behaviour?

JacquesHammer · 16/12/2017 13:00

But for some reason some children's desires are less worthy than others

Some children's NEEDS are more worthy of consideration than other children's yes.

Would I expect an at risk child to have more consideration than mine? Yes, I would and support that fully.

MrsPestilence · 16/12/2017 13:06

Vulnerable kids have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety.

Blink66 · 16/12/2017 13:09

On average Microsoft researchers found there are only 6.6 degrees of separation of people on Earth. This will be lower in the UK population.

So there is a non-trivial risk than anyone turning up to see the performance would recognise an adopted child. I don’t advocate the child not taking part, but yet the parents are happy to take this risk.

Why is this risk acceptable? (Compared to near-zero risk of me taking a photo and publishing it on-line for others to see)