To be angry at photos at Nativity?

[MrsAnamCara]

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.

Blink, could you explain as a risk manager, how the overall risks to children in general should affect the rules of a school who know that one of the children in their class has been removed from a violent father who has threatened to track him and his mother down and kill them?

What has the general risk averseness of society (which I totally agree with!) have to do with the specific risk assessment of a child known to be under threat?

It is like my example with the asthma: yes, as a society we fuss too much about illness. But that is not a reason for not keeping an inhaler accessible for a child known to be suffering from severe asthma.

If a school is very strict with the rules, there is a good chance they know something you don't.

And yes, wellies' dh may have chosen his job. But children do not choose to be born to violent and abusive parents. They really do not.

Too many posters seem to come on this thread to make a general complaint about the ills of modern society. Headteachers can't afford to do that: they have to think about individual children.

9 shows this week. At every one parents we’re told they could take photos/film but nothing showing other children was to go in social media. Within 15 minutes of each show finishing photos/clips of the whole stage were up on Facebook.

This. Exactly this. This is why 'asking people not to put pictures on social media' is NOT a sufficient risk control measure if the risk is high for a specific child.

Also, to those saying it is not YOUR job to keep anyone else's child safe, bear in mind that we are talking about a school event, and it IS the school's legal responsibility to keep EVERY ONE of their children safe. That is why the school doesn't say 'never take a photograph of your child in a public place and put it on social media' - because at that point, the children's safety is not their legal responsibility. However, on the school premises, at a school event, the normal legal safeguarding rules apply, and the legal responsibility of the school is very significant.

Our school recorded the play participated by 60 kids of Y1,Y2 and CD can be purchased for £10

So don’t know how Not recording bits of the play going to protect the child?

Secondly, if one vulnerable child can’t be left out of the play, doesn’t seem right can you think why other parents lose the right to treasure their kids part of life?

It’s like saying the vulnerable child’s happiness is more important than other children’s

Not everyone is on social media and some have better sense of what to share.
Those who share it may not put school name and location.. ??
Somemay have better privacy settings
So many variables
Please don’t tar everyone with same brush.

YVVBU !

welliesontheschoolrun

Absolutely. Given the fact that ARA exist - if you choose (and I totally respect the fact you do) to do so then you have increase the risk to your family - that is a fact.

This does not justify ARA, but the whole point of terrorists is to make people choose when they shouldn't have to.

I do not condone what they do - but I'm sure you'd recognise that you DH was in the Army there is an increased likelihood you would become a single parent. By DH working in pharma there is an increase likelihood of your children being attacked by ARA.

I respect and agree it's your choice and you should be free to choose. Equally I want you to be able to make that choice freely - but the reality is that you cannot ignore the real stats, which as you say do increase risks to your child. ARA exist, and so by working in pharma, it is the case you have chosen a path that increases the risks.

I do understand that - but we are free to travel our own paths

And damn the consequences to an at risk child right? As long as you "follow your own path"

the right to treasure their kids part of life

corythatwas

Certainly. My argument was that at our school there are multiple performances and not everyone appears in all performances, as they cannot be photographed (as well as unavailable at the time etc.). Some performances can be photographed and others not. I believe this is a balance that satisfies safeguarding and meets the desires of other parents.

So, the risk of being identified has been mitigated - and the reason for not being in the next performance is unknown; and generally hard to identify.

So the risks that remain of being identified through being detected as not being in the photo are highly remote. In addition it was then suggested that damage could be caused by just being identified as being weird or special - ye again these risks in term of real harm are minor.

Yet, these minor and low risk considerations are still being blow out of all proportion in terms of general risk adverse management tom prevent the desires of other parents from taking photos.

I also disagree with what a poster said, in that to avoid risk to any child they would change their lifestyle - but when presented with a population risk that would indeed reduce if they changed their lifestyle, refused to answer whether they indeed did do so.

That is the connection.

I manage risk professionally everyday

That explains a lot.

You talk in terms of risk. I think in terms of impact.

You think the risk is small. I, with the full knowledge of my children's circumstances, do not.

You think the benefit of families being able to take and share photos with impunity outweighs the risk/impact to specific children. I do not.

So the risks that remain of being identified through being detected as not being in the photo are highly remote

You absolutely cannot say that for certain without the benefit of knowledge of each individual card.

It makes me sad that a whole generation of kids could potentially go through to adulthood without any visual memories of their achievements at school
It's only recently that this has become possible. There are no photographs or videos of me at school. People didn't generally have video recorders, and no-one took cameras into school. I did school plays and concerts - there are no recordings/photos. There are no video recordings of my DC either from their school plays, etc - people just didn't video-record them then, not at school, apart from once for their GCSE drama exam. There were occasional photos of them in school newsletters, that's it.

Actually, scratch my lost post. I don't even understand what you're trying to say in it, on rereading.

Although mine wasn't any clearer.

Anyway, I'm sure you get the gist.

So don’t know how Not recording bits of the play going to protect the child?

It as been explained multiple times - the school will know exactly who can be seen, and who not. Any DVD / photo / video prepared by the school can be edited / specifically shot to avoid revealing the children in question before being released.

That is why forbidding photograohy / recording by attendees during the show, coupled with a school recording / photographs and a chance before / after the show for attendees to taking individual pictures of their own child (and / or a whole cast photograph once some children have very discreetly been removed), is a perfect soluton for everyone.

As a parent /attendee you get to make genuine memories by actually watching the thing and paying full attention, and you also get a recording of the show that you know can be shared and shown freely at no risk to anyone. Win-win.

My argument was that at our school there are multiple performances

Whereas at ours there's one per yeargroup. A yeargroup is one class. So would be glaringly obvious if a child didn't perform.

Blink- pardon me if I have read that wrong but have you just told me that I have placed my children at risk just because of what their father does.

Um...you said your children are at risk...because of their father's job. Did you not understand your own post?

fatberg

Sorry, nativities here are after school performances. Not part of the school day.

Chimera- I agree with every word you said

Daisypond, for anyone over about 40 - probably younger - then we have a few still photographs in hard copy of bits of our childhood, and almost never of performances (there are about 4 before /after performance Polaroids of me + my siblings at nativities over the course of a decade or so)

It's OK. We remember them well. It's genuinely not an issue, and has done us no harm....

JacquesHammer

So it is possible to manage risk and allow photos if done differently. Your school just needs to think a little more as well rather than just doing what they've always done.

Fatberg

That’s right! Someof us have one precious kid for whom we work our assoff to live and enjoy our life peacefully.

If there are abusive exs, parents, grandparents then they should be the ones locked up not the rest of us suffer.

BTW well done on picking the post apart...true MN spirit of AIBU

I have a job that makes my child more vulnerable. I would not for one minute expect to have the right to demand other parents do not make images of my child in something like a nativity. The real risk would be if someone was to put a photo on social media with public settings and tag me in it. To safeguard this I do not use my real name on social media. I have also told the school not to publish photos of my child alongside their name. At my child’s nativity other parents filmed as did I!

So it is possible to manage risk and allow photos if done differently. Your school just needs to think a little more as well rather than just doing what they've always done

If you had read the thread you'd notice I said school allows each child to be photographed by their parents after the show.

They are forbidden to take photographs during the performance and of taking videos at all

I don't mind not having "action" pics of DD if it keeps other kids safe. A photo of the nativity isn't a basic human right

One of the parents that posted a video of her child and several others is a childminder. She turned up to the show with 4 mindees- no tickets bought for them, of course. She was so busy not missing the opportunity to film her child’s every facial expression (and others) that she took no notice when her mindees got bored, started crying or shouting/screaming. She’d sat the group in the middle of the 2nd row and was leaned over the people in the front row’s shoulders throughout. Because of where they were, getting the upset kids out was impossible so they had to stop the performance to move them all. So that fucked up the DVD of that cast and lost the school money as well as those parents the chance to have a keepsake from a decent angle.

Someone else ranted that they had been waiting to be let in for an hour. The show was at 1:30pm in the school hall and the children don’t finish their lunch until 1pm. We turned it around in 15 minutes and let them in in plenty of time, but she felt she was entitled to be let in at 12:15pm regardless of what the school needs to ensure 270 kids get fed.

And then there was the woman who brought no cash, but ordered a cup of coffee and helped herself to a mince pie, carton of juice and bottle of water anyway. When asked for £2.50 she bit the mince pie and offered it back. She thought her £2 ticket entitled her to see the show and eat/drink whatever she wanted.

Where the fuck are all the braincells?????!!!!!!

ye again these risks in term of real harm are minor

No.
The impact from bullying or being made to feel different or being excluded to an adopted child are huge. These are children whose early lives were so fucked up they may never achieve normalcy. My only goal for my DD is that she grows up to be able to have some self-esteem. If she could mage a friendship that’d be great. Reading, writing, maths would be nice, but are way down the list of what I hope she’ll get out of school.

So yes, here’s what matters to me;
Actual physical safety
Not being made to feel different or get bullied
Not being excluded (from photos or play)

And all of those, in a school setting, absolutely get priority over you wanting to take a photo.

In a park, have at it. Take photos. Put them on fb, I don’t care. But in school, her right to participate fully and not have any other repercussions absolutely wins.

You talk in terms of risk. I think in terms of impact.

Your right that's why I do think this way - risk is outcome of the probability weighted impact.

Considering impact alone is as I said previously irrational and is a problem with the general population in understanding that generally only bad things get attention.

Most people do not consider the "impact" alone of everyday risks however - they then rely on risk and low probability to suit their own argument.

If you wanted to travel from London to Edinburgh most people would not fly, but really they are pricing an additional risk they are willing to take. It's quite interesting how much more risk people are willing to take for a single pound - yet, blow other risk out of proportion.