That you should not put pictures of other peoples children on Facebook???

[Love2bake]

I just noticed that someone I know has put a group picture of some children on their Facebook account.

I know that this person does not have permission from the parents, in fact I am sure the parents dont even know about it.

Is this unreasonable or not??

lets just accept we all have different points of view. Some people don't mind taking pics of other people's kids without permission, others do. Some like to just upload the pics of their own kids or others, and that's fair enough, up to them, but some of us prefer not to and are more discrete.
not sure why others are taking such offence because many other parents out there are slightly more cautious in their approach to uploading pics online.if they choose to be cautious, that's up to them.

Scottishmum I think you are overcautious but like you say, that's down to you, and fair enough insofar as it goes.

But the overall effect of this seems to be that people can't take photographs of anyone except their own DC any more. So photos at the park, at the zoo, on the beach on holiday, at the school nativity play are out.

These are the sort of events that make the memories, and to be unable to capture them and make an album just seems to me to be so sad. My first steps were on a beach in Guernsey, and my mum managed to get a snap, she still proudly produces it sometimes. But I think there are a couple of other children in the background who were strangers. Seriously, now with my DD, I should not take that photo?

And all because there is an infinitessimal risk, so small it's not worth thinking about, that a paedophile might look at a picture, which wouldn't actually hurt you DC in any way at all.

I have a real issue with this.

Love2bake, I do understand the question, I just don't agree that it is a problem and may embark on a 'this is what's wrong with the world' rant.

Pictures of children are not sexual images, even nude ones (unless you work in Asda) so why do we now act as if they are, assuming that every toddler is legitimate bait to some sicko or pervert. By doing this we are legitimising their perversions as something understandable.

In terms of paedophiles (which I realise I can't even spell), if some bastard wants to knock one out over a nativity play I'm not sure I would be happy if my child were the shepherd in question, but I don't see why the danger of that is real enough to prevent 99.9% of the population taking a healthy and loving interest in children, even other peoples.

Yes I'm sure people can, if they try hard enough, hack into your account, download your photos, photoshop them etc but this is illegal and they should be caught and severely punished.

I, in the meantime, should be able to share pictures of my children and their friends without being reprimanded for invasion of privacy or not getting the right forms signed.

Protect your children, by all means, but get some perspective people.

Of course different people see things differently - I thought that we were engaging in an intelligent debate about an issue that is very pertinent to modern parenting (something our own parents never had to concern themselves with.)

The problem with your pov, Scottishmummy, is that it becomes one of semantics. "Cautious" is an entirely subjective term. As is "discrete". And implies that those who disagree with you are not cautious and not discrete.

Ultimately, I believe I am also very cautious and discrete. I only show the photos on facebook to people I would show them to in rl. Furthermore, I agree that it is polite to check if it is ok to TAKE the photo in the first place. What the contentious issue seems to be is whether networking sites such as facebook are a safe place to post a photo album. I would say that, as long the album is secure, it is no less safe than a tradional album that I could potentially show to all the same folk, in person.

I guess whether its unreasonable or not depends on their security levels. I wouldnt take a picture of the childrens school friends and put it on FB but close family with friends only security I DIDNT see it as a problem but am now wondering Why anyone would put photos on with NO security is a bit of a mystery to me.

Sheesh im paranoid about security enough without adding something else to fret over - WW now trundles over to FB to remove all personal details.....

I can see where you are coming from, that things are now far too PC. I was at a soft play centre with a whole group of other mums, we took our DC there one afternoon and there was a sign saying 'no cameras allowed'. We all accepted that was the case, and appreciate it's done for the greater good, to protect all our babies.We capture pictures of them in the privacy of each of our homes so there are plenty group shots. Not the end of the world.

Bluebutterfly, I've already stated we have different points of view and I'm not targeting anyone or making anyone feel bad for the decisions they make. fgs it's hard enough being a parent, none of us have the right to criticise why other people make the decisions they make. that's up to them and I'm sorry you felt the choice words I used last time are upsetting others, that wasn't how it was intended

Fruitstick, loving the direct approach.

You are right, in my view.

But I know that scottishmum is trying to be balanced in the face of what she views as risky parenting, which is nice. It's good to hear both sides without a big row.

I am still interested though to know, whether the pro no-snaps brigade really think that the loss of spontanaeity (sp) and question of not being able to take photos of DC when they are in public places is worth it. Do you really never take photos of your kids wielding a bucket and spade on holiday without asking everyone in the background first? If a parent next to you on the beach takes a snap of their DC and your's is in shot, do you approach them?

What about if you went to a city, e.g. photo in trafalger square. Obviously you can't ask everyone and a child may be in shot. Does that photo not get taken?

Sorry if I sound OTT but I'm really interested to understand how this all works, and where the boudaries lie.

Actually, you could argue that traditional photography is more dangerous - you take an innocent photo of your beautiful child in the bath and take it to your local photo shop to have it developed. God knows who sees or has access to the negatives. Frankly, I think that we are all just a bit more paranoid than we used to be - who used to think twice about handing over photos of their own children and other peoples children at parties etc. to the person behind the counter at the photo shop?

can we not have a good at those who are maybe not following the general consensus please, its not against the law to have a different opinion on something.

I meant go instead of good, god I really must be shattered.off to bed soon me thnks!

thanks for that chukkypig, i'm not being contrary, i'm just trying to see this from all angles too.

I don't really think that you are upsetting others Scottishmummy - I am sorry if I seem to be argumentative (I have always had a direct approach which probably seems more forceful on a thread than is intended). I was simply suggesting that the different pov's that you mention come from a different application of words such as cautious and discrete.

It is an important parenting issue (the internet) and I think it is great when people can discuss their pov's openly. And I respect your right to feel differently about it, too.

yes I know, the Internet is going to be an added parenting stress for all of us these days, wasn't in our parents generation. Just another thing to worry over.

Scottishmum, tricky though isn't it, when views are polar opposites. And of course we all get defensive when our views are placed under the microscope, as a different view is felt (from a strong emotional point of view) to be an attack on our way of bringing up our children.

Of course we're probably all right. Be very careful about personal details on the internet, but not paranoid about what "might happen" to innocent photos of children.

I still am interested to find out what a permission-only pics person would really do in the situations I outlined above.

Don't use facebook. Full stop.

All you do is add to the web of information out there for any lunatic to obtain.

My sis put pics from my wedding up on Facebook. Ppttffhhh..... whatever. I got over it, after some mock-outrage aimed in her direction though.

YANBU, perhaps a little bit hysterical about it though.

Oh, and I also agree with Fruitstick!

Get some perspective.

Do you know what though scottish, I've just had a minor revelation.

When people of my generation grew up (late 70's) we were allowed out, running around, up the road, on bicycles blah blah. There always were a few funny blokes around from time to time but we were not stupid and if approached by a funny bloke legged it. There was a thread on here a while ago about that sort of thing and a lot of people had been approached, every single one had just gone off.

Now, children aren't allowed out nearly so much. So they have their contact with friends on the net, when before they would have met them in RL. The funny bloke from the park is still there, it's just writing rather than RL. Children aren't any more stupid than they used to be, and as in the old days at the first sign of dubious behaviour the child will leg it, cyberspace style.

I mean, if I was corresponding with a 13 year old boy, and I was 12, and I agreed to meet him at macdonald's in the high steet, and I turned up and it wasn't a 13 year old boy it was a 35 year old man, I would leg it. Children weren't stupid in our day and they still aren't.

Sorry that was a long one! Maybe that helps with your worries a bit scottish. Guess what though - I'm sure my POV is the right one

Chukkypig - in response to your question about whether or not to take pictures of our DCs in public places - I'm not saying you shouldn't take the pictures. Take as many pics as you like - it's the putting up pics of other people's children on networking sites like Facebook, without asking first, that I have a problem with.

I have a fab pic of my DS in the bath with his friend of the same age. I have a print of it in my album, and show it to my friends and relations.

But when I posted it on DS' blog, I cropped out the bit of the picture that had his friend in it, because I didn't know if his mum would like it being up there.

No harm done, the picture was still taken, the memory is still captured. But I was careful about where and how I publicised that picture.

Little, I can see where you're coming from. Really I can. But I just find it sad.

It's like (as fruitstick says) you are accepting that people with bad intentions will view your DS's blog and, while you take responsibility for exposing him in this way, you wouldn't expose anyone elses DC.

This is going from a starting point that people with bad intentions will look at the blog, which I find depressing and, I would guess, is really extraordinarily unlikely.

Sorry had to have a little peek at your profile, your DS is gorgoues!

when I joined FB I discovered my sil had put up pics of my parents, me, dh, dd, all without ever mentioning it to us. My parents were a bit upset as they were silly pics taken at Xmas & they didn't expect them to be up for public perusal, I was upset just at not being asked.

She deleted everything, which I didn't ask her to do, & i have a pic of me & dd on my FB. She, however, has several hundred friends - very random, i have 6 (popular,me).

I think it's about manners really.

Also Little, as per my previous point, most abuse is perpetrated my family members or people who know the abused.

I questioned whether, knowing this fact, people refrain from showing photos of other people DC, or in fact their own DC to family and friends. As that is where the greater risk of any actual abuse is.

I still don't get what the danger is, even in the extremely unlikely event that a paedophile does see a snap of your DC. They don't know where you live etc and if they are active abusers probably have their own family and friend DC to attend to (sorry).

I think you're being reasonable, I've taken pics of ds with other babies but I normally only put up ones online that show him on his own, or with grown up members of the family.

Agree with fruitstick's post, but I respect that people might not want pictures of their childrne on the net so would not personally put pictures of others on my FB profile.

Just on your last post, ChukkyPig - I just want to say again that for me this has nothing to do with the potential for abusers viewing the pictures. I have no idea whether that's a legitimate risk or not, it sounds like scottishmummy knows more through her work, but I am blissfully ignorant on the matter.

It's all about manners and acknowledging that some people feel very strongly about this, and therefore asking the question before we do something which is essentially irreversible.