Taking Photos of Children at School

[pgkevet]

I find this whole area of rights and duties one that seems entirely wrongly based even though I accept the difficulties that any viewpoint poses.

Take the 'simple' scenario where an airline bans the distribution of peants on a plane in case someone has a peanut allergy...to mind mine it's the responsibility of the allergy sufferer to take the pracautions ..not to impose their needs on everyone else. Or take the example we suffered some years ago with demands that every public building and business premises fit a hearing loop system.. again to my mine the onus should have been on individual or government to provide all beneficial deaf folk with directional dearing aides - it would udoubtedly have been cheaper anyway when you consider they all needed new deal aides to work with the system anyway.

The same approach should apply to children being photographed..it's the responsibility of parents to keep them safe and teach the children to keep themselves safe..an image (digital or otherwise) is not any direct threat ..it's just an image and making it into some dire issue just gives that image more potential power.

It comes down to the same nonsense when I'm apparently no longer allowed to have prejudices..where are my rights? Now I fully agree with laws against acting on those prejudices in any harmful way to others but refuse to abandon my right to a viewpoint.

If there is some terror about a seizure sufferer being affected by camera lights then the same surely applies to theatre lighting..and the answer should be protective lenses or adjusted medication ..not a blanket ban.

If the 'fear' is that some 'biological' parent recognises their adopted child from posted school images then society should have acted to monitor that biological parent..not put restrictions on everyone else.

Data protection acts are an excuse to invent a new tier of legislation and make-work. The real issue should be to stop collecting unnecessary data on everyone in the first place and folk to refuse to part with data as freely as they do. Market forces would then sort most of these things out.

Heck the government keeps vast data on us all and has the leakiest systems with access by so many divisions that it becomes pointless anyway..and they still can't collate from one dept to another.

[Steve]

I accept that my approach to challenging the school was abrupt, but here's my thinking on the matter:

I heard the news on Wednesday morning last week on national radio and then followed it up that evening with some Googling and further research. I can only assume that at least one member of staff (and there are many) at the school would have heard the same and could have acted on it.

I did not know what the school's stance was going to be this year until the announcement was made prior to the performance so I attended the show prepared to challenge if needed. I might have predicted their attitude based on previous years, but equally they could have acted on the recent news and changed their opinion. Could I have discussed it with them before hand? Well yes I suppose, but equally they could have discussed it with me in advance also so that is a two way street. The school did not issue or request any agreement forms to parents for taking photos at any time prior to the event.

Don't get me wrong, there wasn't an out-and-out public debate or argument about it at the school. I just stated out loud that their reasons (i.e. DPA) for enforcing the rule were invalid and that this was announced earlier the same week. I offered the teacher making the announcement the press release on paper which she didn't accept, but the Head Teacher did accept it later after the event. That was the end of it. Both myself and many other members of the audience then proceeded to take pictures during the show.

[sacko]

All teachers and staff are there to look after the well-being of their students, and at the end of the day that is our main priority.

If they have enforced a ban on cameras/flashes, there will be a valid reason for the extreme measure and one that has been spoken about in great depths at a Senior Management meeting.

Taking photos anyway was completely the wrong approach.

Wonder how the member of staff feels about putting in all those extra hours unpaid to run next years nativity. If it wasn't for next years pupils missing out, im sure that there wouldnt be a second thought.

You have to remember that a lot of decisions from schools are made by the LEA, if the schools go against this decision then they wont be 'covered'.

[URL]http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/news/714024/Nurseries-seek-advice-nativity-photograph-bans/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH[/URL]

[R1stu]

Went to my daughters school play last week and they said photos were ok, as long as its for personal use.

[SRH990]

Our schools send out a standard letter at the start of each school year asking for parents to give permission for photos of them to be used by the school i.e. newsletters, noticeboards, web pages etc. AFAIK there are [I]no[/I] restrictions upon parents taking pictures for personal use.

As my wife & I are foster carers all our children are in the social care system and as such, subject to very different rules. We cannot give permission for their photos to be used by the school or any other organisation without express permission from the social work teams Area Manager and we've had this very recently where the BBC were filming a local news article in one of our kids primary schools. Permissions generally can be a pain in the a*se as, in theory, we even need permission to get their hair cut!

It does seem over the top but there are sound reasons behind most of this. These days the majority of kids & young people that we foster are subject to legal proceedings and contact with their parents is often closely supervised with the parents not knowing our address and sometimes the school they attend, we've already had one attempted snatch from our house which eventually ended up with the child in question being snatched by her family whilst on supervised contact!

This leads to many issues with social networking sites, it's now become virtually impossible to stop contact using these sites between parents & children and now there is software that searches these sites using face recognition software, it's getting worse. There are cases now of parents tracking down their children that have adopted, often years ago, causing a great deal of stress & problems to the adopted children & their adopters.

I agree that some people seem to use various bits of the law to suit themselves without reason entering into it but, at times, there can be child protection issues that need careful consideration.

[Mark_T]

[quote=sacko;576333]If they have enforced a ban on cameras/flashes, there will be a valid reason for the extreme measure and one that has been spoken about in great depths at a Senior Management meeting.[/quote]

I'd like to believe you and while what you describe would be best practice it not happeneing that way everywhere.

On previous occasions where I've had cause to have this debate with a school it rapidly became clear that there had been no 'due diligence' and no basis other than a misguided belief that they were 'protecting' the children and that the DPA did cover this.

If there is a legitimate reason for the ban on the use of flash then that is entirely different and just flash should be banned, not photography in totla. , You can't claim that challenging this shows a lack of respect if the school is abusing the DPA and making claims they should know are entirely false.

[Steve]

I will reiterate - in our case, both last year and again this year the school cited the DPA as the reason for the ban. At the 2009 show, there was no announcement from the ICO, but the guidelines were there none-the-less (just didn't know about them then). At the 2010 show last week, the ICO had released its press stating that it is ok and any use of the DPA to ban photos taken for personal use is invalid.

As for the LEA making the decision - cannot be the case. As stated, we went to two shows at two different schools within the same town and LEA on the same day (one for my daughter and one for my son). Daughter's schools stance was no, son's school said yes without being prompted on the matter.

[pk-surfing]

Steve,

You have my full support on this and what you did is probably exactly what I would have done if the same situation had occurred at my daughters school when she was younger (she is 19 and at Uni now !)

The school was clearly wrong to impose this restriction on you as you came through the door.... why am I so sure, well my take on this is that this 'jobsworth' decision should not be based on a postcode lottery, i.e apparently a few schools seem to try to ban taking photos but most dont.
Surely if it is a genuine proven concern then every school etc should be imposing a ban otherwise it becomes a subjective decision by each Headmaster which then becomes a case of 'I like yellow more than you like blue'.

Looking at it from another point of view and in the light of the published guidance you had the foresight to take with you, just what action exactly could the school take against you for taking photographs..... detention, 200 lines, lock you up (I doubt that)

Anyway, you have my vote, and my blood pressure is up now which cant be good!

[Biggles]

Ban all parents from entering school property!!!! Only allow them onsite when they are coming to pick up their bratt because he or she has been excluded!!!! LMAO!!!! :ack2::):ack2:

Problem solved.:cheers2:

[timflyer]

Steve,

I think that I am with you on this one.

I don't think you would have achieved much by speaking to the head privately as he/she would probably have said 'no' and you would have achieved nothing. Sometimes it's a good thing to make a bit of a scene because I guess that the head will then have to phone up the local LEA to report the incident and seek further clarification which may lead to a rethink. So, yes, perhaps it ambushed them a bit but sometimes it's the kick that's needed to force them to review the policy.

To be fair, it's always easier in these situations to set a 'safer' policy so I can see how we end up with these apparently excessively protective policies - and there's no right or wrong as evidenced by different governing bodies having different policies. What we have to do is to continually challenge policies [not just this specific one] otherwise we end up with safer and safer ones to the point of stupidity.

Interestingly, our local school is fine with us taking photos; but the local leisure centres are generally a bit of a pain and 'ambush' us with latest policies.

[Mart61]

I'm fully behind Paul (sacko) on this one. Why?

[quote=Steve;576204]I now seem to have stirred up a hornet's nest at my daughter's school...[/quote]

Indeed you have and, from what I can understand from your OP, in public too. To use your own words [I]"I instantly challenged her on this from the audience and then proceeded to take a good few photos"[/I]. You, by your own admission, have publicly challenged a figure of authority and then, without waiting for a response, acted wilfully against her instruction and proceeded to take pictures. I ask you this: What kind of example have you set, to the children and other parents, by doing so?

[quote=Steve;576204]...with various opinions being thrown about at the school gates...[/quote]

Sounds to me that, as a result of your actions, mob culture ensued. Nice work...

[quote=Steve;576204]...the teacher who made the announcement in tears...[/quote]

That is nothing short of disgusting! I only hope those that were responsible for this are proud of themselves!

[quote=Steve;576204]...and meetings being called at the school...[/quote]

[quote=Steve;576204]I have this evening written a long and detailed email to the head teacher of the school...[/quote]

And do you feel that the ensuing meetings, the time that will now be spent by the head reading your [I]"long and detailed email"[/I], on defending her teachers, her school and her policies is the best use of their time? All to resolve, or otherwise, a crusade by a few parents, of which you seem to have become their champion, over their right to take photographs on private property?

Personally I think their time could be better spent on educating your children.

[quote=Steve;576204]What's the consensus of opinion? Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

You are wrong.

As you may know, I am a keen amateur photographer and up for protecting the rights of the photographer to take pictures.

However I am also up for the rights of the owners or managers of private property to restrict photography on their premises without having to defend their policy to anybody.

In closing I feel that, should this crusade be continued with any vigour, it will lead to the total banning of photography by parents in all schools. And do you know what? I'd support it wholeheartedly.