Photographing children - how do you navigate the ethical risks?

[BertieTBE]

On holiday with my Dad some years ago, we were having a debate about how careful you should need to be when photographing children (who are not family or friend's children). He had been innocently snapping away at a young girl, who happened to be a rather funny character - an interesting subject, without even considering the possibility that, sadly, what he was doing could land you in serious hot water. In the end we put our difference of opinion down to a cultural change between generations.

A few weeks earlier I witnessed a middle aged man being assaulted on my local beach by two burly blokes (I say assaulted because that's what it was!). He had been pointing a compact camera (little if any zoom) in the direction of a beach which, as tends to be the case on a nice summer's day, happened to have some children playing on it. I have no idea whether the man was acting in a sinister manner, perhaps he was, or not, but there was nothing to suggest that was the case. Yet he was thrown to the ground, injured, and will no doubt have to move from the area after the attention it attracted, even if he's eventually proven innocent.

As a parent, I admit, I might be concerned if a stranger started snapping away at my son or daughter.

So what do you do? Never take a picture of a child you come across, just in case your innocent photographic intentions are misinterpreted? Is there a line? A way of going about it so that you don't upset anyone?

How sad that a post such as this is needed!

Look forward to reading your thoughts.

Thank you very much.

 

[maninsuitcase]

I think the simple answer is don't do it. The full answer, as always, is more complex.

The beach example is hard as you don't know exactly what he was photographing but if it was a scenic with kids in, thats perfectly fine. If he was photographing some kids he didn't know then thats not.

I come at this as a middle aged male parent of 2 (soon to be 4) and I would probably get narky if a chap (sorry but ladies probably would get a free pass*) was taking photos of my kids as the main subject. If some one was just taking a photo of the beach and the kids happen to be in frame? no problem.

I think the bottom line is don't take photos where the primary subject is some one else's child. It's just not worth the hassle.

*I think this is important as whose not to say the lady isn't taking images to sell as she gets away with it?

 

[arclight]

Not territory I would stray into. No matter how innocent your intentions it will simply not look good.
Unfortunate as it may be, trouble will find you if you go about photographing kids.

 

[pooley]

Unfortunately the Daily Mail crew have made this into an issue when in reality there is nothing untoward going on. The vast majority of people are sensible enough to accept nothing sinister is happening, but until the neanderthal approaches and informs you of his 'Jeremy Kyle rights' you won't know who he/she is.

Put simply, do you value your hobby and your shots highly enough to risk the wrath, or do you approach the parents first, explain your intent and maybe miss the natural affect of the shot?

Sad and not necessarily right, but that's the way things work nowadays

 

[KIPAX]

Its simple.... just use your common sense..

I mean seriously.. forget about the laws.. forget about what you should and shouldnt be able to do.. forget all that..

If you turn up at your local pool or beech... start taking pics of a young girl in a swimming costume messing about in the water... her parents are nearby.. forget what you think should happen? Use your common sense.. Chances are dad will want a word.. chances are your laminated rights straight of a web page arnt going to impress him..

I know how it should be.. what i am saying is ..how it is.. and all the moaning wont change it.. thats how the world is.. once you get to grips with that.. just use your god given common sense


Sorry... but people do need a reality check sometimes

 

[big soft moose]

Its simple.... just use your common sense..

I mean seriously.. forget about the laws.. forget about what you should and shouldnt be able to do.. forget all that..

If you turn up at your local pool or beech... start taking pics of a young girl in a swimming costume messing about in the water... her parents are nearby.. forget what you think should happen? Use your common sense.. Chances are dad will want a word.. chances are your laminated rights straight of a web page arnt going to impress him..

I know how it should be.. what i am saying is ..how it is.. and all the moaning wont change it.. thats how the world is.. once you get to grips with that.. just use your god given common sense


Sorry... but people do need a reality check sometimes

exactly

personally I take lots of pictures of kids I don't know - and the parents are always happy.

but that's down to the particular circumstances - ie i'm a head ranger, and we need pictures of kids (and indeed people of all ages) enjoying our sites.
I'm also in uniform and moving around openly with nothing to hide...

so far no parent has ever raised an eyebrow - but if anyone ever did I could clearly explain why , and if they still weren't happy i'd delete the shots

Would I behave the same way off duty ... no.

 

[HMansfield]

The beach example is hard as you don't know exactly what he was photographing but if it was a scenic with kids in, thats perfectly fine. If he was photographing some kids he didn't know then thats not.

Care to elaborate?

I come at this as a middle aged male parent of 2 (soon to be 4) and I would probably get narky if a chap (sorry but ladies probably would get a free pass*) was taking photos of my kids as the main subject.

*I think this is important as whose not to say the lady isn't taking images to sell as she gets away with it?

Women can be paedophiles and/or child abusers too.

As others have said, it's about common sense. Unless someone has a DSLR or CSC with a dirty great lens on the front, it's not easy to determine what they're focussing on.
What you can usually take a better guess at though, is whether someone's trying not to be noticed, or is overly nervous as they're taking a picture.

If someone's acting oddly, and looks as though they're specifically targeting children, let the authorities know. Creating panic benefits nobody.

Alternatively, as most of are likely to have a camera with us, go strike up a conversation and offer to compare shots. If they react like a rabbit in the headlights and want to get out of there as quickly as possible, again let the authorities know.

 

[woof woof]

A few weeks earlier I witnessed a middle aged man being assaulted on my local beach by two burly blokes...

Personally I'd have immediately dialled 999 and reported the assault and I'd probably have intervened. I'd definitely have made sure that I could identify the attackers and followed them if necessary.

I've never been given any trouble by men. I've been sworn at by yoofs and given the foulest of looks by women, middle aged and upwards and often they nudge and whisper loudly to their companions. Mostly if there are people around I put my camera away, hold it at my side or behind my back or if I am shooting I'm very careful what I shoot.

On the female paedophile thing, I did read something years ago that said that a lot of female paedophile behaviour goes unreported or if it is reported doesn't result in a prosecution and I assume the situation is the same today. The image of the paedophile woman doesn't sit well with the caring nurturing ideal. In reality though the female paedophile is probably far more common than many would want to believe.

 

[maninsuitcase]

Care to elaborate?

Women can be paedophiles and/or child abusers too.

Elaborate how? If its was a wide angle scenic which the kids happen to be in frame whys the issue? They'd be small and no the focus of the image. Obviously if its an image of the kids specifically then a lot of parents wouldn't want that. But as I wasn't there I can't comment on what that bloke who got assaulted photographed, maybe he was taking problem images, maybe he wasn't.

I was trying to say that women can be peadophiles too. Which is what I eluded to but for various reasons its normally middle aged men who take the brunt. A woman would probably be the perfect source as they attract at less suspicion around kids.

 

[supersammy]

I might throw my opinion here, generally I seem to be a social hand grenade on this site - so ignore me if you prefer.

I don't see the problem with photographing kids. With the number of CCTV cameras in society, it is obvious that images will be captured from people from all walks of life. I know plenty of people who have camera's in their cars to help with insurance claims, so it's not limited just to organisations.

So if you want to do it, then do so. Show some respect, and if someone asks you to delete a photo, or view one then do so. It will cut out 99% of difficult situations. I'd also be willing to talk to people about what I am doing... Now I'm quite a confident outgoing person, who is quite into weight lifting. But I'd just try and resolve any problems by saying that I liked the photo and offering to email any parents a copy if needed.

Don't allow yourself to live in fear. If you limit what you are willing to do because you are worried about what others will think, you will miss out on some precious life. The truth is we all have a very short about of time on this planet - so just screw it and do it.

 

[Steve]

It's a shame we live in such a paranoid society now.

I love photos from the 40s and 50s of street urchins. I did some research on street photography a while ago, and it was noticable how few contained children; for the reasons given in this thread I imagine.

 

[simonblue]

A lot of the time its just using your common sense,i have shot picture on the beach that included children.
But i would say if you're a person who feel uncomfortable around confrontation,just don't do it because there's always a chance of it happening.

Plus you can always ask if its ok,i was shooting little one do some crabbing on the beach,a lot of other children came round some with their parent i let them know their children might be in my shots was that ok,they all said no problem.

Another time i was shooting around the donkey on the beach none of the parent around mined i had look their way to see if it was ok,then all of a sudden this woman came up behind me and started making a big fuss even those her children were not even in the photos,but she really try to stir it up with the other parents around,but they took no notice of her in the end she stormed off,i went over to her to say her children were not in the my shots,she could check my camera,she clam down a bit and i left it their.

Also a few years ago i read an essay that Don Mccullin had wrote about the subject,he said he had been chase down the street once after taking a picture,and that sometimes if you're out on the street taking photos theses problem will happen.

 

[HMansfield]

I was trying to say that women can be peadophiles too. Which is what I eluded to but for various reasons its normally middle aged men who take the brunt. A woman would probably be the perfect source as they attract at less suspicion around kids.

Fair enough. The way you phrased it made it sound as though you would allow a strange woman a "free pass" to take photo's, but not a strange man. However, you did only mention the concern that the woman might be taking them to sell, and not for any perverse gratification herself.

 

[supersammy]

Fair enough. The way you phrased it made it sound as though you would allow a strange woman a "free pass" to take photo's, but not a strange man. However, you did only mention the concern that the woman might be taking them to sell, and not for any perverse gratification herself.

If a man or women gets "perverse gratification" from photos of clothed children, they do not have to take photos themselves to get a hard drive full of pleasure material.

I'd have no dramas with my niece having photo's taken with her clothes on. If she was naked and I caught someone taking photos of her whilst having her nappy changed, I'd end up going to prison. It's all about common decency and respect.

In reality the best response to anyone who wants to infringe your right to get on with your life is "go **** yourself". I find that generally sorts out if they are really up for the argument.

 

[Byker28i]

I'd have no dramas with my niece having photo's taken with her clothes on. If she was naked and I caught someone taking photos of her whilst having her nappy changed, I'd end up going to prison. It's all about common decency and respect.
.

Really? In what situation do you think a stranger could take an image of your niece getting her nappy changed? Personally I'm always concerned by statements such as the above, offering violence as the first and only solution. I think that says more about you.

 

[Byker28i]

I have no issues with photographing children, you just need to be open about it, not conceal what you are doing. If it turns out that it is a good image then generally I show it to the parents and offer them a copy.

 

[Ferj]

To throw in my 2p.

Firstly sex offenders & paedophiles can be any age and either sex. You can't spot them and they don't wear tshirts identifying them! Secondly there are probably less about than you think and it is very unlikely that they would not get their thrills watching kids on a beach...

I have 2 young boys. They play naked in our back garden which is overseen by rows of terraced houses. Do I care? No! If I took them to the beach and they were naked (which they probably would be!) how would I know someone had taken a photo with a 200mm lens? I wouldn't and as long as they don't approach or touch my children I couldn't care as we are in public.

That said if the kids have friends over or were playing with others outside at the park or beach etc I would be considerate of other parents personal feelings.

 

[big soft moose]

Really? In what situation do you think a stranger could take an image of your niece getting her nappy changed? Personally I'm always concerned by statements such as the above, offering violence as the first and only solution. I think that says more about you.

if you caught some pervert taking indecent pictures of your child, I think violence is a perfectly reasonable response ...

 

[realspeed]

I have taken many pictures of my granddaughter naked (she is only 2and a half) with my son and daughter in law and wife watching but not in the pictures. This is in Brazil in their summer in their own swimming pool.

Anyone looking at the photos would straight away would get the wrong impression. Oh I would also never ever post them on the internet.

Problem is there are too many interfering goody goody people who have nothing better to do than stick their noses into what others are doing. They are the perverts with nothing better to do.

 

[petersmart]

if you caught some pervert taking indecent pictures of your child, I think violence is a perfectly reasonable response ...

So how do you know they're a "pervert"?

Just because they're taking pictures of your kids?

.

 

[HMansfield]

if you caught some pervert taking indecent pictures of your child, I think violence is a perfectly reasonable response ...

Why would your child be doing something indecent on a public beach?

 

[cambsno]

If someone started snaapping at my kids I would have questions... I for one would wonder why you would want pics of someone elses kids??? Of course, there may be a circumstances where this is fine... if it was the old boy who takes pics for our village mag at a village event I would understand, or if my son was playing in a footie match, but if down the park I would not be happy.

 

[Byker28i]

if you caught some pervert taking indecent pictures of your child, I think violence is a perfectly reasonable response ...

How do you know they are indecent? Define indecent? What are you doing with your child in a public place that you feel there is an opportunity for 'indecent' photos to be taken?

Serious question y the way - not an attempt at a wind up.

I'm sorry but the media has scare mongered far too much as it's down to us to question attitudes such as this.

 

[Byker28i]

If someone started snaapping at my kids I would have questions... I for one would wonder why you would want pics of someone elses kids??? Of course, there may be a circumstances where this is fine... if it was the old boy who takes pics for our village mag at a village event I would understand, or if my son was playing in a footie match, but if down the park I would not be happy.

Serious question - Why not? What could possibly be the issue of someone taking photos of children at play?

Checkout Helen Levitt, photos of kids playign in the streets
http://www.lensculture.com/levitt.html

I'm sure we could easily run up a huge list of famous photos of children playing.

Taking photos of children doesn't make you or mean you are a paedophile

 

[new2me]

Serious question - Why not? What could possibly be the issue of someone taking photos of children at play?

Checkout Helen Levitt, photos of kids playign in the streets
http://www.lensculture.com/levitt.html

Times have changed since then - 70s and before from what I quickly gathered from that link and in the US?

Attitudes have changed in the UK since the 70s and my childhood days. Back then, I remember other kids in class laughing about the guy with the camera that hung around the school perimeter. I'm not sure kids laugh about it anymore :shrug:

 

[Gary]

I think if you take photos of other people's children without permission (however good your intentions are) you are asking for trouble.
If you took a photo with my child in the picture i wouldnt car (i'm no Daily Mail reading paranoid), but if you were taking pics of my child specifically and without asking first then you are making a big mistake.

mind you, if my child is doing something where people are expected to take photos (like playing in a public football match) then of course I'm not going to mind.

Interesting thread so far.. thought provoking!

 

[Byker28i]

Times have changed since then - 70s and before from what I quickly gathered from that link and in the US?

Attitudes have changed in the UK since the 70s and my childhood days. Back then, I remember other kids in class laughing about the guy with the camera that hung around the school perimeter. I'm not sure kids laugh about it anymore :shrug:

You mean when MySpace was a den in the woods?

 

[Byker28i]

I think if you take photos of other people's children without permission (however good your intentions are) you are asking for trouble.
If you took a photo with my child in the picture i wouldnt car (i'm no Daily Mail reading paranoid), but if you were taking pics of my child specifically and without asking first then you are making a big mistake.

mind you, if my child is doing something where people are expected to take photos (like playing in a public football match) then of course I'm not going to mind.

Interesting thread so far.. thought provoking!

Why though Gary - you haven't explained? What possible problems are there?

Here's some I took recently as my course work asks for public place photos and capturing the moment:

Now according to some on this thread, the father should have immediately marched up to me and offered me violence?

Same park, one from an assignment last year

In this case the mother was trying to get an image on her camera phone and I was playing with my 50mm lens at 1.4. I posed the kids for her, let her get images then also shot a couple which I gave her my card and later emailed to her.

Note the trousers on the youngest?

I asked for permission to use it in an assignment for capturing the moment, spoke to the mother about it and the open trousers but neither of us saw an issue with it - in fact it caught both moments We both liked the random dog who just appeared and watched.

There's nothing wrong with talking, not with taking images, but too many people are now hung up about 'ooh they must be a P****' as propagated by the media. Sorry but I'll question that all day long.

Don't even get me started on school activities

 

[Steve Smith]

How do you know they are indecent?

If they were indecent and in public then the parent has bigger problems than someone taking photographs.

A photograph of a child in public doesn't transform it into an indecent image.


Steve.

 

[AHILL]

if you caught some pervert taking indecent pictures of your child, I think violence is a perfectly reasonable response ...

And you wonder why the country's gone to rat crap when folks can make irresponsible statements like this and expect to be taken seriously!
Violence is a never reasonable response from anyone!

 

[Ferj]

And you wonder why the country's gone to rat crap when folks can make irresponsible statements like this and expect to be taken seriously!
Violence is a never reasonable response from anyone!

Completely agree. I should also add, the kind of imagery that sexual offenders and predators look for are the kind of things that would repulse most people. They are not little Sam playing naked on the beach or his sister on the swing at the park.

 

[big soft moose]

So how do you know they're a "pervert"?

Just because they're taking pictures of your kids?

.

I was reffering to super sammys post

Frankly i'd judge whether they were a pervert based on what they were doing.. someone just taking pics, no problem (if i had concerns i might stroll over and have a civil conversation)

However hiding in the bushes tossing themselves off is generally a (in)decent indicator of perversion, as is trying to lure small children into said bushes. (plus as per sammys point about photographing a kid having its nappy changed)

In 20 years as a countryside ranger (and similar roles) I can count on the figures of one hand the number of times I've encountered genuine paedophiles in action with cameras , but that figure isnt zero and just because its uncomon doesnt mean it doesnt happen.

The steroetypical P**** taking images to masturbate to is a fiction, because the interweb gives them far easier ways , but thats not to say that the predatory few won't take photos to stoke their fantasies ahead of planning an assault or abduction

(incidentally - most of the few incidents occured in milton keynes where there is a rehabilitiation and treatment centre for nonces... which illustrates that the liberal lets all talk and have a group hug approach to dealing with rock spiders doesnt actually work that well )

 

[Toggerman]

Byker, had you not been on assignment would you have taken those photos? And if you still would have what would you have done with said photos, sell them or just keep them on your hard drive for your own viewing?

I agree with "Why would you want pictures of someone else's kids?" Unless it's for a specific reason such as coursework or at an event or their doing something incredibly funny/cute (and I mean well above normal) etc, then you really should question why do you need it. If it is just for your own pleasure to look at every now and then, how many steps removed from paedophilia is it really? To quote Terry Pratchett "Everything starts somewhere".

 

[Byker28i]

The image with the kids and the leaves just happened and I had my camera, I didn't go out looking for it. Would I have taken it and kept it - yup probably, its a good image of kids playing.

So please explain just how close to being a P**** you think I am then?

It doesn't matter if I'm shooting for my course or not, I'm a photographer enjoying my hobby in a perfectly legal way.

Lets actually get to the bottom of this and please explain it to me why you feel this is wrong? I've had many a rational discussion with people about this and usually it's usually resorts to a media driven frenzy (oh everyone with a camera is a terrorist or P****..), similar thoughts by peers, but theres no actual rational thought behind it.

 

[big soft moose]

And you wonder why the country's gone to rat crap when folks can make irresponsible statements like this and expect to be taken seriously!
Violence is a never reasonable response from anyone!

Yeah this countries gone to rat crap because people want to understand nonces and rehabilitate them instead of just locking them up

Are you seriously saying that if you found someone assaulting/abducting your child (or indeed any child) you wouldnt feel that violence was justifiable to stop them ?

I'm not saying I or anyone should wander round kicking the crap out of innocent strangers who just happen to take a photo of a child, but if I caught an actual paedophile doing something indecent to a child, then I wouldnt hesitate to use an appropriate ammount of force to make them stop.

 

[maninsuitcase]

if I caught an actual paedophile doing something indecent to a child, then I wouldnt hesitate to use an appropriate ammount of force to make them stop.

The key word is appropriate. What a person may feel is appropriate and what the law does it probably 2 separate things. And the level of the former will change drastically depending on their relation ship to the child. ie a father might beat the nonce to death where a passer by would just remove the threat

 

[neil_g]

i give it until page 4 before this gets locked. these threads always spiral into chaos.

Its simple.... just use your common sense..

I mean seriously.. forget about the laws.. forget about what you should and shouldnt be able to do.. forget all that..

If you turn up at your local pool or beech... start taking pics of a young girl in a swimming costume messing about in the water... her parents are nearby.. forget what you think should happen? Use your common sense.. Chances are dad will want a word.. chances are your laminated rights straight of a web page arnt going to impress him..

I know how it should be.. what i am saying is ..how it is.. and all the moaning wont change it.. thats how the world is.. once you get to grips with that.. just use your god given common sense


Sorry... but people do need a reality check sometimes

probably the most common sense reply in this thread..

 

[WelshNoob]

Would I like someone coming up to me and taking my picture unannounced? No. Would I like the same if it was my son, most certainly not. It's not from a Pedophile point of view either it's from a what the hell are you doing point of view.

 

[big soft moose]

In my experience these scumbags know damn well that a lot of us would love to give them a good kicking , so they very rarely do anything that gives you the justification to use serious violence (that said the 3 or 4 times that ive caught up with one its never been at the actual assault in progress stage - IRRC two were tossing themselves off near playgrounds, one was trying to lure a kid into the bushes to "look at her photo" (he turned out to be a known offender out on day release) and one was photographing kids with a long lens (he turned out to be a known stalker who's interest was in the mother not the kid)

Theres also a handful of innocent but questionable occasions i can recall - a couple of times it was estranged fathers who arent allowed to see the kids, and I remember one tragic old man who'd lost his grandchildren in a car accident, and used to hang arround playgrounds because it helped him feel a connection ( we had to use quite a lot of force to stop a paranoid idiot giving him a kicking )

Plus there were upwards of a hundred innocent photographers where we were called out because some paranoid didnt like them being near a playground (In most cases they'd turn out to be either photographing their own kids or photographing something else entirely.

 

[Byker28i]

i give it until page 4 before this gets locked. these threads always spiral into chaos.

Shame really as I'm always trying to get to the bottom of the 'every photographer taking pictures of kids is a pervert'.

With the media's driven rhetoric on the issue, I'm no longer surprised to see such responses even on a photography forum. If you think this is bad, try having this discussion on Mumsnet

0-pervert in about 4 posts, at least it took until page 2 before I was accused of being only steps away.