No ebooks allowed at Upperthorpe swimming pool

[nutty34 10]

I think people are taking what I am saying out of context :

 

Scenario:

 

I am a foster carer who is looking after a young child who has a protection order due to past abuse at home. The child's family do not know the whereabouts of the child in care.

 

Said child has swimming lessons where someone innocently takes a photo of their child having a swimming lesson but inadvertently takes a photo of the child in care. The photo is placed again innocently on Facebook. A friend of a friend sees the photo and alerts the family of the child.

 

It would not take the brightest spark to deduce that the swimming lesson takes place at the same venue at the same time each week, the following week the family of the child turn up.

 

I am not suggesting for one minute that cameras should be banned everywhere just used carefully considering things such as above. It is unlikely that the park scenario above would be an issue.

 

Again if you have never been in this position then I really would not expect you to understand. I am simply offering just one explanation why these rules are in place.

[Badlittlepup 10]

a,b and c

 

ricks so low that there's more chance of being bought a kebab by the queen.

 

but lets not let reality and common sense get in the way of creating more and more petty rules!

 

No it's not. It was only in the last couple of years a man was arrested at Hillsborough baths for taking pictures of children in the changing rooms while they were getting changed. I think he had some sort of device he could put under the cubicles. So it does happen and it has happened locally. To be honest I'm not keen on the idea of anybody taking a picture of me in my swimmers and posting it online.

 

Cameras are banned for good reason and if they can't tell the difference between the two then obviously e-books have to go too. Buy a paper for 50p or get a book out of the library for free.

[Sid Umpley 10]

I think people are taking what I am saying out of context :

 

Scenario:

 

I am a foster carer who is looking after a young child who has a protection order due to past abuse at home. The child's family do not know the whereabouts of the child in care.

 

Said child has swimming lessons where someone innocently takes a photo of their child having a swimming lesson but inadvertently takes a photo of the child in care. The photo is placed again innocently on Facebook. A friend of a friend sees the photo and alerts the family of the child.

 

It would not take the brightest spark to deduce that the swimming lesson takes place at the same venue at the same time each week, the following week the family of the child turn up.

 

I am not suggesting for one minute that cameras should be banned everywhere just used carefully considering things such as above. It is unlikely that the park scenario above would be an issue.

 

Again if you have never been in this position then I really would not expect you to understand. I am simply offering just one explanation why these rules are in place.

 

 

 

so do you have mutual friends between yourself and the families of the children you foster? or are you just spouting the sensatialist media tripe that has got every one suspecting any adult male.

[go4it 10]

For those that say this is a crazy rule here are some reasons why photography is banned in public swimming pools:

 

a) a child in that swimming session / lesson could be being cared for by foster parents - parent takes photograph of their child swimming their first width and in the background are other children. parent places said photo on facebook / twitter and it is seen by someone that knows the child being cared for - tells the parents which could place the child at risk (yes, the risk is low but it could happen)

 

b) same as above but the child this time is part of a witness protection programme because of something they, or their parents etc, have witnessed

 

c) Paedophiles can take the most innocent photograph and use it in ways we wouldn't want to think about

 

No one disagrees with the above, but the point the OP is making is that a basic Kindle has no camera.

 

The rule on 'no basic Kindles' is in place because staff are unable to tell the difference. I can understand that it is an easy solution, but surely a simple request can be made and an assistant can inspect the device to see there is clearly no camera.

 

And for those saying the child should have the attention - it is a swimming lesson, they are under the supervision of an instructor. Not every child wants mum or dad clapping 'well done' every 3 minutes. Some children quite simply want to be left alone to achieve things, then tell mum or dad later what they have done.

[nutty34 10]

so do you have mutual friends between yourself and the families of the children you foster? or are you just spouting the sensatialist media tripe that has got every one suspecting any adult male.

 

I don't recall mentioning mutual friends, again you clearly do not understand how the security settings on Facebook work ?

 

I can see that you think this is rubbish so we will leave it there. I just hope you never end up in a compromising situation

 

Oh .... And for the record I am an adult male

[Sid Umpley 10]

No it's not. It was only in the last couple of years a man was arrested at Hillsborough baths for taking pictures of children in the changing rooms while they were getting changed. I think he had some sort of device he could put under the cubicles. So it does happen and it has happened locally. To be honest I'm not keen on the idea of anybody taking a picture of me in my swimmers and posting it online.

 

Cameras are banned for good reason and if they can't tell the difference between the two then obviously e-books have to go too. Buy a paper for 50p or get a book out of the library for free.

 

 

 

the ONLY mention on the net about the incident at the baths was made on this forum

 

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/archive/index.php/t-626995.html

 

the last post was from a police officer who stated more news would be forthcoming. NONE ever was.

so. it never happened. someone made an unfounded allegation maybe?

if it had actually happened there would surely be more information about it.

 

dont believe the rumours.. most of them are not true.

[verydull 10]

the point is they cant make that distinction so it is easier (and safer) not to have any electronic devices in the pool area.

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

As an old fogie I can't get my head around this situation. Taking it as read that all the kids in the pool have their trunks or swimming cosies on (unlike at the beach) why should parents be banned from taking photos of their little sproggs having a good time in the water. It beats me.

 

Angel.

[Sid Umpley 10]

I don't recall mentioning mutual friends, again you clearly do not understand how the security settings on Facebook work ?

 

I can see that you think this is rubbish so we will leave it there. I just hope you never end up in a compromising situation

 

if you dont know how to set up your facebook security so that only friends can see things then there's a lot of info available online to help you do so.

 

set your security and you can stop being sop paranoid.

[nutty34 10]

if you dont know how to set up your facebook security so that only friends can see things then there's a lot of info available online to help you do so.

 

set your security and you can stop being sop paranoid.

 

 

For info I am an IT manager and fully aware of how to set up Facebook security.

I am also a foster carer who has experience of similar scenarios to the one I suggested. I am speaking from experience where as you my friend are not.

 

Again, everyone is entitled to their own point of view. Personally I really don't care if you think that I am being paranoid or not.

[spooferman 10]

not to worrie they lose funding soon so it will close down! plus why should you read when your kid needs supporting ... some parents !

[Sid Umpley 10]

Thats fine nutty34

 

so as an IT manager you should have no concerns about friends of friends seeing any photos you post on facebook as you already have your security settings adjusted to stop that happening. In that case your scenario has holes in it.

 

 

if we are not carefull in a few yrs time 66 million people will be banned from taking photo's in case a handful of people "accidentally" find something on facebook.