Father and Son, Shower photo.

KERSPLAT!

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-36322279

I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on this? Reading that article it seems to have been mostly positive, I'm glad to say, but it has received some negative responses too

I see absolutely no issue with it. A loving father holding, caring, nursing his son.

Why in the shower?

"Thomas had spent hours in the shower with him, trying to keep his fever down and letting the vomit and diarrhea rinse off of them both as it came,"

Any thoughts?

Kermit.de.frog

Don't see the issue myself.

It's a lovely photo of the loving care of a dad looking after his sick baby. Anyone who sees anything wrong with it is fundamentally flawed.

It's actually perverse and slightly seedy to read anything perverse or seedy into it. It's almost depressing and it says far more about the eye of the beholder.

Jasper79

Lovely photo of father and son nothing wrong with that.

Posting online for anybody to see I don't agree with.

I don't know why you'd want to share something so private like that with the world

whatismyname

I certainly don't see it as disgusting (headline asks 'disgusting or beautiful?'), and don't know what type of negativity the picture received.

But the issue I have with it is probably a different one.

I actually find the picture beautiful, and certainly in no way see it as pornographic or seedy or anything like that. But even without being pornographic, the child is naked, and the child cannot consent to a naked picture of themselves being shared online / with the world, so I don't think it should be shared with strangers / online.

On a similar note, I have had friend post naked pictures of their babies on facebook, and I reported them to facebook as breaching the facebook standards, and they were removed. I didn't perceive the picture as pornographic, but I see that child as having a right not to have a picture of themselves online without their consent. And since they can't consent to it as are too young to understand the implications of their naked picture being shared with the world, I don't believe it should be shared.

And that by all means keep the picture until the child is old enough to share it with people themselves if they so wish (I'd imagine in many cases the child on becoming an adult would not choose to share their naked baby pictures with whoever online.)

suicide_circus

Nothing wrong with the photo.
Whether I'd put such personal photos of my child on the internet is another matter

SEPT 23 1989

Anyone who has a problem with this has a twisted mind

endacl

I'm I alone in thinking 'that's practical'?

I mean, rather than have to constantly clean the kid?

jester77

The poor child is in a really bad way and the mother decides to take a photo of him That would be the last thing on my mind if my child was that sick.

whatismyname

whatismyname wrote: »

I actually find the picture beautiful, and certainly in no way see it as pornographic or seedy or anything like that. But even without being pornographic, the child is naked, and the child cannot consent to a naked picture of themselves being shared online / with the world, so I don't think it should be shared with strangers / online.

That's actually a very good point and valid objection. The child has had no say in a naked image of themselves being shared, and thinking about it it doesn't feel right, as nice as the image is.

retalivity

Id be more concerned that they named their child 'fox'

To the 'stupidest childrens names' thread!!!

Sonics2k

Nothing wrong with it at all. Frankly people complaining show more about themselves as opposed to there being anything wrong with it.

retalivity

retalivity wrote: »

Id be more concerned that they named their child 'fox'

To the 'stupidest childrens names' thread!!!

Fox Mulder got there first with that name.

omahaid

The negative responses are disgraceful and anyone who makes them should be ashamed.

Digs

Jasper79 wrote: »

Lovely photo of father and son nothing wrong with that.

Posting online for anybody to see I don't agree with.

I don't know why you'd want to share something so private like that with the world

Yeah this is my thinking.

It's a beautiful photo and one which should be kept private imo. I really dislike this over sharing culture that's developing with Facebook, Instagram etc parents (especially) are creating social media footprints on their children's behalf without a second thought and who knows what that child will think as a teenager or adult. He may like the photo but will he enjoy it being on the internet forever? Surely that should be his decision to make.

For some people nothing is private anymore, I think it's sad.

Realt Dearg Sec

endacl wrote: »

I'm I alone in thinking 'that's practical'?

I mean, rather than have to constantly clean the kid?

Apparently you're not alone. It's rare I go onto a boards thread and find that everyone is being sane and sensible, the only strange thing is that someone would put it on the internet. Not sure why they'd do that, or what they were expecting other than a witch hunt.

KERSPLAT!

jester77 wrote: »

The poor child is in a really bad way and the mother decides to take a photo of him That would be the last thing on my mind if my child was that sick.

He was in the shower for hours, I'm not sure the mother leaving for a few seconds did any harm. It was a beautiful image and she wanted to have it forever.

_______


I would agree somewhat with some posts regarding the photos being posted online. While I understand that there's a huge difference between naked and clothed, should we not post any photos of our kids online without their consent.**

Edited because the last sentence made no sense**

timthumbni

The picture wouldn't concern me so much as to why anyone would take a picture of their sick kid and then post it on Facebook. That's Facebook for you I suppose.

Nonoperational

It's frankly bizarre to put it on public view on Facebook. Jesus people can't scratch their holes these days without putting it online. Child critically unwell and the mother is taking pictures and putting them on Facebook. Bloody weird.

Samaris

Nothing wrong with the photo. Bit weird sharing it though.

Why do people feel the need to post their frankly uninteresting lives on the internet? "and of course I shared it" WHY?

osarusan

"And this is you when you were sick with diarrhoea."

I think if/when I have kids that I'd try to avoid posting any images of them online. I'd probably leave it up to them, when they're old enough, to decide what kind of internet presence they have.

Realt Dearg Sec

Digs wrote: »

Yeah this is my thinking.

It's a beautiful photo and one which should be kept private imo. I really dislike this over sharing culture that's developing with Facebook, Instagram etc parents (especially) are creating social media footprints on their children's behalf without a second thought and who knows what that child will think as a teenager or adult. He may like the photo but will he enjoy it being on the internet forever? For some people nothing is private anyway, I think it's sad.

Yeah I agree, i think it's a great photo in the context of why it was taken, but I have a daughter born last year and I haven't so much as put a single picture or even a thanks/likes whoring mention of her on social media for the very reason you mention. Actually have been closing all my social media accounts as it happens. Would prefer my daughter make her own decisions about how she is recorded and known in this bizarre new world that she'll understand better than i ever will, and the consequences of which we're still learning (through stories like this!)

Esel

Three issues for me:

1. The weirdos who have a problem with it,

2. The weirdos who will get off on it,

3. Making it public, thus triggering 1 and 2 above.

getzls

Not read through it all, but if it had been a Mother and Child?

Digs

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Yeah I agree, i think it's a great photo in the context of why it was taken, but I have a daughter born last year and I haven't so much as put a single picture or even a thanks/likes whoring mention of her on social media for the very reason you mention. Actually have been closing all my social media accounts as it happens. Would prefer my daughter make her own decisions about how she is recorded and known in this bizarre new world that she'll understand better than i ever will, and the consequences of which we're still learning (through stories like this!)

We're the same. I have a 3 yr old girl and #2 is due in 3 weeks. Not a sign of number one on Facebook. However we did have to tell members of my husbands family to take pictures of her down when she was born. Warnings will go out when #2 is born. The mind boggles as to what goes through some people's heads! We're the stranges ones apparently for being uptight about it

KERSPLAT!

getzls wrote: »

Not read through it all, but if it had been a Mother and Child?

As I said, it's been a mostly positive reaction. No need for a father v mother argument.

Realt Dearg Sec

Digs wrote: »

We're the same. I have a 3 yr old girl and #2 is due in 3 weeks. Not a sign of number one on Facebook. However we did have to tell members of my husbands family to take pictures of her down when she was born. Warnings will go out when #2 is born. The mind boggles as to what goes through some people's heads! We're the stranges ones apparently for being uptight about it

Stick to your guns, although i can see how people feel it's utterly normal, and a few newborn pictures are hardly going to do any harm, but I'm just inclined be as conservative as possible so as to leave it up to herself. Still if someone was to put up a picture of her on Facebook just smiling or whatever I would leave them at it (don't have Facebook so wouldn't even know anyway), but still I'd support your approach personally, let the child have privacy until they're old enough to decide what they want to share.

jimgoose

No issues with that man or the photo, except to wonder what kind of lunatic would publish that kind of thing to the Internet.

One eyed Jack

Honestly I winced upon seeing the photo. If I hadn't read the OP before clicking the link, and I'd seen the photo on it's own, I'd genuinely have thought it was downright bizarre. After reading the story I can only feel for the child in pain, because I'll never forget a similar incident with my own child. I was trying to keep calm while standing in the shower with him (I'd my trousers and shirt on), and my wife was panicking like a headless chicken. If she'd thought at that moment to take a photo (and my wife is an avid photographer), I'd still have thought it was inappropriate.

If she'd thought to share it on her Facebook... I'm actually not sure what I'd have done tbh. I absolutely detest the idea of people using their children for validation on social media anyway, but the child is in a bad way. I just can't shake the feeling that this woman knew well the photo would go viral with the controversial nature of it. I don't see anything wrong in the photo itself, I just don't see why she felt a need to take a photo of a situation like that (since when is a child with a fever, exploding out both ends, ever a beautiful moment?), let alone upload it on social media.

It just comes off as inappropriate somehow to "share" that with the world.

BorneTobyWilde

jimgoose wrote: »

No issues with that man or the photo, except to wonder what kind of lunatic would publush that kind of thing to the Internet.

We should all wear blindfolds in case we see a child somewhere. The world is gone crazy.
Nothing wrong with photo, she was sharing it with family and friends, not the world. Had she know at the time that this would go viral then she would most likely not have wanted to post it.

Maireadio

No issue, sure some families are nudists together.

marklazarcovic

why would you even think to take a picture of it like,if my missus took that pic of me n my son whilst he's suffering her phone would go in the toilet

BorneTobyWilde

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Honestly I winced upon seeing the photo. If I hadn't read the OP before clicking the link, and I'd seen the photo on it's own, I'd genuinely have thought it was downright bizarre. After reading the story I can only feel for the child in pain, because I'll never forget a similar incident with my own child. I was trying to keep calm while standing in the shower with him (I'd my trousers and shirt on), and my wife was panicking like a headless chicken. If she'd thought at that moment to take a photo (and my wife is an avid photographer), I'd still have thought it was inappropriate.

If she'd thought to share it on her Facebook... I'm actually not sure what I'd have done tbh. I absolutely detest the idea of people using their children for validation on social media anyway, but the child is in a bad way. I just can't shake the feeling that this woman knew well the photo would go viral with the controversial nature of it. I don't see anything wrong in the photo itself, I just don't see why she felt a need to take a photo of a situation like that (since when is a child with a fever, exploding out both ends, ever a beautiful moment?), let alone upload it on social media.

It just comes off as inappropriate somehow to "share" that with the world.

With one eye Id wince too .

jimgoose

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

We should all wear blindfolds in case we see a child somewhere. The world is gone crazy.
Nothing wrong with photo, she was sharing it with family and friends, not the world. Had she know at the time that this would go viral then she would most likely not have wanted to post it.

The problem is not me. The problem is the significant portion of the world's population that are off their heads, and these are the people you reach when you publish to the Internet. When it is not necessary to breach security, then it is necessary to not breach security.

Spanish Eyes

Why publish it for all to see?

That's the only thing wrong here. Poor kid in years to come.

Smacks of parental abuse by publicity.

A very private thing and should have been kept that way imv.

No accounting for those wanting their 15 minutes of fame. Or their very own "viral" story.

Baffled.

RobertKK

The child had to be hospitalised, did he seek medical advice before spending hours in the shower?

BorneTobyWilde

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Honestly I winced upon seeing the photo. If I hadn't read the OP before clicking the link, and I'd seen the photo on it's own, I'd genuinely have thought it was downright bizarre. After reading the story I can only feel for the child in pain, because I'll never forget a similar incident with my own child. I was trying to keep calm while standing in the shower with him (I'd my trousers and shirt on), and my wife was panicking like a headless chicken. If she'd thought at that moment to take a photo (and my wife is an avid photographer), I'd still have thought it was inappropriate.

If she'd thought to share it on her Facebook... I'm actually not sure what I'd have done tbh. I absolutely detest the idea of people using their children for validation on social media anyway, but the child is in a bad way. I just can't shake the feeling that this woman knew well the photo would go viral with the controversial nature of it. I don't see anything wrong in the photo itself, I just don't see why she felt a need to take a photo of a situation like that (since when is a child with a fever, exploding out both ends, ever a beautiful moment?), let alone upload it on social media.

It just comes off as inappropriate somehow to "share" that with the world.

One cannot share something with the world , but things can end up shared with world because they go viral. One could not set out or predict it going viral. I would hate to take a random picture that was somehow funny or weird and for it to end up all over the world. I can't imagine many would want that kind of exposure.

One eyed Jack

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

With one eye Id wince too .

I winced because of the photo, not because I'm blind in one eye? I can still see like

drunkmonkey

I often do that, nobody takes pictures though, perfectly normal everyday thing for any dad, it's the easiest way to wash them.

*just read it, I don't spent hours in the shower with diorrea kids, stick a nappie on and change it regularly, hours in the shower is a bit odd but they don't come with an instruction book so you do what you think is best.

FizzleSticks

This post has been deleted.

elaney

Last week i seen a photo of a mother with her sick child in the shower
almost identical to this.
She got nothing but praise for that photo. I dont see how this father
shouldnt get the same. My husband has spent many a night up with my
sick children as i have i never share this on facebook but fathers should be treated the same
.

One eyed Jack

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

One cannot share something with the world , but things can end up shared with world because they go viral. One could not set out or predict it going viral. I would hate to take a random picture that was somehow funny or weird and for it to end up all over the world. I can't imagine many would want that kind of exposure.

Ohh please...

BorneTobyWilde

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I winced because of the photo, not because I'm blind in one eye? I can still see like

I was Joe King .

RobertKK

You have a sick child, do you think 'Here's a photo opportunity'?

Pawwed Rig

RobertKK wrote: »

The child had to be hospitalised, did he seek medical advice before spending hours in the shower?

Fairly standard way of dealing with a high temperature. Medical advice is not always available immediately. For example in Ireland if you need a doctor out of hours you could be waiting all day for a housecall. Even during normal hours it can be difficult to get a GP to see you without appointment.
Where one chooses the A&E option you better be prepared for a long wait unless you are critical.
If I was to have gone to A&E everytime my little boy had a high temperature he would have spent half his life in waiting rooms and he is a very healthy child.

Nice photo. Glad it was shared.

drunkmonkey

Ahh no that would be Calpol. That doesn't work, hospital, hours in the shower is just odd.

prinzeugen

Nothing wrong with it.. Dad might have wanted to put shorts on for the pic..

I remember having my arse over the bath while I was unwell and my dad reading Thomas the tank while I had non stop ****s.

RobertKK

prinzeugen wrote: »

Nothing wrong with it.. Dad might have wanted to put shorts on for the pic..

I remember having my arse over the bath while I was unwell and my dad reading Thomas the tank while I had non stop ****s.

Had you no toilet?