nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

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?

RandomName2

I don't know if this was shared on a named facebook account or whatever, but if it's unidentifable, what's the harm?

Clearly by the time the photo was taken the most distressing part of the illness was over (mind you, as he was not getting better they eventually brought him to hospital - one could say they should have done that earlier, but generally people avoid hospital unless really necessary, understandably). Would it be any more reprehensible if the wife made a cup of tea as take a photo? Come on.

Putting it online is weird. But people put all sorts of stuff online about themselves and their family that I find frankly weird Hell, people use twitter: and give their genuine opinions on it, with their real names no less. :eek:

prinzeugen

RobertKK wrote: »

Had you no toilet?

Yes but it was coming out as quick as it was being wiped. I was 4 ffs.. And it was liquid anyway!

Neyite

timthumbni wrote: »

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.

My OH isn't on social media and I would never share naked pictures of either of them - I tend not to put much up on FB at all but I can see kinda where she would see it as a beautiful image and maybe share it on her feed. What I mean by that is that you know your kid is sick and you just have to ride it out until they get better. So they were probably taking shifts looking after the child. I don't see nudity there, I just see practicality and a child getting comfort and a dad giving comforting cuddles.

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

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

I think it went viral because of the fact that FB took it down when it was shared and left up a very similar picture of a mother and sick child in the shower so it highlighted the double standards. And possibly people complaining because of a widely held notion that a man cant be naked in the presence of a child without having nefarious intentions. And that is the saddest part of it all really.

RobertKK

I don't care if it is the mother or father, what is weird was thinking of taking a photo of it when one would think one would be more concerned about the child being sick, so sick he ended up in hospital.

Pawwed Rig

RobertKK wrote: »

Had you no toilet?

His Dad needed somewhere to sit.

RandomName2

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't care if it is the mother or father, what is weird was thinking of taking a photo of it when one would think one would be more concerned about the child being sick, so sick he ended up in hospital.

Well you can only stand wringing your hands for so long. After a couple of hours it might not seem so urgent. I am not sure if it's particularly the type of moment you would want immortalised though.

timthumbni

Neyite wrote: »

My OH isn't on social media and I would never share naked pictures of either of them - I tend not to put much up on FB at all but I can see kinda where she would see it as a beautiful image and maybe share it on her feed. What I mean by that is that you know your kid is sick and you just have to ride it out until they get better. So they were probably taking shifts looking after the child. I don't see nudity there, I just see practicality and a child getting comfort and a dad giving comforting cuddlesy.

Aye, I agree that the picture itself is no big deal. I am against people making these private images available for the rest of time however.

I really dislike Facebook in general, so maybe I'm biased.

RobertKK

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

His Dad needed somewhere to sit.

That makes no sense, so you are saying the father sat on the toilet to use it as a seat and the bath as the toilet.
Logic would say the father would sit on the edge of the bath if close enough to toilet and support the child on the toilet if needed.

Sweetemotion

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't care if it is the mother or father, what is weird was thinking of taking a photo of it when one would think one would be more concerned about the child being sick, so sick he ended up in hospital.

I don't believe that. for all we know maybe the person taken the photo thought this would be the last image of this child.

Pawwed Rig

drunkmonkey wrote: »

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

Last time junior had a temp the GP recommended a cool bath as the most important thing is to get the temperature down.
What you are recomending is sitting in a waiting room for hours with no ability to monitor/adjust the childs temp. I wouldn't be prepared to put my child through that if it was not a last resort.