Hospital baby photos

[Splog]

Nothing like a knee jerk reaction

Have'nt a clue what that's supposed to mean?.... Don't you like my business plan?

 

[neil_g]

I've had a great idea for a new business..... I think I'll employ people to take pics of kids having their first shower at school. Should make a fortune.

And that's the same as the op how........

 

[Splog]

And that's the same as the op how........

Why do you think its different? I don't.

 

[Dale_tem]

Why do you think its different? I don't.

You have taken a very successful business plan that operates in over 90 hospitals with hundreds of happy customers each week, taking photos (with parents permission, otherwise how do they give the photo number to the parent to access their photo??) of newborn babies all covered up. They happily pay £50 or so for photos of their newborn baby and are delighted with the results.

You have suggested that this is the same as taking nude photos of children in showers in schools without any permission. Would any parent want these photos?

You should get a job at the daily mail.

 

[Splog]

You have taken a very successful business plan that operates in over 90 hospitals with hundreds of happy customers each week, taking photos (with parents permission, otherwise how do they give the photo number to the parent to access their photo??) of newborn babies all covered up. They happily pay £50 or so for photos of their newborn baby and are delighted with the results.

You have suggested that this is the same as taking nude photos of children in showers in schools without any permission. Would any parent want these photos?

You should get a job at the daily mail.

Whats the problem with taking the nude pics....... Perhaps the parents would buy them?.......

 

[Iris]

To be honest, I'd be annoyed by it too. It's not the fact that a bounty photographer was at the hospital that the op is complaining about, she said no and seemingly the photographer has accepted that and come back and taken the photograph later when the op wasn't aware. The photo hasn't been used by Bounty for anything and there has been no cost to the op so some may well say that there's no harm, no foul but surely there should be an expectation of privacy especially if you have asked for it.

 

[cambsno]

To be honest, I'd be annoyed by it too. It's not the fact that a bounty photographer was at the hospital that the op is complaining about, she said no and seemingly the photographer has accepted that and come back and taken the photograph later when the op wasn't aware. The photo hasn't been used by Bounty for anything and there has been no cost to the op so some may well say that there's no harm, no foul but surely there should be an expectation of privacy especially if you have asked for it.

We don't know the full story. Did the other partner give consent? Was granny looking after baby while mum and dad were away, was it taken on different days and different tog (or they forgot), was baby with nurses while mum was having shower???

People on here are quick to have a go at the "daily mail brigade" when a tog gets told off for taking his camera to the park etc. yet now claiming privacy? U can't have it both ways.

How else did the tog collect contact info? From memory we did not give any when we got bounty bag

 

[Iris]

We don't know the full story. Did the other partner give consent? Was granny looking after baby while mum and dad were away, was it taken on different days and different tog (or they forgot), was baby with nurses while mum was having shower???

People on here are quick to have a go at the "daily mail brigade" when a tog gets told off for taking his camera to the park etc. yet now claiming privacy? U can't have it both ways.

How else did the tog collect contact info? From memory we did not give any when we got bounty bag

Perhaps so, but I think we also have to take the ops version at face value until we find out otherwise. I can't remember either tbh, I wasn't there long enough with my younger child - home before she turned up

 

[weybourne]

Its what Bounty do, it is widely accepted.

Because they 'do it' does not make it right or good.

It's not that widely accepted either - read the Telegraph article linked earlier:

a report in the British Medical Journal accused Bounty of "exerting pressure on new mothers at a time when they are most vulnerable".

...Of the trusts that replied, 12 said they had received complaints about the activities of Bounty.

...The NCT says it regularly hears from mothers who have been "upset" by the sales reps' hard sell techniques.

People on here are quick to have a go at the "daily mail brigade" when a tog gets told off for taking his camera to the park etc. yet now claiming privacy? U can't have it both ways.

Do you think it is unreasonable to expect a higher level of privacy in a hospital ward than in a public park? This isn't about having it both ways. Implying that the two situations are comparable, imho, is trying to have it both ways.

 

[Oxford_Matt]

Have you thought it could be that the Bounty employee changed shift??

They don't have the same person working all day and all weekend etc.

The one who was told no may not of been the one that took the photo??

 

[Byker28i]

Why do you think its different? I don't.

Apart from it's illegal and would end up with you on the sex offenders list?

Yup, no difference at all :shrug:

Edit:
For your info


Sexual Offences Act 2003

Section 45. Indecent photographs of persons aged 16 or 17
(1) The Protection of Children Act 1978 (c. 37)(which makes provision about indecent photographs of persons under 16) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 2(3)(evidence) and section 7(6)(meaning of “child&#8221, for “16” substitute "18".


The Protection of Children Act 1978 (as ammended)

Section 1. Indecent photographs of children.

(1) It is an offence for a person—
(a) to take, or permit to be taken or to make, any indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of a child; or
(b) to distribute or show such indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs; or
(c) to have in his possession such indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs, with a view to their being distributed or shown by himself or others; or
(d) to publish or cause to be published any advertisement likely to be understood as conveying that the advertiser distributes or shows such indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs, or intends to do so.

Section 7 Interpretation

(6) “Child”, subject to subsection (8), means a person under the age of 18

(8) If the impression conveyed by a pseudo-photograph is that the person shown is a child, the pseudo-photograph shall be treated for all purposes of this Act as showing a child and so shall a pseudo-photograph where the predominant impression conveyed is that the person shown is a child notwithstanding that some of the physical characteristics shown are those of an adult.

 

[awhyu]

Somehow i think the whole thing has been lost in translation......the main point is as any father to a newborn the occassion should be happy and joyful, and even if bounty did send you a reminder email, about purchasing a photo, well for me i wouldnt be too upset, as i would be reminded of the special day which occurred.

I cannot see the harm or loss to you as a result of this, and yeah i went through the same process when i declined the bounty photographer services myself and even if they did take a picture, there is no loss on my behalf because i wouldnt pay for it.

Perhaps the op would try and relax,

 

[Jellycat]

Tbh I'm disgusted at some of the responses on here!

I was in hospital for a while as I had an emergency c-section. In hospital you are told to rest and sleep when your baby dose. Am I right in now thinking that I'm a bad parent for doing this???? Hospital baby wards are secure places you can't just walk in off the street!

I'm not the kind of parent that would stop the school play being filmed but I am extremely pi**ed off that the hospital and bounty find it acceptable to allow a new baby's photo to taken without the parents permission!!

Bounty get you to sign up to their website, that's how they get your details but it dose not however give the permission to take photos!

Being a member of a few mummy forums there seems to be a big issue with bounty photographers, one lady said she had to cover her baby head with her hand to try and stop the lady taking a photo after she'd said no!! Thats no way to treat new mums and this company must lean that to carry on they must listen to the parents wishes. Some people love theses photos and that's great, but when someone says NO they should leave it at that. If a baby is with a nurse or mum is a sleep a photo should not be taken until the parents permission can be obtained!!

Oh and by the way, if anyone in my family had given permission they would have told me!!!

 

[Jellycat]

can I say if you have nothing helpful to add to this thread, don't!!! I'm getting rather upset of people calling me a bad parent and turning this thread into an attack on me rather than offer advice or similar experiences.

Thank you to all who have offered advice. I think we can conclude that I probably won't get anywhere but I'm going to make my feelings known to both the hospital and bounty, not to get compo, as someone said but to try and get the company to listen!!

 

[MartynK]

Let it go. I can understand why you are angry, but this happened several years ago and you didn't know anything about it until they sent you a mail. There's no harm done and nothing has changed.

 

[Simmotino]

You should be more worried about the fact you fell asleep and gave someone the chance to enter your ward and cubicle and even had chance to photo your child whilst you slept and was unaware of what was going on!! Not the best start.

This is a joke, right?

Lyn, as others have said, I don't think there is much you can do but I'd certainly be writing a strongly worded letter to Bounty and the local PCT about this. You were asked, you said no, and yet they still deemed it acceptable to take the photos. That, in itself, is unacceptable IMO.

 

[malo50]

This is a joke, right?

Lyn, as others have said, I don't think there is much you can do but I'd certainly be writing a strongly worded letter to Bounty and the local PCT about this. You were asked, you said no, and yet they still deemed it acceptable to take the photos. That, in itself, is unacceptable IMO.

I don't think it's a joke Simmo, I think it's a scandalous, spiteful and disgusting thing to say. Matt should be ashamed of himself.

 

[Simmotino]

I don't think it's a joke Simmo, I think it's a scandalous, spiteful and disgusting thing to say. Matt should be ashamed of himself.

Oh, I agree. I was just being diplomatic

 

[Byker28i]

Tbh I'm disgusted at some of the responses on here!

I was in hospital for a while as I had an emergency c-section. In hospital you are told to rest and sleep when your baby dose. Am I right in now thinking that I'm a bad parent for doing this???? Hospital baby wards are secure places you can't just walk in off the street!

I'm not the kind of parent that would stop the school play being filmed but I am extremely pi**ed off that the hospital and bounty find it acceptable to allow a new baby's photo to taken without the parents permission!!

Bounty get you to sign up to their website, that's how they get your details but it dose not however give the permission to take photos!

Being a member of a few mummy forums there seems to be a big issue with bounty photographers, one lady said she had to cover her baby head with her hand to try and stop the lady taking a photo after she'd said no!! Thats no way to treat new mums and this company must lean that to carry on they must listen to the parents wishes. Some people love theses photos and that's great, but when someone says NO they should leave it at that. If a baby is with a nurse or mum is a sleep a photo should not be taken until the parents permission can be obtained!!

Oh and by the way, if anyone in my family had given permission they would have told me!!!

Sorry - I don't think anyone has called you a bad parent. If you feel someone has or has been abusive then use the report post icon (the red triangle) and let the forum mods deal with it.

As already mentioned several time, as you feel strongly about this then you need to write to the local NHS trust about this. There was a very well worded response explaining exactly how you should word this.

I'd be very interested in their response. There's obviously the contract with the photographer and the hospital and the photographer having permission to photograph on private property against the wishes of the parent.

I'm guessing a mistake was made somewhere in the taking of the photograph. As you declined the offer, the photo was obviously taken at another time and also at a time you were unaware of, which possibly explains the mistake. Unless you spoke directly to the specific photographer who took the image then I'm assuming they just took all the babies photos, yours in particular at a time when you were probably resting. Let's face it, just after a c-section they tend to drug you up a little, plus you'll have been exhausted from the delivery and the emotions of the emergency. I certainly know my wife was.

As for Mumsnet, there's quite a few threads on their get emotionally overheated and I'd rather hope that on here it wouldn't happen quite so much. Generally it tends to be a voice of moderation and reason, but difference of opinions happen - that's life.

Contact Bounty, explain why you aren't happy and ask for the images to be deleted. Write to the NHS trust where you delivered your child and let us know the outcome please. Also don't forget you could always speak to your local MP if you feel that strongly.

 

[Dale_tem]

Bounty have already changed the way they do things they now have to give you a number to get access to your photo.

I would say it was annoying/stupid employees rather than the company as a whole, perhaps more training would help and employees carrying ID numbers so you can complain if needed.

Overall there isn't a problem with Bounty. They have changed the way they do things with ID numbers, so there is no point taking photos without you present as they can't give you the ID number.

It seems like some of their photographers are rude.

They took my daughters photos, I had already taken some and they were about the same so we didn't bother buying them. The person was polite, asked as about the labour etc. and was nice to talk to.

They have already changed their policy to storing photos, only storing them for a limited period, an email reminder after 6 months and if no reply they are deleted.

My wife is also on mummy forums and hasn't seen or noted complaints about Bounty, if you look you will find it, but its not a regular complaint.

 

[jon ryan]

Article here from the Guardian

Salient bit:

As the NCT points out, it is extraordinary that these total strangers, with no qualifications, should be allowed to roam maternity wards, while visits from visitors and family members are often restricted to short hours. It is very hard to turn down an emotional appeal to have these precious first moments of existence recorded for posterity, even when most parents have probably got a perfectly decent camera in their hospital bag.

That maternity units are struggling and need all the money they can get is a major cause for concern, but by allowing them to be subsidised in this way the NHS is colluding with private companies exploiting people at their most vulnerable. These experiences may be a small minority - please do share your own below - but enough by themselves to surely justify a rethink of this practice at the very least. The NCT themselves want a ban on it and I, for one, would sign the petition.

Dunno if there is a petition, but I'd say signing it would be a good idea. Perhaps hospitals could have an `on call` photographer who would take shots on request rather than harassing new mums.

And from the Telegraph (July 2009, so I hope things have improved). Especially the claim that Bounty staff

are allowed to park free on hospital sites while patients and relatives are forced to pay

If that's true, I hope anyone approached by them will shortly thereafter require the services of a tired, underpaid, overworked nurse, to have their camera surgically removed.

 

[Mirus Lux]

Speaking as a father of 2 and a photographer. I see the concern and I think this individual issue needs to be addressed by the op and the company.

For me I do think it is wrong if the tog took the photo with no permission. I also think the company should think very carefully before mailing parents of new born children 3 years on. A brief contact in a maternity ward doesn't give them the right surely to contact you after 3 years. What if the child had had complications on the days weeks months after and had passed away it could be incredibly distressing. If it was in the weeks or months after you might be expecting it but after 3 years?!?

My wife bought the pictures from them (they weren't great) and it is a bit of a pressure situation. This needs to be addressed by the hospital but unlikely to change just like as it makes money you have to remortgage your house to pay for a phonecall!

 

[Oxford_Matt]

I don't think it's a joke Simmo, I think it's a scandalous, spiteful and disgusting thing to say. Matt should be ashamed of himself.

Why should I be ashamed??

How can it be scandalous?? You need to choose your words better.

I understand OP is angry, but like I said I would have been more worried about the fact anyone could have had access to the child whilst I was either asleep or not there. We did not let our Newborn out of our sight and despite the OP stating hospitals are secure which is true. It's not bulletproof.

Maybe I'm just over protective over my Children??

Just seems like its all gone a bit OTT to be honest.

PS: Like I said before, my partner used to work for bounty, and nobody has mentioned the fact that the money they get from Bounty goes towards medical equipment for the Baby ward, which may one day save your child's life!!

 

[malo50]

Why should I be ashamed??

How can it be scandalous?? You need to choose your words better.

I understand OP is angry, but like I said I would have been more worried about the fact anyone could have had access to the child whilst I was either asleep or not there. We did not let our Newborn out of our sight and despite the OP stating hospitals are secure which is true. It's not bulletproof.

Maybe I'm just over protective over my Children??

Just seems like its all gone a bit OTT to be honest.

PS: Like I said before, my partner used to work for bounty, and nobody has mentioned the fact that the money they get from Bounty goes towards medical equipment for the Baby ward, which may one day save your child's life!!

No shame at all.

 

[joescrivens]

Why should I be ashamed??

How can it be scandalous?? You need to choose your words better.

I understand OP is angry, but like I said I would have been more worried about the fact anyone could have had access to the child whilst I was either asleep or not there. We did not let our Newborn out of our sight and despite the OP stating hospitals are secure which is true. It's not bulletproof.

Maybe I'm just over protective over my Children??

Just seems like its all gone a bit OTT to be honest.

PS: Like I said before, my partner used to work for bounty, and nobody has mentioned the fact that the money they get from Bounty goes towards medical equipment for the Baby ward, which may one day save your child's life!!

^^+1

 

[Yv]

I understand OP is angry, but like I said I would have been more worried about the fact anyone could have had access to the child whilst I was either asleep or not there. We did not let our Newborn out of our sight and despite the OP stating hospitals are secure which is true. It's not bulletproof.

Except it wasn't just anyone, it was someone authorised to be there [even if they weren't authorised to take the picture], which is a slightly different matter. Oh and next time you give birth, by emergency c-section, do please let us know, so we can all come and make sure the baby is never out of your sight for a minute. :bonk:

Anyway, to the OP - I think the advice in this thread regarding what to do is sound. There is little point in getting massively wound up about it, a strongly worded letter to the local PCT and Bounty is always better when written with calm and clear frame of mind.

My own experience of hospital photographers was 17 and 20 yrs ago, we said yes to one and no to the other, both were polite and friendly. Was it Bounty back then? No idea

 

[Byker28i]

Article here from the Guardian

Interesting article, reads a bit of the photographer catching the mother at the wrong time. It happens, everyones human, but then as a journalist who needs to make copy, she has a good story and angle :shrug: (playing devils advocate).

Especially the claim that Bounty staff are allowed to park free on hospital sites while patients and relatives are forced to pay

Well, I know that's not true at our local hospital - even the staff have to pay, albeit a reduced rate.


Again, playing devils advocate, the photographer who took the image of this mums baby may, or may not, have been the one who spoke to the mum. I've no idea what the company policy is, but the photographer may have been a little keen to get all babies in the ward, have a limited time, might not have been the one who spoke to the mum.

Legally, do we think the photographer did anything wrong? They have permission to be there and to take photographs from the hospital. Are hospitals classed as private property?

From the telegraph article earlier, "FOI requests received from 93 trusts show they earned £547,280 from Bounty in 2008-9, up from £460,284 the previous year". To be honest - that doesn't sound a lot per trust, around £5k a year. They must make more than that out of the pay per view TV/internet, pay phones, carparking, vending machines, or the 101 other ways you have to pay at a hospital these days.

 

[Byker28i]

For me I do think it is wrong if the tog took the photo with no permission. I also think the company should think very carefully before mailing parents of new born children 3 years on. A brief contact in a maternity ward doesn't give them the right surely to contact you after 3 years. What if the child had had complications on the days weeks months after and had passed away it could be incredibly distressing. If it was in the weeks or months after you might be expecting it but after 3 years?!?

Strange that - some parents might feel different.
I got asked two weeks ago to take photos of a friends newborn that wasn't expected to last more than a couple of days. Luckily, it pulled through and is now fine.
Got asked by some old neighbours a few months back if I had photos of their 18 month old son that died 20 years ago as they'd had flood damage and lost photos.

 

[Oxford_Matt]

Yep... No Shame.

More things to worry about in this worried and to get worked up about than someone photographing your child 3 years ago!!

Is life really that boring?

 

[malo50]

Yep... No Shame.

More things to worry about in this worried and to get worked up about than someone photographing your child 3 years ago!!

Is life really that boring?

Pardon?

 

[joescrivens]

he said, "is life really that boring"

what he means is, how can this be such a big deal, it's a photo there are more important things to worry about

 

[malo50]

No show without Punch eh?

My point was about him impugning the behaviour of the OP at what was a very stressful time for her. The fact that he's now trying to divert the argument, suggests that he's back pedalling.

 

[Dale_tem]

He is saying is there a point to getting wound up over a photo being taken 3 years ago?

A quick email - no thanks, please remove photo from your servers and move on in life.

Would you really get that stressed?

It sounds like from their website that this email is a reminder to see if you still want the photo before photos are removed from their server.

 

[joescrivens]

No show without Punch eh?

My point was about him impugning the behaviour of the OP at what was a very stressful time for her. The fact that he's now trying to divert the argument, suggests that he's back pedalling.

well he can fight his own argument about that, you lambasting him about a comment and back pedalling seems like you egging for an argument to me, but i find the whole thing laughable that a photographer complains when someone takes a photo of something they are within their rights to take a photo of. there are so many threads on here about photographers being stopped when they shouldn't and whats the harm. then this one is the opposite.

It hasn't caused any harm or problem, move on

not sure what you mean about the punch comment though

 

[sturisoma]

just to be clear, when you say:

"You should be more worried about the fact you fell asleep and gave someone the chance to enter your ward and cubicle and even had chance to photo your child whilst you slept and was unaware of what was going on!! Not the best start. "

do you mean the mother is at fault because she fell aslepp?

or

do you mean the ward is at fault because it allowed access to newborn babies while mothers are asleep?

because I'm confused...


(still remember Dawn Griffiths whose baby was stolen by a fake health visitor )

 

[Dale_tem]

She had a C section, there is not a huge amount she can do.

My wife fell asleep (they need to sleep at some point ), woke up to find my daughter missing, got up and found 2 nurses taking her stats around the corner as they didn't want to wake her.

The OP is at no fault in anyway. Anyone who says she is doesn't have a clue about maternity wards these days. There is no central nursery, You are responsible for your child at all times, they recommend you take them to the toilet with you. You can leave them with the nurses over night at the nurses station if you are extremely tired and need sleep, but they prefer you to look after them.

Partners can't stay, so the OP had 4 days looking after the baby on her own (visiting hours works out about 6 hours a day for partners in our hospital), it would of been hardwork without the C section, let alone with the C section. When I went in my wife slept as it was the only time she could rest properly as I looked after my daughter. The rest of the time she slept for an hour or so at a time.

But why get stressed about the photo?

 

[POAH]

the most worrying thing is the responses in this thread - most of which are a load of [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER].

wards are locked and you need to buzz to get in.

you sleep when you can after you give birth. Any one that says other wise is talking rubbish.

visitors/family are not allowed in all the time because the medical staff have to do their job and the mums&dads need time alone (although dads have to go at some points). We never had anyone come round when our two boys were born. even if they had taken a pic I'd not be posting it on the internet since its no big deal.

next time you go to sleep pull the curtains round

 

[Splog]

well he can fight his own argument about that, you lambasting him about a comment and back pedalling seems like you egging for an argument to me, but i find the whole thing laughable that a photographer complains when someone takes a photo of something they are within their rights to take a photo of. there are so many threads on here about photographers being stopped when they shouldn't and whats the harm. then this one is the opposite.

It hasn't caused any harm or problem, move on

not sure what you mean about the punch comment though

Why are you saying that they are within their rights to take the photo? They clearly aren't as permission was refused.

 

[fixedimage]

"Friendliest forum on the Internet"

Indeed.

 

[Simmotino]

"Friendliest forum on the Internet"

Indeed.

This.

I've RTM'd the thread this morning as it seems to have moved from offering advice to making character assignations of the OP and debating them as a parent which is, IMO, unacceptable.

Sadly, it seems to the be usual suspect stirring the hornet's nest again! :shake: