Data protection act: Photographing Children

S

Siberdib

Messages
310
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
This may have been discussed before but I'm looking for advise for my personal situation.

I currently work in a school and have been asked to photograph the fortcoming sports day and drama production. Now these photos will be used for official use, intended for the school website I'm currently constructing and potentially for re-sale to parents. This is an primary school with a number of children on child protection plans.

Therefore under the data protection act; what must I obey too? Children are given permission to be photographed by parents upon admission to the school, but where does this stand in my example. The photographs don't have to be linked up to personal data providing the child's name or address.
 
If you want to comply with the data protection act "don't have to" isn't an issue. You don't link the images with any personally identifiable information.
 
Photographing children in public places is, for most children, exactly the same as photographing adults under the same circumstances. That is, there is no right to privacy and hence it is legal.

The exception is children (and vulnerable adults) who are wards of court or subject to a child protection order, or on the 'at risk' register. The Children Act 1988 creates special rights of privacy ('the rights of the child') which make it an offence to publish any photo that might place them at risk from, say, an estranged violent parent by divulging their location. A photograph of a child in a public place wearing school uniform, or accompanied by others whose whereabouts are known to the would-be assailant, might conceivably do this.

The Children Act is also the cause of problems at sports clubs and similar venues, as the supervising adult has a legal duty to safeguard these enhanced rights to privacy. And since part of that right is confidentiality about the child's status, usually they will not know themselves which children in their charge the Act applies to. Their safest course of action then becomes one of challenging any photographer as an imminent threat.

But by far the biggest issue surrounding photographs of minors is public fear of paedophiles. There seems to be a widespread assumption that the only possible explanation for any adult photographing children who are not their own is that they are a pervert with a camera. Proceed with extreme care and sensitivity, and if at all possible ask permission.
Click to expand...

taken from photo rights.org
 
If the school want to post the pictures on their web site that is fine. My only word of caution would be, that those children that are under protection plans may not be included on the web site if they can be viewed by any of the general public. It does depend on the reason they are under protection. If they have people looking for them, then obviously they shouldn't be included. I'm sure the school can advise on those isolated children. Basically Data protection doesn't really cover many uses of photos. There are exceptions of course.

There was a radio 4 program on this, I can't find the link to it now.

heres a link

Also, just quickly been through the main points of the data protection act 1998, which basically says any information held should be accurate up-to date and relevant. There are exceptions such as historical events.

Some other act may cover your situation, not the data protection act
 
It looks like you'll be taking the photographs as part of your employment at the school.

I should think that your school already has a designated Data Controller under the DPA (they're required to by law) who ought to know the ins and outs of your particular environment.

I'd recommend he/she be your first port of call for advice.

The Information Commissioner's Office has some general advice about the DPA in education and some specific Guidance Notes for photography in schools
 
DPA and Child protection are 2 different things aren't they?
 
lawrie29 said:
DPA and Child protection are 2 different things aren't they?
Click to expand...


Yup

The school should be aware of which children have a child protection order in place - just do not take any pictures of those children.

Also not sure how they do things in your school but here parents must sign a consent form that allows the school to take pictures of there children, the consent form also indicates how those pictures may be used as well: just in the school, on a school website, in council publications or used by the media.
 
I've got a similar problem. For the last 3 years I've been taking photographs of junior rugby as a parent and the parents have been using them on facebook etc, we've used them for club publicity, match reports and at the end of year presentation.

This year I was asked to become publicity officer, which now means the club requires me to have yet another CRB check (I already have two enhanced CRB's from other organisations). With CRB processing currently paused until the end of july and then working through the backlog, the club won't be submitting further CRBs until the end of Sept, so it could be Christmas until it comes through.

Meanwhile I've been told I can't take photo's until I get the CRB! It's been a frustrating week as I've gone back and forth between the CRB, RFU and club's welfare officer. I could submit a request for event photography, but then I'd need insurance.

I'm about to write to my MP suggesting a CRB certificate should be against an individual, bot organisation and time expired. A car's MOT proves it's fit for use on the road. I don't have to get an MOT for every different road I drive on!
 
MOT only proves it's fit for the road during the time it had its examination. Doesn't prove it's fit for the road the following 364 days. :)

Have you asked the club why you need a CRB check if you're never left alone with the kids?
 
1. if the photo is linked to data, then it is under the DPA. Example - mugshot photo for school file (likley to be electronic)
2. if it is not linked to any personal data, then it is not covered by the DPA. Example - pic of rugby match
3. if it is the official published school photo, with all thenames on - likley to fall under the DPA (grey area)
4. if iut is an individual image, that wont be stored, but likely to be given to parent etc.. not coveredd by DPA

---

The issue abouyt CRB checks is relevant. however, it is pretty unenforcable. Example. If you are a social worker, and you live on the border, and you work part time for 2 schools, then you need 2 CRB checks. It is the employer (school that instigates the check)

In the same vein, no point in you getting CRB checked. If the school is doing thier job properly, they will instigate the check themselves

The way arround this is supervision. There are professionals (doctors, dentists, opticians, social workers) who all have to visit multiple premeisis in a working day. The CRB system isnt geared up for this. the standard workarround is that a CRB checked mamber of staff in the organisation, supervises the site visitor

Madness yes
practical no
 
Byker28i said:
CRB check (I already have two enhanced CRB's from other organisations). With CRB processing currently paused until the end of july and then working through the backlog, the club won't be submitting further CRBs until the end of Sept, so it could be Christmas until it comes through.
Click to expand...


As I understand the CRB checking is still being processed, it's the Vetting and Barring Scheme that has been suspended, which is not the same thing.

Any delay in having a CRB check would be down to the form filling, did you use the old form or the newer purple form ?

Full details at Criminal Records Bureau
 
Byker28i said:
I've got a similar problem. For the last 3 years I've been taking photographsI'm about to write to my MP suggesting a CRB certificate should be against an individual, bot organisation and time expired. A car's MOT proves it's fit for use on the road. I don't have to get an MOT for every different road I drive on!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it's a fundamental issue with the way that CRB works.

Unlike an MOT, you don't pass/fail a CRB check. It's not an examination certificate.

It provides information to the employer/sponsor to form their own judgement about your suitability for the role which requires a CRB check. Their legal responsibility is to form that judgement.

Things on your record that are not a problem for one role may not be appropriate for another, or different organisations may have different opinions about the same things in your past history.
 
But, like an MOT, it's still only valid at the time it's issued. You might get arrested for god knows what the following week without your employer doing another CRB.
 
The CRB system is a complete mystery to me. While all the staff at a nursery I worked for needed the checks, I, as a photographer photographing the children individually and in groups, didn't.

Doesn't make sense to me.:shrug:
 
I had a simmilar situation to byker last yr.. I ahve photographed womens football for some time and it does OK for print sales.. however I was hired by blackburn rovers pr dep to photogrpah the ladies team official (ie paid for) but i was told i couldnt photogrepah them at all until my CRB came through.. how silly is that.. been photogrpahing them for yrs without one and as soon as being paid i need a crb and cant photograph til I get it... ludicrous.. but only missed a couple of games ... now nobody asks me for one because i list on my website that I have one.. that seems enough for everyone else..
 
whiteflyer said:
As I understand the CRB checking is still being processed, it's the Vetting and Barring Scheme that has been suspended, which is not the same thing.

Any delay in having a CRB check would be down to the form filling, did you use the old form or the newer purple form ?

Full details at Criminal Records Bureau
Click to expand...

Yup, but that says (and so does the CRB over the phone)
However, please note that applications received on or after this date for Enhanced or Standard checks will not begin to be processed until 26 July 2010,

Kaouthia said:
Have you asked the club why you need a CRB check if you're never left alone with the kids?
Click to expand...
Because the welfare officer says so and won't budge. She says 'it's the law' despite me pointing out I'm never alone with the kids and nothings changed from what I've already been doing. It doesn't help my missus is a childcare specialist who advises the Govt occaisionally. She's biting her lip trying to stay out of it because we've a feeling with this person it'll make things worse.

RFU say they provide guidelines, and don't feel it's strictly necessary to stop me photographing whilst a CRB check is obtained, but it's down to the club to lay down the rules.

At the moment I'm thinking of just saying sod it all!

As for CRB's, one of my wife's staff has 12 valid checks, 9 enhanced checks and 3 normal
 
Siberdib said:
This may have been discussed before but I'm looking for advise for my personal situation.

I currently work in a school and have been asked to photograph the fortcoming sports day and drama production. Now these photos will be used for official use, intended for the school website I'm currently constructing and potentially for re-sale to parents. This is an primary school with a number of children on child protection plans.

Therefore under the data protection act; what must I obey too? Children are given permission to be photographed by parents upon admission to the school, but where does this stand in my example. The photographs don't have to be linked up to personal data providing the child's name or address.
Click to expand...

Dont your school know?
 
Coaster said:
The CRB system is a complete mystery to me. While all the staff at a nursery I worked for needed the checks, I, as a photographer photographing the children individually and in groups, didn't.

Doesn't make sense to me.:shrug:
Click to expand...

If you were left alone with the children then you should have had a CRB check carried out.
 
Hi Siberdib, to get back to your question, I would take whatever pictures you need to then get the school to confirm if they are OK to use on the web site before proceeding. Make sure you get confirmation in writing then it is down to them.

Best regards

Chris
 
Thanks for all the replies all.

It is incredibly confusing as nobody really knows when the Data Protection Act comes into force and when it doesn't with regards to photographing children (mainly other people's). I'm going to be working freelance for the school soon and therefore my query was in relation to this. The school is still stuck in the 1960's for technology and I'm working to turn this around. I therefore needed knowledge of what my rights would be in photographing the pupils.

The school and I have come to an agreement that anything officially photographed for the school and placed in the public domain mustn't include the children's names. When a child's name needs to be used, written permission needs to be obtained from the parent/guardian.
 
Siberdib said:
It is incredibly confusing as nobody really knows when the Data Protection Act comes into force and when it doesn't with regards to photographing children (mainly other people's).
Click to expand...

eerm the rules on who what where when you can photogrpah dont change even if the crackpot idea does come into play which it looks unlikely..

Siberdib said:
The school and I have come to an agreement that anything officially photographed for the school and placed in the public domain mustn't include the children's names. When a child's name needs to be used, written permission needs to be obtained from the parent/guardian.
Click to expand...

There are no rules with childrens photography bar the ones the school might make up.. as above..... but there are guidelines... the first is.... dont include names with childrens pictures published..
 
Siberdib said:
Thanks for all the replies all.

It is incredibly confusing as nobody really knows when the Data Protection Act comes into force and when it doesn't with regards to photographing children (mainly other people's).
Click to expand...

The guidance for photography in schools regarding the Data Protection Act seems pretty clear to me (some more interesting guidance here.

What's the problem? Is it really the DPA or is the school confusing the issue with child protection and safeguarding? Certainly your original post is confusing seperate issues, as are a large number of the replies.
 
I think the areas between DPA and Child protection gets merged because theres so much misunderstanding about it.

Usually it's "you can't because of data protection", then you point out how they are wrong and they fall back onto child protection and the need for a crb check...
 
Siberdib said:
Thanks for all the replies all.

It is incredibly confusing as nobody really knows when the Data Protection Act comes into force and when it doesn't with regards to photographing children (mainly other people's). I'm going to be working freelance for the school soon and therefore my query was in relation to this. The school is still stuck in the 1960's for technology and I'm working to turn this around. I therefore needed knowledge of what my rights would be in photographing the pupils.

The school and I have come to an agreement that anything officially photographed for the school and placed in the public domain mustn't include the children's names. When a child's name needs to be used, written permission needs to be obtained from the parent/guardian.
Click to expand...


You are being a bit sweeping here. The data protection act is pretty clear, it is simply about the collection of data. In essence shooting photographs is not covered by the act - in the same way that writing an essay with a fountain pen is. The DPA is relevant if you use the photgraphs as part of the school records - i.e. they are tied to other data the school has about a child. Without being funny, schools must have loads of info about children - names, addresses, medical stuff, DOB, parent names etc.. so the schools ought to know about the implication of the DPA better than anyone.

So if you shoot pictures of children, thats fine, if you put them in the file / on the computer system, on a passcard etc.. then you essentially you then have to comply with the DPA

The data in a school that is covered by the act will include any personal data about staff, parents or pupils. CRB checks are totally another story, and just assess and certify an individual to be safe (or not) to work with children or vunerable adults. The onus is on the employer / authoritory / orgganisation involved to satisfy themselves that an adult complys and is safe. It isnt the begginging or end of the rules - it ought to be a single part of the big plan to keep kids safe

The reason we (as photographers) can go and work in schools without a CRB check (done by the individual school) is that we are supervised by staff that are. The moment we work alone, we become responsible for the kids, and our own actions, so we need to be checked - hence a CRB check

Back to dthe DPA - someone in you school will be the compliance officer, and essentially it is thier responsibility to make sure the organisaton has the procedures in place to ensure propper complaince. If there is a grey area, or unsure area, they wil lbe able to call a helpline, where they themselves can get advice. The whole DPA thing isnt that hard

The area of confusion comes when ill-informed people in organisations (police, schools etc) make rules, wrongly citing the DPA or CRB compliance as the reason for (or not) doing something. If this ended up in court, it will be a really simple black and white thing

again the whole thing comes about because there are often differences between

1. what you are legally allowed to do
2. what an organisation lets you do
3. what you think the rules should be
4. what the rules were last year
5. what the rules are in the organisation down the road
6. what the newspapers say
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top