-
-
This is exactly why mine is non-revocable. Newspapers and photographers do it all of the time so I figured why can't I?
Comment
-
Thanks for the advice. I did get some screen shots of her liking and commenting on photos before I took them down. Even if she has a case, I am not going to help her so I will only be sending the health forms which are transferable. I guess then a leave me alone text will be next. I have gotten 7 today reminding me that she needs different things.Comment
-
I would definitely let her know that the health forms are the ONLY things you are giving to her; she is entitled to nothing else. She got copies before, and perhaps she should have kept better track of those things. Not your problem she didn't. Hopefully she doesn't text you again. Can you block texts once you send her the "Now that you have what I am giving you, leave me alone" text?Comment
-
I will share my story. I've shared before but this case is very similar to mine.
I would def take screen shots of her liking them, commenting, sharing, etc. To show that she was fully aware and in fact enjoyed them and didn't have an issue at the time or she would have immediately said to take them down.
Here's why: I had a family with 2 boys in my care. I had them sign a photo release, including a separate section GIVING SPECIFIC PERMISSION FOR FACEBOOK. Both parents were friends on my DAYCARE ONLY page. Commented daily on the pics, LOVED the pics, and shared lots of my pics of their kids, saying things like "love the pics!" "they are having so much fun!" etc. Their families and friends also commented and liked the pics. The parents loved seeing the pics on FB and never had an issue UNTIL THEY LEFT, then they found LOTS OF ISSUES!
They went to licensing, it was a long drawn out ordeal. One of the things was that they suddenly had a problem with their kids being posted on FB even though they specifically signed saying it was ok!
Licensing was not at all pleased with me. I thought I had covered my bases with my permission form. I had to remove ALL pics with ANY PART OF THEM IN IT! My licensor didn't care that they signed a waiver. She said children's privacy issues are a HUGE issue! Even with permission. My daycare page is for families only, but the issue is the liking and the sharing and the tagging. As much as I did my part to keep the pics private, once parents are tagged or they like or share, then the pics are now visible to THOUSANDS of people, friends, friends of friends, etc. So basically they are now PUBLIC!!
I did not get cited on it, but it left a very bitter taste in my mouth. I had to remove all their pics like I said. I of course blocked them and anyone related to them that had commented on my pics.
I now have a much different agreement with parents regarding FB. They are not allowed to tag or share, if they do their access to my page will be removed. I also have BOTH parents sign, and will not post without permission from both parents.
I don't think you should be providing copies, since it is QUITE LIKELY they are planning to use it as EVIDENCE AGAINST YOU as my people did in court!Comment
-
I got an email late last night telling me she wanted the health forms plus every parent handbook and update I've had in the last year, every parent communication from the last year and my napping and disipline policies. I giggled a little and told her I have sent the health forms and she will not be getting anything else and to not contact me any more. I have all my ducks in a row in case licensing shows and I have called them to give them a heads up. If she tries to sue me, we will deal with it but I"m not going to help her. Thanks for all your support.Comment
-
I read your post wrong that it said they DID give permission to post, so ignore my comment!
And good luckComment
-
Napping was one of the main concerns I had been expressing because he had been waking up everyone on a regular basis. I don't actually have a written napping policy, but I don't start kids who don't nap and disrupting nap is one of my sticking points.Comment
-
Ant updates?Comment
-
Wow, I didn't read this thread til today... That's crazy. It's obvious she's trying to find something she can use against you. I'm a glad you told her you won't give her anything but the health form. I'm assuming she hasn't contacted you again! Has licensing heard from her?
I have a photo release I found on a daycare site with various forms. I found a really detailed one and everyone has signed and agreed to it. I had one mom who didn't so I just didn't post her DCG's pics and only sent then to mom and deleted them after. We had a nasty term anyway and it was probably for the best. I have lots of great response from my Facebook page though. It's not private, it's a business page and mainly for pics of fun things we do. Walks, outside play, crafts, etc. Granted it would be considered "public", I have been able to find public pics of almost all my daycare kids on Facebook without being their friend. What about websites? I mean that is accessible to anyone on the planet with internet access. How is it any different than Facebook? I see tons of daycares with websites and get lots of ideas from them. I find them on Craigslist and Yelp all the time.Comment
-
Craigslist was a huge no-no from my licensor too! Even though I had permission. Pics with kids (specifically their faces) are "highly frowned upon" for websites and facebook.
Facebook is worse because of the liking, tagging, sharing and commenting. These things put the pictures in people's faces who normally wouldn't be looking for them. It just shows up on their newsfeed when the pics are shared, etc. Commenting is a problem because people say negative things that snowball (happened to me) and causes issues.
Websites aren't "as bad" because there is no opportunity to share the pictures or comment freely. People who are viewing your website are specifically looking for your website, as opposed to thousands of people on facebook seeing your pics in their newsfeed, not specifically looking for them.
That is how it was explained to me. My licensor also stressed the "highly frowned upon"part. It is not a regulation. I think her upset was mostly her personal opinion, and varies even from one licensor to the next much like other things.Comment
-
This is why I dont have a Facebook page for parents. I will send pictures every now and then of just their child by texted photo. I do not use photos of the children for any advertising.
It is a pain but it seems like anytime you do anything extra, parents come back to bite you. I have had that issue before with daily sheets which is why I no longer provide them. I will fill out a sheet IF the parents provide a copy each day and only for the first while and only for infants because I can see how this would be helpful for parents (only one parent every took me up on that). I had a parent bring up an old daily sheet way back when I used to provide them. Apparently their child received one jar of food at one meal instead of two due to an oversight by my assistant. They never brought up this concern until after they had tried to sneak out with no notice, no payment and all of a sudden they were worried their child wasnt being fed.....then why keep him in my care for another several months past the day this happened and also, never even ask me about this until I demand you pay the two weeks notice? I just dont understand parents that get ugly post daycare termination, especially when they are the ones who left! just pay what you owe, leave and just be done with it, stop trying to take advantage of people. you gotta wonder how they sleep at night.
Anything you share with parents or put in writing/text/email can be used against you. I do not provide additional copies of anything for parents (outside of the original they reviewed to sign, etc) and especially not for parents that are already termed. Why would I help them compile a complaint against me? If they were concerned, they should have kept documentation themselves so your biggest weapon in defending yourself is the fact that they did not remove their child before and did not keep any documentation of concerns.Comment
Tweet
Comment