Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I really admire what a family friend did after she had a baby. She isn't posting any photos of him on social media, and says it's because he can't consent to have his photos shared publicly. Lots of her friends keep pestering her saying "I want to see the baby!" and she says they're welcome to come over, and suddenly they don't want to see him that much. They just want something they can click like on.


This logic is bizarre to me. He can’t consent to being fed, clothed or having his diaper changed either. I imagine she likely still does all three.

For a parent, making choices on your child’s behalf is kinda part of the deal.


Not feeding, clothing, or changing your baby's diaper is objectively bad for their health; not sharing their pictures on Facebook is not anywhere close to that. I don't see how it's bizarre to want to keep your baby healthy but otherwise let them decide things for themselves once they're old enough.


>"For a parent, making choices on your child’s behalf is kinda part of the deal"

And this person has made the decision for their child that whatever social media company is not going to own their child's image. What is is "bizarre" about that.

I hardly think caring for a child and letting a corporation own their image are even remotely the same thing.


I don’t disagree with anything you’ve said, it’s perfectly fair, but what you’ve said is not the logic she is using.

If she had said this I see no logical discrepancy, but to couch your logic in terms of a child’s lack of consent is the point that makes little sense.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: