The point is the simple sounding proposal has a lot of complexity hiding behind it.

If I’m a photographer, do I have to get consent from both the divorced parents to photograph the kids? The kids themselves?

>the simple sounding proposal has a lot of complexity hiding behind it.

Okay? We're not on a legal forum drafting the 50 page law to cover all those loopholes. I'm nor even sure if the posting limit here would faciliate that.

I trust some decent lawyers can take the high level suggestions and dig into the minutae when it comes to real policy. And I find it a bit annoying to berate the community because they aren't acting as a lawyer (and no one here claims to be one AFAIK).

>If I’m a photographer, do I have to get consent from both the divorced parents to photograph the kids? The kids themselves?

Check your state laws. The answer will vary immensely. Another reason a global forum like this isn't the best place to talk about law.

> If I’m a photographer, do I have to get consent from both the divorced parents to photograph the kids?

Does a doctor have to get consent from both divorced parents to give a child routine care?

Sometimes, yes.

The point was similar situations exist now. For photographers even. Parents may disagree if a photographer may publish their child's photographs.

> do I have to get consent from both the divorced parents to photograph the kids

In public? Street photography style, you don't have to get any consent, generally.

Why is "both" the issue? You don't have to get the consent of both parents to photograph their kid whether together, married, separated or divorced.

> In public? Street photography style, you don't have to get any consent, generally.

The parent poster proposes changing that.