Lee & White

1. at birth - name of child, name of parents, weight and height of child, time of birth, contact details of the family for well wishes, and not to forget, pictures! Yes, and these pictures sometimes include pictures of their little ones in the nude - which in my opinion should not be published. You may think it is simply innocent and your child may look absolutely adorable, but in today's society where paedophiles roam and child pornography is rampant, I think it is better to keep your precious moment locked in your cupboard rather than displaying it on a global communications network!
2. after birth - daily/monthly development of the child, pictures, likes/dislikes of the child, hobbies, etc, and again, contact details including the home address and phone number. Basically, you will know all about the child just by browsing through the website and never needing to have met him/her. And if a stalker or a kidnapper happens to be on the hunt for your child, how much easier can it get for them? The parent has given them all they need to know.

What is wrong in wanting to share all about your child? Everything.

Let us look at it from the perspective of the Belgian law of 8 December 1992 on the protection of privacy.

We know that the Internet is a communication means that, in comparison to other communication means, promotes the distribution of and access to information freely and on a world scale. Such a distribution can easily bring with it a loss of control of the individual over his data which he has communicated online.

There are many who cannot imagine that, when they disseminate personal information online, this data will be able to be used numerous times. This observation is even more apparent when children are surfing the Internet. Why?

Well, a child is himself in a weak position when he comes into contact with third parties via the Internet: he/she is more impressionable than an adult, less suspicious and probably does not know all his rights. Given the fact that a child is innocent, impressionable and vulnerable, the law seeks to protect him/her by ensuring that his/her personal information is not freely available both on and off the Internet and that whatever information available is kept secure and only obtained by outsiders with the permission of his/her parents.

Now take note. The law assumes that parents (who have supposedly reached the understanding capacity age) will take care and exercise their parental responsibility to protect and guard their children against harm. The law in fact entrusts parents with this duty. It goes without saying then that parents should only give permission to third parties to handle their children's personal information in necessary circumstances. All this is said on the acceptance of a child's vulnerability.

Further on, whilst the granting of permission usually requires it to be anexpressed permission, a parent who sets up a website for himself and divulges his child's personal information is actually impliedly giving the world (an uncountable number of third parties) permission to make use and sometimes abuse such personal information.

Can we stop to imagine the worst that could happen given the availability of such information concerning the child?

For example, there is nothing stopping outsiders from profiling the family and saving the pictures of the child/children made available by his/her parents on the website by simply right-clicking with the mouse. Only God knows the potential abuse of innocent children's pictures that could take place.

If we look at the Belgian Privacy Commission's recommendation concerning the protection of the privacy of minors on the Internet, when it concerns the distribution of pictures of minors, not only must their preceding permission be obtained, but also those of their parents in the case of a minor who has not yet reached the understanding capacity age. Just as it is with the case of sensitive data, so also is a picture of the object of a specific protection, framed with the theory of the right to image. By virtue of these provisions, in principle, the permission of the person concerned must be obtained for every use of his picture.

Thus, those who wish to handle personal information including pictures, must obtain the expressed permission of the data subject, and in the case of children, the permission of their parents.

But if parents themselves seem to shirk their responsibility in this matter and make such personal information including pictures of their children so readily available for abuse, then what more can the law do to protect these young ones? Who is to blame when something does go wrong? Do stop to ponder on what I have just said. Is what I am saying so far-fetched? I do not think so. Not in today's world at least. We are certainly not living in the age of well-manicured gardens, dutiful housewives and newspaper-pipe-slippers husbands.

So, the next time you want to set up a website with your little child's pictures and personal details on because you are bursting with pride, think. Don't just feel. Then think again.