“Bet Lynch”

Parsley3

So some posters think that Julie looks awful in that photo. I don't.

What you think doesn’t matter any more than what I think.
Was she asked?
Did she say yes?
If the answer to either of those is no or we don’t know then it was wrong to post it, just as it’s wrong to post photos of children or other adults without their consent.

So some posters think that Julie looks awful in that photo. I don't.

Ms Goodyear had no choice in the sharing of the photograph Luminance I find that disturbing. A lady who set great store by her appearance would surely not want this picture displayed to the general public.

I understand others finding it unacceptable for themselves and that is a valid choice. What I don't understand is why anyone would think themselves qualified to judge that for someone else. Perhaps their own fear of such a photo being shared stems from knowing others judge by appearance despite not acknowledging they are themselves part of that problem.

You compared yourself without teeth as, I assume, a small child, we are not speaking of a child but a woman aged 83, her
photographs are on GransNet too .

It was brutal to put the photographs on Facebook, you find it acceptable, that’s it

Well I for one never knew a lack of teeth made for a source of shame high enough that I must hide myself away from family and friends.

The photographs have now become a joke

Anniebach

The photographs of you at many functions, did you have teeth,

Well Facebook did not exist the last time I didn't have teeth but the photo albums stand as testament that my mother thought my gummy smiles rather endearing.

Witzend, Allsorts, Anniebach good points.

Not the action of a loving husband to post a picture which might not be acceptable to the person in the picture somewhere where it could be made available for the world to see and comment on, regardless of whether others think it’s all right or not.
He might at his age, not understand about privacy rules on Facebook. On the other hand if he does have his privacy locked firmly down, that doesn’t stop people in the group reposting the picture.
Would Bet have liked it?
No problem if she could say yes or no.
Big problem if she is incapable of understanding and answering.
Worse problem if she wasn’t asked.

The photographs of you at many functions, did you have teeth,

There are photos of myself at many functions on Facebook. Had I ever declared discomfort at this there likely would not be. Had his wife declared discomfort of her image being shared I doubt she would have chosen her profession. Were she still able to work and many her age still are, would you be watching "Coronation Street" or whatever televised nonsense and be saying "she looks awful" because that is indeed your own judgement and vanity showing.

To his own Facebook ? Do you mean for family and friends,
He put her on display , she did not choose to be on display

I think what matters are the motives and we should take vanity out of the equation. The actions of a loving husband sharing a picture of a beloved wife on her birthday to his own Facebook seem beyond reproach. Imagine having half of those responding it is wrong to share a picture of his wife looking awful. I hope he is soothed that the other half are able to agree she looks rather beautiful and full of joy.

She doesn't know what's going on. Happy in the moment is good, but not to show the decline of someone who was proud of how she looked, I don't go out without make up and have the last look in the mirror to see I look ok, it matters to me. If others don't think like that, its their decision. Would you give a life long vegetarian meat as they cant remember they do not eat it? Its respecting their choices.

ViceVersa

Are we suggesting that no-one with dementia should ever have their photo taken, if they may not know the photo is being taken or can give consent?

I have taken the occasional photo of my mother with advanced dementia, but only to share with immediate family. I certainly would never have shown them anywhere else. To me it’s a question of protecting the person’s dignity - what bare scraps are left of it by that stage.

‘She looks happy, smiley, cared-for’, she is a woman not a thing on display for public approval. It was her husband’s choice not hers, so happy, smiley, cared-for is applause for him

She looks smiley, happy and cared-for. Getting old is a fact of life as is looking old, being old, being ill. Uncomfortable for those who cannot face facts, that we get old and then we die

I like the photo, she is as she is, not as she was. Always better to live in the moment

Anniebach

If only for family why Facebook

I wondered that too.

Or it was "group" that you had to "join" on request.

As I say, we don't know how they came to acquire the photo. But almost every newspaper publishes photos from people's FB pages on a daily basis, with or without their consent.

Thank you ViceVersa I dislike the mail but it would be wrong to accuse them of what is to me a cruel act if they haven’t done so.

The simple answer, Anniebach, is that none of us know. We don't know whether his Facebook profile was public or locked down. If he regularly shares things on it for family, friends and fans, then the chances are that it was set to public, so anyone could see what it posted - and copy photos etc if they so wished.

Has anyone criticised before dementia photographs of his wife ?
Did the Mail hack into the husband’s privacy ?

The husband didn't post a before and after picture of Julie the press did. I can't see him as a villain at all.

Daily Mail claims husband is angry because his photographs of his wife were taken from social media, he chose to share with
family, friends, fans, !