If only for family why Facebook
Gransnet forums
Chat
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Sign up to Gransnet Daily
Our free daily newsletter full of hot threads, competitions and discounts
Subscribe
I haven’t watched Coronation Street for many years but when I did Julie Goodyear was a constant presence with her animal prints and all her make up.
Yesterday there were photographs of her in the media on her 83rd birthday.
She has Alzheimer’s and her H put the photos on to mark the day.
It was, to me, the cruellest gesture possible.
She looked absolutely dreadful.
No front teeth and so very old looking.
If my H had done anything similar I would have been devastated, fortunately she will probably never know.
It was not the act of a loving husband however he meant it to appear.
If only for family why Facebook
It's been said up thread, if any of us were asked when we had all our mental faculties, if, at some future time, we would like a photo of ourselves published for the nation to pick over (not family members, that's quite different), suffering from dementia, minus most of our teeth, would we want that? I think those of us who find the photo disrespectful towards Julie Goodyear, is because quite possibly she couldn't, at this stage of her life, make an informed choice about her present image going viral.
Agree TerriBull it wasn’t her choice and she could not be consulted.
Undoubtedly she couldn’t, Terribull. People with dementia will often not recognise their current faces, only much younger versions. There is a good reason why care homes often have no mirrors in residents’ accommodation. They can become scared of this weird old person who seems to be looking at them.
Anniebach
If only for family why Facebook
People often share things on Facebook and similar so that family and friends in other areas can see their posts too. As I said, you can lock down your profile so that only people who are on your friends list can see what you post.
Then why were they not shared with only family and friends
Maybe he has lots of supporters on Facebook? People who have been part of his/their circle of family/friends and fans?
Anniebach
Then why were they not shared with only family and friends
How on earth would I know? Maybe he did and someone else copied his photos and shared it or sent it to the media? There could be any number of ways in which the picture found itself in the public domain. Not everyone is tech savvy or realises just how easy it is to get your hands on someone else's photos.
She looks happy as Larry in all these pics surely that’s all we all want to feel happy and secure whether we ve got teeth or not, whether we ve got wrinkles or not.
She’s alive, she’s obviously loved and she looks as happy and loud as she always was
Embrace her age and her illness stop all the misery I bet if she could she’d still get up and dance and laugh as loud as she always did
I cannot, she didn’t choose for the photographs to be shared and we do not know if she knew photographs were being taken,
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. Repeat ‘ I cannot ‘, not the rest of the world cannot not or should not, ‘I cannot ‘
Anniebach
I. Repeat ‘ I cannot ‘, not the rest of the world cannot not or should not, ‘I cannot ‘
Yes thanks, I can read. So you personally would never take a photo of a loved one with dementia?
Doubt it, certainly not for social media
I don't think anyone is saying that a photograph of a person with dementia should never be taken, it would depend on the circumstances. It is however the circumstances that have surrounded this particular picture and the fact that it's out there in the wider domain. I mean quite withstanding the fact that she couldn't give her consent, why was she presented in such a shocking way, without teeth. Pictures of patients in asylums of yesteryear would have been presented minus their teeth, displaying frailties, abnormalities. Really it wasn't kind and it isn't now, once again, her husband should have made her dignity a priority. Just because she was and is a known celebrity, in this context she should be treated like any other person. Whether she was happy or not, she was presented as some sort of spectacle, if that wasn't the case there wouldn't have been the backlash.
Well I hope if I get dementia I don’t get pushed up a corner or shut in a room I want to be remembered for the nutter I am,, warts and all, they can take as many photos of me as they like, it will mean they are NOT ashamed of me, and still want to share me and my personality, with or without teeth.
Anniebach
Doubt it, certainly not for social media
That's fair. We took photos of both my mum and MiL when they were in the latter stages of dementia, but they were purely for us as a family and weren't posted or shared anywhere on line. Did they know or could they have consented? At that stage, probably not, but they brought comfort to family members later on. The care home where my MiL lived (and FiL still does) regularly take photos of residents and some are shared on their own social media (with families' consent, obviously).
No Terribull the husband shared it on his fb page as a celebration ….the Daily Mail (was it the DM)? took it to sensationalise and beat him with a stick they are the abusers not him
This is a first, the Daily Mail took photographs from a private account, has it made any apology yet ?
Anniebach
This is a first, the Daily Mail took photographs from a private account, has it made any apology yet ?
It's by no means a first. Newspapers have been doing this for years and years. You just need to look at any social media site to see that where they get many of their stories and photos. Unless your FB account is completely locked down, then anyone can copy your photos and use them.
Look I'm not on FB but there are privacy filters I believe. So whoever got hold of it be it the DM then they are culpable, but still, he, the husband, whoever he is, should have not photographed her minus her teeth and put that on F. All I know if it were my loved one, mother, husband, there's no way I could disrespect them in allowing such a photograph to be circulated.
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, !
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.
Has anyone criticised before dementia photographs of his wife ?
Did the Mail hack into the husband’s privacy ?
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.
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.