www.azcentral.com . . .

I stumbled on this article because I was trying to figure out if chain stores would print out my artistic nude photos I took for my art portfolio.
Although this article is a few years old, I am curious to what your opinions are to having the children removed from the home for bathtime photos.

I know personally I have photos of myself when I was infant in a bathtub FILLED with bubbles, mohawk hair style, and rubber ducks everywhere. I know a lot of friends my age also have a collection of funny bathtub photos.

Do you think Walmart did the right thing by reporting the family? Do you believe that the family has a right to sue?

No, I think the report was ridiculous and was none of Walmart's business. Before we know it we'll have to close our eyes when changing diapers or bathing our children because goodness knows it's a terrible thing for a child to be naked.

Look, I know child abuse is a serious issue, and I'm not trying to make light of it, but this is ridiculous. Out off 144 photos there were 8 bathtub photos and somehow these parents are abusive?! There wasn't even anything to indicate the slightest bit of abuse.

I really don't think we can comment. We haven't seen the photos. We haven't seen previous photos the family might have had developed there. All we can do is guess, and so I don't think it's fair to make a judgement.

Taking them, no.

Posting them on Facebook, hell to the yes.

This case sounds stupid... I find it hard to believe that's the only time they've seen nudie baby pictures at WalMart.

No, because everyone has some bathtime photos. I think people shouldn't take those photos after the age of 1 though. When I was 13 and looking through photos at my grandma's house I found a picture of me taking a bath at age 3 I think and I thought that was a bit too much because I was standing up and everything was visible and I didn't like the idea of my vagina showing to the world so it was ripped to shreds and thrown away.

As long as there is nothing showing, I don't have an issue with it.

It's not like I'm going to take a bath time photo of my kid with their legs splayed open and everything there for the world to see.

LlamaLlamaDuck wrote:

As long as there is nothing showing, I don't have an issue with it.

It's not like I'm going to take a bath time photo of my kid with their legs splayed open and everything there for the world to see.

I know someone who did that with their grandchild many years ago ("ha ha, won't this be funny at his 21st?"). When the photo was developed, the mother took a pair of scissors and cropped his bits out of the photo.

I find the naked bathtime photos distasteful, and don't see a point to them. But illegal? Without seeing the photos in question, it does seem to be a big overreaction. What next? Baby girls can't run around in just a nappy because you can see her nipples?

LlamaLlamaDuck wrote:

It's not like I'm going to take a bath time photo of my kid with their legs splayed open and everything there for the world to see.

I have one of me at age 8 months or so totally butt naked playing by a pool with everything on display. It's by far the funniest photo I have of myself as a kid because my facial expression says, "I'm naked and I don't care! BOO YEAH!"

when we take bath time photos of my son, I try to pose the photo from the waist up. I think to make taking them illegal is going too far. I'm going to decide what is okay to display for my kid.

No I don't think it should be illegal. Though I think now, I would probably just print the photos myself using a machine in the store and not develop so the photo developer doesn't have to see. I even had a bathtub picture in my senior ad for the high school yearbook. I think I look cute! No harm, no foul. (mods if you feel the pic is inappropriate for the site, I get it, not a big deal to me, I thought about removing it but I guess you can't edit to add/remove photos)

I don't think it should be.

Personally, I find nothing wrong with them. I wouldn't take a picture of my child with all the bits and pieces hanging out but I can say I'll probably have a few naked pictures once I have children. Of course none will be for public eyes of course.

What kind of city is Peoria, and what kind of state is Arizona anyway?

For generations parents have been taking photos, and in more recent years videos, of their little kids romping around in the tub naked.

Heart has a good point that in this day and age you need to remember that putting it up on a Facebook page is not a good idea. Although you want to share this with your sister across the country, it is all too accessible by other people you don't want.

The Walmart employee should have been better trained. But even if an inexperienced, overzealous Walmart employee reported the photos, the state's Child Protective Services certainly should have been competent enough to just dismiss the whole thing. I absolutely think the family has a right to sue.

The fact that we, as a society, have hyper-sexualized the body to the point that it's illegal to take pictures of your children where they so happen to be naked is utterly insane.

I was always naked as a little kid so I have very few photos where I'm fully clothed. A lot of the time I'm wearing a tshirt that just covers everything, but not all are like that. I have plenty of photos of me in the bath and *shock* I even have a couple with me and my brother (who is 7 years older than me) in the bath together.

If the employee thought it was a bit odd, then fair enough, report it for someone to look into. I'm a student paramedic and we're taught that if we have a feeling that something is not right then we should report it. But it should not have gone as far as it did.

Taking naked bathtime photos isn't illegal. The couple were investigated for child abuse and cleared of all charges.

I also think the walmart employee did the right thing, and walmart's policy is right. I don't trust a kid hired out of high school to discern what is and is not child pornography, so it's reasonable for them to just forward all naked photos of children to the authorities.

The one thing I don't like is that it took the state a month to return the children to their parents, but I chalk that up to general bureaucratic incompetence, more than anything philosophical.

The parents should have known better than to hand over digital copies of their naked children to strangers. I doubt much of their lawsuits will be found to have merit.

Gosh, does that mean we can't take pics and videos of the babies being born, either? Cause, ya know, babies are born naked. :/

kk~

I think it's crazy that it could be considered illegal.

I think my cutest baby photo is in a basin taking a bath! The pictures are totally innocent, some people may see it sexualised but those people obviously have some warped minds?