 |
| courtesy of Pixabay CC0 Public Domain |
While at the Spring Band and Chorus Concert last night an
announcement was made that because some of our students have strobe induced
seizures, flash photography should not be used when taking pictures. I heard no
parents complain and I saw only a couple of brief flickers of light while folks
took pictures and realized those flickers were from the rangefinders on some of
the cameras and camera phones. This came to my attention because I was trying
to take some pictures myself with my camera, for the yearbook and music
teachers, and one of my colleagues pointed out that my flash might be bothering
the affected student.
“Student.” Yes. There was only one. I checked my camera because
I was sure I had turned off the flash, and I had. Then I realized it was the
tiny rangefinder light that was quickly turning on and off whenever I pressed
the shutter release to take a picture. Not knowing how to turn that off, though
I’m sure there’s a way, I’ve just never had to, I chose to stop taking
pictures. The camera battery was nearly spent by then anyway.
This incident got me thinking about how well most people react
when asked to stop doing something like using flash photography at a school
event not because it will disturb the performers, but because some of those
attending, particularly children, may be ill-affected by continuing to do the
thing.
Most people, that is. At last night’s event I heard no
complaints. Such is not always the case. During a previous concert I heard a
parent who’d brought a camera with a fancy flash attachment mutter, “Why do the
rest of us have to miss out on taking pictures because of somebody’s defective
kid?”
I was just close enough to hear his comment but not close enough
to say something to him without causing a commotion. The other parents around
him gave him some scathing looks, but none contradicted him out loud. I hoped
as the words played back in his head that they’d shame him like I wished I
could.
Sadly, I’ve heard this from parents at other times. We had a
student with a severe peanut allergy and the school sent a letter home asking
parents to refrain from sending peanut based foods and snacks to school with
their children. The letter was more on the lines of a command than a request and
had been endorsed by the School Board. Compliance was not optional. Some
parents vociferously objected, saying they couldn’t understand why their
children had to go without peanut based items because of one child’s allergies.
They wanted to know why the child with the defect couldn’t eat their lunch
alone in an isolated location so the rest of the children could enjoy the lunch
they wanted.
This attitude bothered me, a lot. How dare one parent refer to another
parent’s child as defective? The parent making the heartless comment would be
deeply offended if someone referred to their child in those terms.
Why, when
asked, is doing something to help ensure the safety of a student at their child’s school
considered to be such an onerous task. I love peanuts, peanut butter, and
peanut based snacks as much as anyone and probably more than most, but I would
gladly give them all up to keep one of my students safe, just like I stopped
taking pictures to prevent causing an issue for that one student at the
concert.
As always, I remain,
The Exhausted Educator
No comments:
Post a Comment