[Base] [Index]

_'Mummy, are we going to prison?'

[Source unknown] August 10th 2000, UK.

An artist who took innocent photographs of her children for her paintings found herself at the centre of a child abuse investigation. Sara's paintings are in demand and the few exhibitions she has held have all sold out on opening night. Sadly, her art was the subject of child pornography claims which still haunt her, despite being cleared

Sara is a successful artist. On a typical day, after taking the children to school in the morning, she will spend a few hours painting at her studio.

Her art is a passion but she has never allowed it to interfere with her family, although her daughters, aged 10 and 11, often inspire her. She paints when her children are at school and often works from photographs of them. Her paintings are in demand and the few exhibitions she has held have all sold out on opening night. Sara has chosen not to spend endless days and nights painting and instead fits it in around her children's timetable - they in turn often provide the inspiration for her next painting. Highly regarded for her still life paintings, she moved on to a more figurative style incorporating the silhouettes of children in early 1999, often taking inspiration from photographs which she had taken of her own children. In February this year Sara picked up her youngest daughter, Emma, from school and on her way home stopped at the photo lab where she regularly had her film professionally developed.

When she handed over her docket she was told, coldly and in front of other customers, that the police had been contacted and that she should not leave until they arrived. Two policemen appeared, accompanied by loud walkie talkies, and asked questions of Sara and her daughter. Other customers were still present. It was only when one of the policemen asked Emma what her mother did and what she painted that Sara began to understand what was happening: that the police were suggesting that the photographs were indecent.

Sara's main concern was the effect this was having on Emma, who was confused and close to tears. Why was her mother being questioned by two policemen? Sara was then instructed to drive behind the police car to the nearest police station where she would be questioned further.

Sara followed. "Mummy, what have we done?" Emma asked. "Are we going to prison?" Sara knew immediately that she must reassure her daughter by explaining that the police were just doing their job by investigating anything that might harm children.

She explained that they were, of course, mistaken in this case but that it was nice to know that they would be there so quickly if there were a real problem. Privately she struggled to believe that she could be at the centre of an inquiry into child abuse.

At the police station, Sara and Emma were told to wait until a member of the child protection team arrived. After ten minutes Sara was ushered into an interview room while her daughter was told to wait alone in a grim adjoining room. Why was she there and what was going to happen? she asked the officer. "I can't say anything at this stage," he replied.

Sara was told to return with her lawyer three days later when, under caution, a taped interview would be conducted. She collected her daughter, who was sitting alone, sucking her thumb, and returned home in shock. The police kept the photographs.

Over the next few days Sara tried to remember each one and work out why they could have been found offensive. She knew that the film had been in her camera for months and that she had often taken pictures as the children tumbled around at bathtime, or as they struck poses which they would be eager to see reflected in one of their mother's paintings.

When she did eventually see the photographs she realised that they were regarded as offensive because the children were not wearing any clothes. Each photograph had been taken from a distance of at least two metres, most showed the children curled up in a foetal position, some were images of them jumping happily, their arms outstretched. Not one, she was certain, could be described as anatomically explicit.

Accompanied by her solicitor, Sara returned for her interview three days later.

Even now she finds it painful to recall the hour she spent answering intimate questions by two child protection officers with tape recorders.

They went through the 36 pictures, describing each one for the record and then asking questions.

"They would say: 'Child facing away in foetal position. Why is the face hidden?' I told them that I don't do portraits, it's the body positions that are important for the paintings," Sara says.

"When they asked about the last picture I replied that it was taken just after her bath, to which one officer said, 'What? Why after a bath?' I tried to explain that my photos were a replacement for preparatory sketches for my paintings, and that instead of painting a child in a cold studio for hours, I took photographs. I felt as though my replies were being misinterpreted deliberately, as though they were trying to catch me out." Sara was told that a decision on whether charges would be laid against her would be made within five weeks. It was 12 weeks before she was told that no charges would be brought.

During that time Sara felt worried about showing her children affection in public. "I know it may sound strange now, but I was afraid that when someone saw me kissing my children hello and goodbye at the school gates that they might think I was a criminal," she says.

Five months after the interview, a perfunctory letter arrived from the police stating that the investigation into allegations that she took, and had in her possession, indecent photographs of children was now complete and that no further action would be taken against her.

She can not dismiss it so easily.

"I am much calmer now but I was so angry about the way in which it was handled," she says. "I wanted to scream out to everyone and tell them what I was going through, but to protect my children I had to stay silent.

"Why did my daughter have to be subjected to such an ordeal by the people whose job it is to protect children from fear?"

Many parents in Sara's situation would never dream of discussing such a humiliating accusation as that of deliberately taking indecent photographs of their own children, but Sara has decided to tell her story because she believes that such inquiries should be handled with greater sensitivity.

"I felt they had decided I was guilty and treated me as such right up to the day when charges were dropped," says Sara.

"Even their tone on the telephone was unfriendly when I rang for updates on the situation, which was becoming unbearable.

"All of this could have been avoided had they been assured of my real psychological profile by a professional instead of being guided by the hunches of a photolab employee."

Even a parent who knows they are innocent may be made to feel somehow inadequate: this is an unavoidable consequence of having parenting investigated by strangers.

Such cases leave a feeling of damage, of stigma which can prevent an adult from discussing their feelings and recovering quickly. Most families enjoy spontaneous affection and develop their own ways of bonding. There are no precise rules about what age children should be when they no longer take a bath with a parent or siblings. The NSPCC advises letting the child decide when he or she wants privacy. Some eight year olds consider themselves too grown up to climb into their parents' bed; for some 13 year olds it is a comforting weekend tradition.

Is indecency in the eyes of the beholder? If so, who is to say that the beholder is qualified to know the difference between healthy, natural relationships between parents and children and the apparently perverted? There have been many cases where a disgruntled third party, a fired nanny for example, has reported the most mundane of family habits in language designed to shock the authorities into action. One young father recounts how he never thought twice about taking bath with his young children until one day a social worker, alerted by a former au pair, appeared at his front door to investigate allegations of improper behaviour. He was so shocked that even two years later he has difficulty being spontaneous with his children.

At Sara's home there is a tangible feeling of love and security and there is no outward sign of any lasting ill-effects. Emma, she says, seems to have relegated the memory to the distant past. But what about Sara? "When I went to see my elder daughter in her school play I took Emma. When she got bored and started hugging me and climbing on to my lap I felt uncomfortable in front of the other parents. So the fear is still there but I hope time will heal," says Sara.

(Names have been changed to avoid embarrassment to the parents and children involved.)