Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
It is a few statistically and even fewer who use photography. I may wewll be too many.

What needs to be taken into account is the the context of an odd family image containing child nudity, which is not the same as intent to make obscene illegal images. The point being innocent people are tared by the deviants if they make images like the OP mentions.

Ian, I have worked in this field.
The idea that "it is few statistically" is simply false.
I don't understand on what basis it could be argued that "even fewer ... use photography"

The point being that abuse within families is a significant and horrible problem that has remained untroubled by public attention; most attention is given to the (truly) few (statistically speaking) "strangers" who abuse children, which allows the rest of the population to maintain the fiction that "this doesn't happen in families".

Fortunately, this is changing, albeit slowly. One effect of that change is situations occur like that of the OP, where someone's judgment rather failed them.

However, if inconvenience and unpleasantness for someone like the OP is all that has to be suffered, that's fine by me. It proves that people have had their eyes opened.