I'm reading about recent cases where parents are brought up on charges & temporarily separated from their children when photo lab technicians reported nude pics to the authorities. In one case, the picture was something like 20 years old; the child in it is now an adult & was brought in to state that he was a happy well-adjusted adult, that he willingly posed, that he suffered no ill effects, etc; there was still some question about whether a crime had been committed! In a Times article today, I see that a father was forced to spend weeks at a hotel due to court order barring him from any contact with his daughter, after photographing her genitals. The child is grinning in sample photo; the home life is happy, there is no evidence of abuse. Is the mere act of photographing a nude child Wrong? I thought the point was to try to protect children. If the child is now a functioning adult who testifies that he suffers not from having had a photo taken of him, how can anyone say a crime has been committed? & even if the child is still a child, if s/he is a happy young person & likewise testifies freely that she didn't mind having pictures taken of her, why is possession of the picture still a crime?

That's another thing, it's not just taking the pictures, it's owning them. What is the harm that is done by possessing a nude picture of a child? Is it the idea that someone who would want such a picture would be so deranged, society must necessarily be protected from him?

Can someone answer these questions for me? Thanx.