There is an actual law in Québec (or is it Canada? I can never remember...) that stipulates you can't have a clear picture of the face of a child diffused publicly (EG: on the internet, on TV, in a newspaper, etc...) unless:
a) it's your own child (in which case, you can choose as you want to share or not those pictures as you're the guardian of said child),
b) the photography is of a significant event and the face of the child would take away from the picture's explanation of the event (EG: a child being rescued by a firefighter from a burning house who's crying).

A simple blur is generally considered enough (http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2252268/ is borderlining it, actually), but the media, for instance, will generally avoid taking images of any child's face and will blur the footage anyway, at least on TV, to make sure there's never any contention with the footage/images.

I hope this clears up a wee bit. :)

Forgot to mention:
Obviously, getting authorization from the parents (some would argue that parents actively trying to get a picture of you with their child is authorization enough, but there's no precedence yet as far as I know) means it's perfectly fine, too.

Law is never so clear cut, especially when it comes to photography from a private photograph point of view. Members of the press have it more clear, but private citizen photography, especially when it comes to the point of other people being in the photography, is really not clear. :\

You might want to read this:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/923...../#cid:62544449

Just saying. :)

There's pros and cons to any country. For example, we can legally download MP3s/movies from what would be considered "illegal" sites in the USA and not be prosecuted for it here. :3

Take some, give some. :)