GA - Parents Arrested for Giving Kids Tattoos

Oh this is a good one...

Couple arrested for giving kids tattoos

A northwest Georgia couple arrested for giving six of their children homemade tattoos say they didn't do anything wrong. The kids, they say, wanted the tattoos to be like Mom and Dad.

"I'm their mother," Patty Jo Marsh said late Saturday. "Shouldn't I be able to decide if they get one?"

snip - Marsh and her husband, Jacob Bartels, did the tattoos in their Summerville home. They cleaned up a tattoo machine someone gave them, and used guitar strings as a needle. Out of the seven children in their custody, only the youngest child did not get a tattoo.

"They weren't hurt by them," Marsh said.

snip - Marsh said the children, ages 10 to 17, wanted the small cross tattoos, and the couple did them after Thanksgiving. But when two of the children spent a weekend after Christmas with their biological mother, she reported it to DFACS and police.

snip - she and her husband were arrested. They were each charged with cruelty to children, reckless conduct and tattooing, something Marsh they didn't realize was illegal.

"If we knew that, we wouldn't have done it," Marsh said.


http://www.ajc.com/news/couple-arrested-for-giving-265194.html

More here with video with interview of the lovely mom. She's a delight.

Parents Arrested For Tattooing Kids

http://www.myfoxla.com/dpp/news/offbeat/parents-tattoo-children-20100102

Wow......

Mom claims it isn't permanent? Is that true?

While I think it was stupid...I don't consider it child abuse. Apparently, the children weren't forced.

People circumcise baby boys and pierce the ears of their children everyday in this country. I fail to see the difference.

Linda7NJ said:

Wow......

Mom claims it isn't permanent? Is that true?

While I think it was stupid...I don't consider it child abuse. Apparently, the children weren't forced.

People circumcise baby boys and pierce the ears of their children everyday in this country. I fail to see the difference.

Click to expand...

If a person circumcised baby boys in their own backyard, without a medical license, maybe you'd see a difference then?

Linda7NJ said:

Wow......

Mom claims it isn't permanent? Is that true?

While I think it was stupid...I don't consider it child abuse. Apparently, the children weren't forced.

People circumcise baby boys and pierce the ears of their children everyday in this country. I fail to see the difference.

Click to expand...

At home with homemade instruments? Wow.

Actually, now that you mention it, there was a case recently of a father who circumcised his baby at home. The baby's injuries were absolutely horrific.

BeanE said:

At home with homemade instruments? Wow.

Actually, now that you mention it, there was a case recently of a father who circumcised his baby at home. The baby's injuries were absolutely horrific.

Click to expand...

Exactly. GA law prohibits anyone who is not a licensed professional from giving tattoos, and giving tattoos to minors under 18.

jjenny said:

Exactly. GA law prohibits anyone who is not a licensed professional from giving tattoos, and giving tattoos to minors under 18.

Click to expand...

But does it still meet the definition of a tattoo......... if what the mother said was true, that it's not permanent? If it is indeed temporary and will fade away......it's not a real tattoo IMO

Linda7NJ said:

But does it still meet the definition of a tattoo......... if what the mother said was true, that it's not permanent? If it is indeed temporary and will fade away......it's not a real tattoo IMO

Click to expand...

They used a tattoo machine and ink. You tell me.

BeanE said:

At home with homemade instruments? Wow.

Actually, now that you mention it, there was a case recently of a father who circumcised his baby at home. The baby's injuries were absolutely horrific.

Click to expand...

Mohels need not have a medical licence.

and............

"The centuries-old practice, called metzizah bi peh or metzitzah b'peh, involves a mohel using his mouth to suction blood from the wound after the foreskin is removed. The ritual is used by Hasidic and ultra-Orthodox Jews."
http://www.cirp.org/news/thejournalnews12-17-05/

Linda7NJ said:

Mohels need not have a medical licence.

and............

"The centuries-old practice, called metzizah bi peh or metzitzah b'peh, involves a mohel using his mouth to suction blood from the wound after the foreskin is removed. The ritual is used by Hasidic and ultra-Orthodox Jews."
http://www.cirp.org/news/thejournalnews12-17-05/

Click to expand...

What is your point?
Your own link states several babies were infected with herpes, presumably because of this practice. One baby died and one suffered brain damage.

My point is....making holes in a child's ears, and lopping off part of a child's genitals is perfectly legal and acceptable. In the grand scheme of things...I don't think what this woman did is any worse.

I think society, in general, has no problem with the practice of piercing children's ears....but I would bet........ those very same people would be outraged if a parent pierced a child's bellybutton or eyebrow.


I have to ask myself why????

Linda7NJ said:

Mohels need not have a medical licence.

and............

"The centuries-old practice, called metzizah bi peh or metzitzah b'peh, involves a mohel using his mouth to suction blood from the wound after the foreskin is removed. The ritual is used by Hasidic and ultra-Orthodox Jews."
http://www.cirp.org/news/thejournalnews12-17-05/

Click to expand...

I'm quite well aware of that, but thanks.

It has nothing to do with rigging up a gutten plastic pen and guitar strings to electrical wires and applying it to the skin of children.

Linda7NJ said:

I think society, in general, has no problem with the practice of piercing children's ears....but I would bet........ those very same people would be outraged if a parent pierced a child's bellybutton or eyebrow.


I have to ask myself why????

Click to expand...

For the same reason we are wearing clothes rather than running around naked.
Acceptable norms of behavior.

Linda7NJ said:

My point is....making holes in a child's ears, and lopping off part of a child's genitals is perfectly legal and acceptable. In the grand scheme of things...I don't think what this woman did is any worse.

Click to expand...

lol. I just did a search and found all these cases of parents mutilating their little boys' genitals at home with crude instruments. The court system disagrees with you that it's perfectly legal. Those little boys would certainly disagree with you that it's acceptable.

BeanE said:

lol. I just did a search and found all these cases of parents mutilating their little boys' genitals at home with crude instruments. The court system disagrees with you that it's perfectly legal. Those little boys would certainly disagree with you that it's acceptable.

Click to expand...

where doesn't matter to me.

The law has no problem and makes no distinction for piercing ears at home, or at the mall by a "professional" (lol).

I think parents that consent to have part of their child's genitals lopped off and orally suctioned should be charged with child abuse. IMO it should be illegal. But it isn't.

BeanE said:

At home with homemade instruments? Wow.

Actually, now that you mention it, there was a case recently of a father who circumcised his baby at home. The baby's injuries were absolutely horrific.

Click to expand...

These children didn't suffer horrific injuries

"I'm their mother". Well, it seems the biological mother thinks she is. I wonder how that will pan out? Will the biological mother of two of them now have more than a weekend visitation?

Man, I've heard of some hair brained schemes. It's Thanksgiving time kids and if you all want some ink like mom and dad let's do it.

To think they took those kids off the people who gave the names Adolph Hitler and Aryan Nation.

If they'd have been smart they would have inked the bottom of their feet. Not even trying to make light of anything so plain well backward. I wonder if they said it was for Religious purposes it would be O.K.? Or the tribal things they do to young girls in Africa?

I have really mixed feelings about this case. Obviously, whomever has legal custody of the children can make a decision to get a child's ears pierced (even doing that at home) but I believe all states have strict laws about tattooing. I know a number of teens (and a couple of pre-teens) in our community who have tattoos who are not of legal age and I have no idea how they got them. My biggest concern about home-grown tattoos and piercings is about safety, though. I draw a distinction between tattoos and circumcision however as the latter is a surgical procedure.

IMO, this was really poor judgement (OK, I'll go so far and say stupid) and should be dealt with accordingly. I don't think it amounts to child abuse though. I do take issue with the Mom's statement that they "just did what the kids wanted". That statement doesn't fly with me because kids want a lot of things that parents should have the good sense to deny. They'd like to drive a car, have their boyfriends spend the night, and have alcohol and pot, too. That doesn't mean we say, "OK."

This Mom should have also realized that she'd have heck to pay when the biological mother found out. With the amount of planning this whole ordeal took, one would think that someone would have had second thoughts. I just thank goodness for the parents' sake that the tattoos are of crosses and "Momma & Dad" than a swastika or pentagram. Imagine how much ruckus that would cause.

Many cultures tattoo or scarify children for religious reasons or beauty but we still need to keep in mind that state laws exist for a reason. A ten year old who asks for a cross tattooed on his hand, might not be so happy about it at age 15. That's my problem with tattoos anyway as our interests evolve and change. If we unilaterally approved tattooing of kids we'd have an awful lot of Spiderman and Dora tattoos out there. I'm really hoping that these tattoos do fade as the Mom insists. I've wished for years that someone would come up with a tattoo which faded after a few years. Now that would be a great idea.

This news story will probably whip up some spirited dinner table conversation between kids and parents. That's a good thing. However, I really fail to see how a misdemeanor charge (which is what the law pasted below states) justifies national news.

http://www.tattoodesign.com/tattoo_...tates_tattoo_laws/georgia_tattoo_laws_147.php



TITLE 16 CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 5 CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON
ARTICLE 5 CRUELTY TO CHILDREN

16-5-71. Tattooing.

"(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to tattoo the body of any person under the age of 18, except that a physician or osteopath licensed under Chapter 34 of Title 43, or a technician acting under the direct supervision of such licensed physician or osteopath, and in compliance with Chapter 9 of Title 31 shall be authorized to mark or color the skin of any person under the age of 18 by pricking in coloring matter or by producing scars for medical or cosmetic purposes.

(b) Any person violating the provisions of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."

Linda7NJ said:

Wow......

Mom claims it isn't permanent? Is that true?

While I think it was stupid...I don't consider it child abuse. Apparently, the children weren't forced.

People circumcise baby boys and pierce the ears of their children everyday in this country. I fail to see the difference.

Click to expand...

I'm with you on this, Linda.