GA - Parents Arrested for Giving Kids Tattoos

[eleven]

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????

You wouldn't have a problem with a little 10 year girl having her belly button or eyebrow pierced?

 

[jjenny]

I'm with you on this, Linda.

The woman isn't even a bio mom of all the kids.

 

[Linda7NJ]

You wouldn't have a problem with a little 10 year girl having her belly button or eyebrow pierced?

Ummm, Yeah...!!!

For the same reason I'm not running around naked! Society norms and all that jazz.....but I do think it's a mistake not to examine them and ask ourselves some tough questions.

In the grand scheme of things what is a 10 year old with a pierced bellybutton have to do with me? Should it be a crime? I don't think so.

I think it's kinda nice when the stupid publicly display it....When a see a 10 year old sporting a thong, tiny shorts with words like JUICY and SEXY written across the butt...I automatically know her parents are stupid. I already know the parents have demonstrated extremely poor judgement when it comes to their child. I would think the same of the parents that tattooed the hands of their children.

Please don't think I am defending their actions, I'm not. I just don't see it as a big deal. I see stupid all the time

 

[LadyL]

imo ink is permanent if they used a machine

 

[Missizzy]

What the woman did was ill-advised. I think we all agree on that. However, I'd like to know what her legal status is with the children. If we're going to debate this in comparison to home ear piercing, I'd like to know who has legal custody of the children. If this woman does (the one who did the tattoos) she had the right to make decisions for the children. Obviously, not this right as she'll probably be found guilty of a misdemeanor. If she is the LEGAL mother, she has the right to allow piercings, religious training, sports involvement, medical procedures, etc.

However, even if the biological mother has visitation rights, that does not mean that she also has custody or decision making rights. That would depend on the court order of the judge who placed the children with this family. Anyone who does NOT have legal custody to the children would get into far more trouble for making a decision like this.

 

[jjenny]

Ummm, Yeah...!!!

For the same reason I'm not running around naked! Society norms and all that jazz.....but I do think it's a mistake not to examine them and ask ourselves some tough questions.

In the grand scheme of things what is a 10 year old with a pierced bellybutton have to do with me? Should it be a crime? I don't think so.

I think it's kinda nice when the stupid publicly display it....When a see a 10 year old sporting a thong, tiny shorts with words like JUICY and SEXY written across the butt...I automatically know her parents are stupid. I already know the parents have demonstrated extremely poor judgement when it comes to their child. I would think the same of the parents that tattooed the hands of their children.

Please don't think I am defending their actions, I'm not. I just don't see it as a big deal. I see stupid all the time

Tiny shorts or a tong is not permanent, and not something that will lead to the child's blood to be tested.

 

[jjenny]

What the woman did was ill-advised. I think we all agree on that. However, I'd like to know what her legal status is with the children. If we're going to debate this in comparison to home ear piercing, I'd like to know who has legal custody of the children. If this woman does (the one who did the tattoos) she had the right to make decisions for the children. Obviously, not this right as she'll probably be found guilty of a misdemeanor. If she is the LEGAL mother, she has the right to allow piercings, religious training, sports involvement, medical procedures, etc.

However, even if the biological mother has visitation rights, that does not mean that she also has custody or decision making rights. That would depend on the court order of the judge who placed the children with this family. Anyone who does NOT have legal custody to the children would get into far more trouble for making a decision like this.

She doesn't have the right to get the children tattooed. It's illegal under GA laws.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Tiny shorts or a tong is not permanent, and not something that will lead to the child's blood to be tested.

Really....I think allowing a 10 year old girl to prance around in thongs and vulgar shorts could also lead to permanent ramifications. Honestly, I have a bigger problem with parents that dress their children up like a pedophiles wet dream.....................

 

[Linda7NJ]

She doesn't have the right to get the children tattooed. It's illegal under GA laws.

Do you believe it rises to the level of child abuse? National news?

 

[jjenny]

Do you believe it rises to the level of child abuse? National news?

Oh right. National news should be devoted exclusively to something important for everyone, like what dress is Lady Gaga wearing today.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Oh right. National news should be devoted exclusively to something important for everyone, like what dress is Lady Gaga wearing today.

ROFLMAO! Good point! Got me there!

 

[Missizzy]

Linda--I agree with you. Stupid's everywhere. I don't want my daughter or granddaughters' belly buttons or tongues pierced but in all honesty I can't judge others for doing it as many of my girls have their ears pierced. They're all body parts. You are so right....we need to ask ourselves tough questions. If we're totally honest, we find that we are all highly opinionated!!

I hate baggy pants and provocative clothing on little girls but I can't expect them to be outlawed (Oh, if we only could!!). Being that we choose to live in a country where personal choice is a right, though, we have to be respectful of others who make different choices than we do. Our society has chosen, though, to not allow this particular choice for children. That's where the parents failed.

I think you are correct when you say that this is mainly an issue of parental lapse of judgement. Ye without sin, cast the first stone. I've sure had a few lapses in my 36 years of parenting. I know a lapse when I see one. I also know abuse when I see it. This isn't abuse IMO.

 

[Missizzy]

In looking at the Georgia law, Filly, I have to wonder what sorts of tattoos doctors and osteopaths are allowed to apply. The only thing I can think of is some sort of identification for identical multiples and possibly, religious markings. Does anyone know? Before every mall had a piercing shop, doctors used to pierce ears (yes, I'm aware they've been done at home, too, forever). I wonder if some docs are willing to do tattoos. I'm gonna check into that. You're my multi-cultural inner city expert. See what you can find.

Just so everyone doesn't think I'm prejudiced in any way for or against tattoos, I should disclose that one of my adult daughters (a delicate, exquisitely gorgeous, well educated young Korean woman who manages an upscale Santa Monica retail store) has surprised me by accruing quite a number of tattoos. I about fell out of bed when she sent us a photo of her newest. It's on her forearm (always visible) and is in Roman numerals. I was a little taken aback when I saw it until she explained. It's her Dad's and my birth years and the number of children in our family. It's taken some getting used to but the thought is lovely. She is an adult, though, and they were very professionally done. It's quite a rite of passage here in our town at age 18.

 

[missyjane77]

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.

The article says a cleaned up tattoo machine was used.

 

[Ada]

Doctors sometimes tattoo the body to mark it for surgery.

 

[BuzzieCat]

The guitar strings particularly bother me. Those are not made for cutting into the body, even superficially. You can get home ear piercing kits that are sterile and single use. As far as I know there are no home tattooing kits.

 

[Linda7NJ]

The guitar strings particularly bother me. Those are not made for cutting into the body, even superficially. You can get home ear piercing kits that are sterile and single use. As far as I know there are no home tattooing kits.

I pierced quite a few of my friends ears when I was a teen. Always used an embroidery needle, alcohol and a ice cube. No one died:innocent: or even got an infection!:dance:

 

[MomofBoys]

I'm pretty much aghast at anyone thinking this is not a bad thing. Since when is 10 old enough to make a decision like that? Ear holes will grow back. Tattooing, if she used ink and a machine, is permanent and something that takes, essentially, surgery to rectify. I would NEVER make that decision for one of my children. There is no religious or health reason to get it done.

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.

Have you ever watched a male circumcision? One performed in a clinical setting with pain relief? I have. Referring to it in the way you do is a way to make a point through language, not reality. By the time this baby is born, I will have "abused" my sons three times, then, and somehow they've turned out to be happy, healthy toddlers with no longterm effects outside of some potential health benefits. Lock me right up.

 

[Missizzy]

A thought provoking article on tattoos and young people. I didn't realize that 36% of all young people between 18-25 have at least one tattoo. That's a lot of ink!!

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/may/17/health/chi-oped0517tattoo_edmay17

"Like many American parents, I’m revolted at the prospect of my children coming home one day with body ink. But when I try to explain why, I fail. Every reason to oppose tattoos turns out to be, well, unreasonable.

Let’s start with the health objection. Only 16 states regulate tattooing, via licensure or sterilization laws. So it would make sense to worry about what else your little princess is getting when she gets her tattoo.

But the numbers tell another story. Since it began tracking HIV/AIDS in 1985, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has not discovered a single case of HIV transmission through tattoos. Between 1985 and 1997, it did link 12 cases of hepatitis to tattoo parlors. That’s 12 too many, of course, but it hardly qualifies as a national health crisis......."


I did quite a bit of research and can find very little on permissible tattoos and children--even for religious/cultural reasons. So, I don't know what the Georgia law is referring to when they say that doctors and osteopaths can apply them. The only cultural references I found were connected with indigenous peoples and were a right of passage....thus, being in the late teens.

I find it very interesting how we all have such a visceral reaction to tattoos. Few of us are blasé about them.

 

[MomofBoys]

I'm kinda blase, LOL. I have a small one, but don't care either way whether other people get them for themselves or not.

I will admit to some bias when it comes to people who have them on their face/neck/hands. It creates a negative first impression for me. Probably more my problem than theirs, but I don't understand the choice to make that the first thing people see about you.