Tattoos and Minors.

25 posts / 0 new
Last post
Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226
Tattoos and Minors.

Mom Arrested After Giving Her 11-year-old a Tattoo | Parenting - Yahoo! Shine

Was this a good idea?
Should you be allowed to let your child get a tattoo under the age of 18?
Why IS tattooing a minor different from letting them pierce their ears?

mom3girls's picture
Joined: 01/09/07
Posts: 1535

Hate the idea of kids under 18 getting tattoos, cannot think of a valid reason. If they want ink, they can get it at 18.

Joined: 12/10/05
Posts: 1681

No, I wouldn't let my minor get a tattoo.

It is different from getting ears pierced because changing your mind about your ears and letting them grow over is simple, quick, and painless. The same can't be said for going back on a tattoo.

ETA... She did it herself?? Because the child asked? Good grief. Parenting at its finest :thumbsdown:

Minx_Kristi's picture
Joined: 01/02/09
Posts: 1261

Absolutely shocking.

I agree with pp also about ear piercing, it's not the same at all.

xx

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"kris_w" wrote:

No, I wouldn't let my minor get a tattoo.

It is different from getting ears pierced because changing your mind about your ears and letting them grow over is simple, quick, and painless. The same can't be said for going back on a tattoo.

ETA... She did it herself?? Because the child asked? Good grief. Parenting at its finest :thumbsdown:

Well not all pierced ears do close up again. Mine never have and i've gone years without wearing earrings (Oddly enough, at age 35, this is the first time that they have ever given any indication of possibly closing up, so i've gone back to wearing earrings every day).

That being said, that tiny hole is pretty unobtrusive. While it may be the same in principle (a permanent body alteration), its not the same in actual consequences.

Makes me wonder if you could compare it to a very minor, small tattoo in an discreet spot though.

Not saying i think its a great idea, just pondering what 'the line' is between crossing and not crossing and exactly what the objection is.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

I think this was a bad idea.

I am not sure how I feel about parents being able to give permission or not. 1 part of me feels that as a parent I should be able to allow my child to get one (I wouldn't!) and the other part of me feels like this is similar to when most seat belt laws applied to minors...some parents just need that :).

Body modification wise...tattooing to me is just different and I have really no idea why. Probably more to do with what is considered acceptable in society.

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6561

Personally, I am not a huge fan of piercing a young child's ears or giving tattoos. We have decided not to allow our children to even wear the fake sticker tattoos, not because I think they are a big deal, but because I do not want there to be confusion on if they are ok or not.

The line is a little blurry on if a parent should have a right to tattoo their own child. Over all, I am for a parents right to raise their child however they see fit with the exception of abuse. I am not sure how much a tattoo hurts.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4100

I'm opposed to all body alterations on children. No piercing, no circumcision, no tattoos. Leave their bodies alone. I don't believe parents have the right to permanently alter their children's bodies. It's not a parenting decision, it's a bodily integrity decision and the only person who can make it is the child. That said, we *did* allow Tiven to get her ears pierced this summer; it was totally her idea and her decision, and we made sure that she really understood what it involved. I showed her where one of my extra holes has never healed up and gets infected on a regular basis. She had to think about it for at least a month and ask again, and then she had to pass a test showing that she was mature enough to take care of them properly, which was drawing dots on her ears every night for a month & washing them off every morning. After all that, we felt that she was making an informed decision, and we let her do it. I wouldn't have let her do it much earlier because her ears were still growing and I wouldn't want her holes to end up lopsided when she's an adult.

My two biggest problems with tattoos is that they are permanent, and they change as your body grows. Tattoos should not be done before you stop growing. That's actually a problem for people who get tattooed later in life, too. I know two people who have covered up old tattoos that don't look good after they gained weight. One got into body-building and the other lost the weight he put on but the tattoos were still misshapen. Neither of them really wanted a new tattoo but they didn't like how the old ones looked anymore and laser treatments won't work because the tattoo is too old or wrong color, not to mention laser treatments are very expensive. One of them said there should be a waiting period for getting a tattoo because he had serious buyer's regret over it. I see young women with beautiful tattoos on their bellies & wonder what those will look like after a baby or two! At least with an ear piercing, the hole is pretty small and innocuous, and it doesn't change over the years.

boilermaker's picture
Joined: 08/21/02
Posts: 1984

While I wouldn't let my own kid get a tattoo at 11, I really don't think this is a big deal. A tiny heart on her shoulder? Whatever. Not worth our time to have her in court and eating up taxpayer money over an 11 year old who wanted the tattoo and a mother who did it safely and with her consent.

People want parents to have the right to spank their kids, indoctrinate them to their personal beliefs, and want government to stay out personal lives-- but go nuts on something like this? Silly.

I'm not sure where the "line" is, but this seems much ado about nothing IMO.

I'm much more concerned about the parents who let their kids dress like tramps, wear provocative sayings on t-shirts and are absentee parents than one who inks a tiny tattoo on her pre-teen....

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"boilermaker" wrote:

While I wouldn't let my own kid get a tattoo at 11, I really don't think this is a big deal. A tiny heart on her shoulder? Whatever. Not worth our time to have her in court and eating up taxpayer money over an 11 year old who wanted the tattoo and a mother who did it safely and with her consent.

People want parents to have the right to spank their kids, indoctrinate them to their personal beliefs, and want government to stay out personal lives-- but go nuts on something like this? Silly.

I'm not sure where the "line" is, but this seems much ado about nothing IMO.

I'm much more concerned about the parents who let their kids dress like tramps, wear provocative sayings on t-shirts and are absentee parents than one who inks a tiny tattoo on her pre-teen....

Yeah, i tend to agree with this. A little heart on an 11 year olds shoulder, that wanted it, just doesn't scream 'arrest her' to me.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4100

Did she do it safely? I don't know that. She did it at home with "her own tools," which may or may not be properly sterilized. You would think that someone who works as a tattoo artist would know that it's illegal to tattoo a minor in her state. She could have driven her daughter over the state line to Virginia and it would have been perfectly legal, but she chose to do it illegally at home instead. And now she's paying the price, literally. It's only a misdemeanor, she was cited & released, and probably only faces a court date because she didn't pay the fine.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"Spacers" wrote:

Did she do it safely? I don't know that. She did it at home with "her own tools," which may or may not be properly sterilized.

The arrest wasnt' for doing it unsafely...it was for doing it...period. Because in her state you aren't allowed to tattoo a child even with parental consent. Obviously if she did it unsafely that would be very wrong and I would imagine some other laws would apply in that case, but thats not really what this article is about. Speculating about safety isn't even within the realm of the charges.

You would think that someone who works as a tattoo artist would know that it's illegal to tattoo a minor in her state. She could have driven her daughter over the state line to Virginia and it would have been perfectly legal, but she chose to do it illegally at home instead. And now she's paying the price, literally. It's only a misdemeanor, she was cited & released, and probably only faces a court date because she didn't pay the fine.

LOL well i won't defend her intelligence Smile Minor offense or not, the principle of the charges do seem kind of silly to me.

But again, i wouldn't know how to appropriately draw the line. Obviously i would be much more appalled if we were talking about tattooing a non-consenting baby's face or something.

Although according to the article, lots and lots of states make it possible for minors to get tattoos with parental consent, and overall it doesn't seem to be that detrimental.

Yeah...i don't agree with the law in her state. I think parents should be able to give consent. I wonder if there is a bottom age limit in those states where you can give parental consent.

Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1686

The truth is that I pass judgment on students I've had with tattoos. I think it might be more what the tattoo is than the fact that they have one. You don't need your mother's name tattooed on your shoulder when you are 13. One girl had a treble clef behind her right ear and I didn't really judge that much.

A little heart on her shoulder? I can't get behind criminal charges on that one either.

Now, the thing I can't stand - ear stretchers. Yet, AFAIK, you don't need parental consent to buy them.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4100

"KimPossible" wrote:

The arrest wasnt' for doing it unsafely...it was for doing it...period.

[snip]

Yeah...i don't agree with the law in her state. I think parents should be able to give consent. I wonder if there is a bottom age limit in those states where you can give parental consent.

I mentioned safety because Audra said she wasn't concerned because it was done safely and with the mom's consent, and I was just pointing out that we don't know it was done safely. The kid might end up diagnosed with Hepatitis from it.

Some states do have a lower limit of 14, but Virginia doesn't. This isn't a comprehensive list, I noticed South Carolina is missing but I found that in SC it's illegal to tattoo a minor.
Legal status of tattooing in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I thought of another argument in favor of waiting. The dyes used in tattooing can cause an allergic reaction. My ex-BIL found out he was allergic to yellow, and his reaction to it made a scar in addition to the tattoo. Kids generally have more sensitive skin than adults, which might mean they could be at higher risk for that kind of thing. Why risk it?

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6561

Is the debate if you should tattoo a child, or should it be illegal to tattoo a child? I think those are two different things.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

Now, the thing I can't stand - ear stretchers. Yet, AFAIK, you don't need parental consent to buy them.

Of all the things you can do to your body, I think that is one of the worst also. Regular piercings you can take out, tattoos you can at least hide in most cases, but once your ears are all stretched out I don't think there is anything that can fix them. Gross.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

I mentioned safety because Audra said she wasn't concerned because it was done safely and with the mom's consent, and I was just pointing out that we don't know it was done safely. The kid might end up diagnosed with Hepatitis from it.

True i guess i would say it doesn't make sense to point to safety in either direction.

"Spacers" wrote:

I thought of another argument in favor of waiting. The dyes used in tattooing can cause an allergic reaction. My ex-BIL found out he was allergic to yellow, and his reaction to it made a scar in addition to the tattoo. Kids generally have more sensitive skin than adults, which might mean they could be at higher risk for that kind of thing. Why risk it?

And you ear can get infected when you pierce it...why risk it? Is the argument "its not necessary and presents risk, they shouldn't do it"

Tons of things fall into that category that we let our 11 year old children do.

I can see someone making a *personal* decision that getting a tattoo in general its not worth the risk, i don't see anything in particular about a small tattoo that makes it criminal though.

boilermaker's picture
Joined: 08/21/02
Posts: 1984

True. I assumed safety bc she was a professional. I should not have.

I guess I just don't see the big deal on this one.

I'm mostly not into altering bodies of children, but this just seems so much less intrusive than so many things that we *do* to our kids that I can't get all up in arms about it. That's all.

GloriaInTX's picture
Joined: 07/29/08
Posts: 4116

Even though it isn't permanent this has to be one of the weirdest things I've seen.

'Bagel Head' Saline Forehead Injections: Japan's Hot New Beauty Trend? (VIDEO)

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

Is the debate if you should tattoo a child, or should it be illegal to tattoo a child? I think those are two different things.

I guess both. Partly because I don't understand allowing your child to get a tattoo but not sure if it should be illegal.

Alissa_Sal's picture
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

I agree with Kim and Audra. I think it's dumb, but it also doesn't seem like a big enough deal to warrant a criminal arrest.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"GloriaInTX" wrote:

Even though it isn't permanent this has to be one of the weirdest things I've seen.

'Bagel Head' Saline Forehead Injections: Japan's Hot New Beauty Trend? (VIDEO)

Yeah I was just reading about that a week or so ago. Amazingly odd and i just don't even see the appeal of it visually...but whatever...knock yourselves out, right? LOL

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6561

"Jessica80" wrote:

I guess both. Partly because I don't understand allowing your child to get a tattoo but not sure if it should be illegal.

See while this is something that I would never sign to let my child do, I think it is a grey area when you start telling parents what they can and can not let their own child do. With the clear exception of abuse.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

I don't know where you can draw the line. Circumcision is legal, ear piercing is legal, so how do you draw the line at tattoos, legally? I don't know how you'd do it.

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3312

"freddieflounder101" wrote:

I don't know where you can draw the line. Circumcision is legal, ear piercing is legal, so how do you draw the line at tattoos, legally? I don't know how you'd do it.

Here's one thing i will say. With circ-ing and ear piercing, there is little to no risk at all that you could ruin or significantly affect a child's life by doing either of those things, with or without consent.

With tattooing? I see potential to cause some big life changing problems with it. Not with a heart on the shoulder, but the problem with tattooing is that its is everything from a heart on the shoulder to full sleeves and neck tats. I can see how it would be easier to just make laws around it all, instead of trying to say "well this is okay, this is not" and trying to figure out what is acceptable or whats not.

I guess part of me would like to see kids be prevented from doing anything TOO drastic before they are adults.