oh, and I forgot the obvious; you’re exposing the kid to possible infection and allergic reaction.
in before someone implies i have a problem with ink (i have my own). i have a problem with letting a 10 year old do it.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
I think this conversation is slightly confusing because it went from: “Is this child abuse?” To “Should she have done it.” That’s a pretty big difference.
Do those that think she shouldn’t have done it also think that it’s child abuse that she did?[/quote]
Is it child abuse?
Here’s the GA definition:
‘Child abuse’ means:
Physical injury or death inflicted upon a child by a parent or caretaker thereof by other than accidental means; provided, however, physical forms of discipline may be used as long as there is no physical injury to the child;
Neglect or exploitation of a child by a parent or caretaker thereof;
Sexual abuse of a child; or
Sexual exploitation of a child.
Is getting tatted a “physical injury”. Given that it takes some time to get one (unlike the fallacious piercing analogy which is over in a second), and it is definitely uncomfortable, it’s a tough question I think. Can a 10 year old “consent” to this? No. That much is clear. Can the child’s mother consent on his behalf? I doubt it. And I cannot think of a good analogy for this situation. Piercing certainly isn’t it. A piercing happens in a second. A tattoo like that was likely an hour or more.
Does the State belong in this affair? I’m not sure. The pain and permanent nature of this event aside, this is not much different than naming your kid some stupid fucking name he’s going to have to “wear” the rest of his/her life. It’s fucking stupid, but is it “criminal”. Is it abuse? He wanted it, he sat for the tat, but he’s 10. Tough question.
In any event, she’s not the mother of the year. That’s for sure. But we need to protect children from themselves, because at some point, it WILL be a spongebob tattoo. It doesn’t matter that the tat was to honor his brother, the issue is the tat. [/quote]
I think your second paragraph raises an interesting point and I tend to hope that she is convicted for the maximum penalty and then appeals all the way to the Supreme Court to see how the Justices might look at things.
I’m not totally familiar with SC case law in this area, but I suspect you’d see some sort of 14th Amendment issue here. It would depend on how they classify the “right” to a tattoo. They’v gone as far as allowing someone to commit virtual suicide by refusing medical treatment on the grounds that the unwanted treatment constitutes a battery (Cruzan). That case basically established more than most in recent history that control over one’s body, short of actual suicide, was the most fundamental of rights.
Does this then extend to tattoos and are all decisions about one’s body, regardless of what it is, of SO fundamental a nature that they cannot be denied to children either? I don’t know how that argument would go. It could go anywhere, really.
I think the Court could argue that a tattoo represents a much more potentially-damaging result upon a child who gets it than say, a piercing, based on social stigmas he may suffer from at an age where he’s too young to properly handle such encounters. There is also the physical potential for some sort of injury that is small, but one that exists nonetheless. There is also the chance that the kid pulls out halfway through or something due to the pain and now he has a difficult decision to make regarding getting it finished or not that he may not have anticipated at such a young age.
Part of it is contract law and part of it may be some sort of Equal Protection issue. If kids at say, 16 or 17 can get a tattoo with parental consent then is that a right of theirs and if so, to what age does it go back to? 10? 6? 5? Is there perhaps some sort of test that can be applied? And of course, does the parent’s consent really mean anything? If the Court were to rule that at the age of 10 a child is not competent to make this decision then parental consent is moot.
Is there some sort of test that states can enact in the form of mandatory educational literature or other such media that must be provided beforehand, such as with some states and abortions? Or is it strictly a state matter? Should it be left up to states to decide the laws on this so that in one state NO ONE under the age of 18 can get a tattoo, period, and in another anyone over the age of 13 can get one with parental consent?[/quote]
Although your post is well thought out, you’re passing by the major issue; this kid is indeed a child and under no legal analysis yet old enough to choose or consent to anything. He cannot decide to get a tattoo anymore than he can decide to drop out of school, which will not allow us to embark on such “personal right” issues. And your musings cannot pass that simple legal point.
In a nutshell, this is why parents have legal responsibility for their MINOR children. The issues become more cloudy as a child begins to reach majority, even mid-teens, but there is simply no such tortured analysis to apply to a 10 year old.
My opinion of course.[/quote]
I don’t think I did pass by the issue at hand. I mean, if tattoos are somehow considered part of a fundamental right to have control over your own body, then doesn’t that right begin from birth? Isn’t that what inalienable means? And sure, a child is not considered to be competent in most respects, but the parent is. Part of our fundamental rights include the right to make certain decisions about our children’s lives. We can choose what schools they go to, what sports they play, the type of healthcare they receive (provided it isn’t a LACK of healthcare) and so on.
So when does this right to have some control over the lives of your children start and stop? When the possibility of injury exists? I’d argue that there is a FAR greater chance of permanent injury when a kid plays virtually any organized sport than when receiving a tattoo. So who decides when it is and isn’t appropriate for a child to engage in a certain activity, provided that he and his parents both consent? What is the difference, from a purely legal standpoint, between allowing a kid to play full-contact football at the age of 10 and allowing him to have a tattoo that he wants and his parents will allow him to have?
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]strungoutboy21 wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]LessTraveled wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]LessTraveled wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]TigerTime wrote:
TL:DR
-10 y/o kid’s brother died
-asked mom to get a tattoo in remembrance of his bro
-she said o.k.
-he got it done
-mom got arrested for “child cruelty”
note: the kid got the tattoo done at a legit studio.
So, should the kid have the legal right to get a tattoo since his mother consented to it? Would you let your child get a tattoo?
Discus.[/quote]
he’s not old enough to to make that decision, no matter how heartfelt.
no, I would not let my child get tatood. I have also refused mohawks and earrings (my 6 year old has asked for both b/c of the little future felons he goes to school with - because when your parents are letting you get your ears pierced at 5, what kind of parents do you expect they’d be???).[/quote]
Right because Mohawks make you a felon…wow, awesome stereotype bud. oh while your at it you mind as well just say that Older White guys always wear plaid pants and Golf 24-7 right? (see mirror).
So if I shave my kids head because in summer its hot or because he does Brazilian Ju-jitsu 4 times a weak and he like his hair short for that then my kids going to grow up to be a Skinhead???
I do agree on the ear piercing deal, some people get their INFANT girls pierced, that’s a little scary for me, I would not allow that.
I Don’t think Id stop my kid from wearing his hair like he wanted and I do not. If my kid grows up to be a felon then it has notning to do with his fucking hair and everything to do with my failure as a parent to teach love, respect, and acceptance.
Now Im going to be a hypocrite here and say that I do not allow my boys to walk around with their pants hanging off their asses like a gangsta…I guess that would imply that I believe thier style of pants is going to influence how they grow up…I just hate baggy jeans and I don’t want to walk around seeing other peoples asses in public, its fucking disrespectful.
[/quote]
calm down sugar britches. i don’t have to reply b/c you’re all over the place here contradicting yourself.
and i don’t play golf or own plaid pants. lol[/quote]
Sugar Britches…awesome!.
Anyway, I guess I do sound all over the place and I guess its only because I was speaking about things that bug the shit out of me and of things that I don’t think are a big deal. SO yeah I guess I am contradicting myself, my apologies.
I guess I don’t think a mohawk is going to influence my kid to be a criminal…but I wouldn’t allow cornrolls, braids etc etc. SO I guess Im fucked up and the hypocrite.
Also to chime in on the subject of the thread…NO I wouldn’t allow my 10 year old to get a tattoo.
Also BG, don’t lie man, we know your closet full of plaid bro, don’t be mad.[/quote]
dude, you live in Alasaka, I live in NJ. I bet your whole wardrobe is flannel.
There are a few kids in my son’s school with earrings and mohawks. Grade school. Without exception, their parents are uneducated, and in dead end jobs. It is absolutely largely a class issue. You don’t generally see the children of college educated, high wage earning parents, wearing earrings and mohawks in GRADE SCHOOL.
[/quote]
I’m just curious, but what is wrong with a mohawk? Also, are you talking about a real mohawk with liberty spikes? Nowadays they are pretty common to see someone with one that isn’t the liberty spikes one. I wouldn’t care if my kid wanted a mohawk.[/quote]
you’re talking about “faux-hawks” I’d guess. My son had one last haircut. meh.
but there are kids in his school with 2 inch or better Mohawks with coloring. give me a fucking break.
what is “wrong” with them? well, i’m not sure i can say anything is “wrong” with them, but maybe you might want to address my observation that the parents of these kids are invariably lower income, not college educated, and that you just don’t see this from higher income, educated parents. and remember, i’m talking K-3 grade here.
[/quote]
Two inches is nothing. Oh my god, this kid must be poor trash because he has a mohawk.
So, should the kid have the legal right to get a tattoo since his mother consented to it? Would you let your child get a tattoo?
Discus.[/quote]
he’s not old enough to to make that decision, no matter how heartfelt.
no, I would not let my child get tatood. I have also refused mohawks and earrings (my 6 year old has asked for both b/c of the little future felons he goes to school with - because when your parents are letting you get your ears pierced at 5, what kind of parents do you expect they’d be???).[/quote]
Haha,
Your kid is pissed at life. These things are external. An earing, a tattoo, a mohawk, these things in no way mold a child the way a parent does. Please believe that children are smarter and more morally intelligent than your giving them credit for.
[quote]okage wrote:
Haha,
Your kid is pissed at life. These things are external. An earing, a tattoo, a mohawk, these things in no way mold a child the way a parent does. Please believe that children are smarter and more morally intelligent than your giving them credit for.[/quote]
Please dont.
Children are flat out stupid with the moral compass of a rabid baboon.
There is a reason why they want to be all in Mad Max gear, because that is the kind of society they would build if they could.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
I thought about this some more over dinner and the obvious occurred to me: if you’re too fucking stupid not to let your 10 YEAR OLD get a tattoo, well then you DO need the State to come along and interfere.
It was a dumb fucking decision, and any defense of the mother is is pretty weak. [/quote]
Your too stupid. period. The tattoo in no way damaged the kid. Get over yourself Bro
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]okage wrote:
Haha,
Your kid is pissed at life. These things are external. An earing, a tattoo, a mohawk, these things in no way mold a child the way a parent does. Please believe that children are smarter and more morally intelligent than your giving them credit for.[/quote]
Please dont.
Children are flat out stupid with the moral compass of a rabid baboon.
There is a reason why they want to be all in Mad Max gear, because that is the kind of society they would build if they could. [/quote]
Hahahhaha,
Have you so much proof that adults have any better of a moral compass. your a joke if you think a tattoo or a mohawk is something that is a moral issue. No its a conservative issue. Might I remind you that tribes tattoo kids all the time. Its a social norm for you to think its bad dude. Its funny you think that a tribute tattoo to a lost brother is morally wrong. your just a prude loser who thinks that everyone should be controlled until they become brainwashed by society like your sorry ass. hahahhaha
ahahhaa
[quote]okage wrote:
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
I thought about this some more over dinner and the obvious occurred to me: if you’re too fucking stupid not to let your 10 YEAR OLD get a tattoo, well then you DO need the State to come along and interfere.
It was a dumb fucking decision, and any defense of the mother is is pretty weak. [/quote]
Your too stupid. period. The tattoo in no way damaged the kid. Get over yourself Bro[/quote]
[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
I love how she says “how can I tell my child no?” Ummm…you say “NO. Wait until you’re 18.” [/quote]
So, a kid wants to make a memorial for his brother and he has to wait 8 years for it? I could see that leading to all kinds of emotional issues.
Its not NO don’t wear those jeans. Its NO don’t honor your brother by sparing your flesh…[/quote]
I’m sure there are plenty of other ways to honor your brother than getting inked at age 10.
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
[quote]Ct. Rockula wrote:
[quote]Grneyes wrote:
I love how she says “how can I tell my child no?” Ummm…you say “NO. Wait until you’re 18.” [/quote]
So, a kid wants to make a memorial for his brother and he has to wait 8 years for it? I could see that leading to all kinds of emotional issues.
Its not NO don’t wear those jeans. Its NO don’t honor your brother by sparing your flesh…[/quote]
I’m sure there are plenty of other ways to honor your brother than getting inked at age 10.[/quote]
What like a brand?
I wouldn’t let my 10 year old get a tattoo.
[quote]okage wrote:
Your too stupid. period. The tattoo in no way damaged the kid. Get over yourself Bro[/quote]
The irony is strong with this post.
First, let me caveat this by saying I’ve got a relatively large piece of art on my upper arm so I understand the draw of tattoos.
That being said, you eliminate the possibility of certain jobs when you get a tattoo. Not many but some jobs require you to have clean skin (or did, that might have changed). Second, the placement and style of that tattoo will give that kid a handicap in some career fields. Say he wants to become a lawyer and practice corporate law. How’s he going to wear a short sleeve shirt on the golf course without getting a lot of judgement? Maybe that’s not in his future. Maybe he doesn’t want to be that right now but why completely eliminate yourself from that option at such a young age?
How do you think he’s going to be judged by his classmates and teachers by the time he gets into High School? Do you think he’s going to be viewed highly at first glance? Should we judge a book by its cover? No. Do we judge a book by its cover? Of course we do.
As a parent it’s my job to make sure that my sons options are as open as possible for his future. The actions of the mom here really didn’t do that.
james
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
What like a brand?[/quote]
You can name someone after him. You can carry him in your heart. There’s a lot of ways to show honor.
My brother died before I was born and neither of my parents ran out and got tattoos with his name but they still honored him (that’s how I got my middle name). We have this tendency to think that the only way for us to honor people is through a tattoo or a bumper sticker but that’s superficial. If you really want to honor them you live a good life, you make sure that you don’t forget about them, you take flowers to their grave every week. There’s a lot of ways that we can honor our dead.
james
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
What like a brand?[/quote]
You can name someone after him. You can carry him in your heart. There’s a lot of ways to show honor.
My brother died before I was born and neither of my parents ran out and got tattoos with his name but they still honored him (that’s how I got my middle name). We have this tendency to think that the only way for us to honor people is through a tattoo or a bumper sticker but that’s superficial. If you really want to honor them you live a good life, you make sure that you don’t forget about them, you take flowers to their grave every week. There’s a lot of ways that we can honor our dead.
james
[/quote]
James man I was joking. 
Messing with Greeny.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Messing with Greeny.[/quote]
Figured as much and I hope I didn’t come across like a dick. It’s just that when I see the posts about how it’s OK for a 10 year old to get a tattoo because it’s in honor of his dead brother I seriously question the reasoning skills of people.
And there’s going to be some people who take your idea of a brand seriously…
james
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Messing with Greeny.[/quote]
Figured as much and I hope I didn’t come across like a dick. It’s just that when I see the posts about how it’s OK for a 10 year old to get a tattoo because it’s in honor of his dead brother I seriously question the reasoning skills of people.
And there’s going to be some people who take your idea of a brand seriously…
james
[/quote]
Honestly James having a serious discussion about this topic seems hard to do. I have a lot of Ink and a lot of kids. I have my own opinions, about the topic but its a moot point.
You have to remember its the net, there is no accountability. So a lot of posts are just to have an argument.
I am not talking here about 10 y.o. kid, but… I don’t get why people want to have tattoos in the first place… in prison culture they have some meaning when they show your hierarchy status… but outside of jail, in real life… what are they supposed to mean?.. when I see someone with tattoo I see him as a wannabe for something… or maybe desire for more attention, maybe desire to look cool:)…
but how can you look cool when everyone in your neighborhood is having tattoo? you just another guy with tattoo:)… and nobody really cares whether you have tattoo or not… maybe to look a tough man?? but how tattoo can make you look tough??.. training martial arts, lifting weights, and even the tough face, if you have one, make you look a tough guy…
OK, nowadays among younger generation this is a mass culture in most anglo-saxon countries… today having tattoo is like going to have food in Macdonald… and these pictures are so cliche and kitsch, and nothing else… but most of the time it shows me that someone is empty and tasteless… and don’t know why, but when I see a guy that has face of a spoiled mommy son with tattoo it makes me lough:)
[quote]Antonio. B wrote:
I am not talking here about 10 y.o. kid, but… I don’t get why people want to have tattoos in the first place… in prison culture they have some meaning when they show your hierarchy status… but outside of jail, in real life… what are they supposed to mean?.. when I see someone with tattoo I see him as a wannabe for something… or maybe desire for more attention, maybe desire to look cool:)…
but how can you look cool when everyone in your neighborhood is having tattoo? you just another guy with tattoo:)… and nobody really cares whether you have tattoo or not… maybe to look a tough man?? but how tattoo can make you look tough??.. training martial arts, lifting weights, and even the tough face, if you have one, make you look a tough guy…
OK, nowadays among younger generation this is a mass culture in most anglo-saxon countries… today having tattoo is like going to have food in Macdonald… and these pictures are so cliche and kitsch, and nothing else… but most of the time it shows me that someone is empty and tasteless… and don’t know why, but when I see a guy that has face of a spoiled mommy son with tattoo it makes me lough:) [/quote]
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Messing with Greeny.[/quote]
Figured as much and I hope I didn’t come across like a dick. It’s just that when I see the posts about how it’s OK for a 10 year old to get a tattoo because it’s in honor of his dead brother I seriously question the reasoning skills of people.
And there’s going to be some people who take your idea of a brand seriously…
james
[/quote]
Honestly James having a serious discussion about this topic seems hard to do. I have a lot of Ink and a lot of kids. I have my own opinions, about the topic but its a moot point.
You have to remember its the net, there is no accountability. So a lot of posts are just to have an argument.
[/quote]
Cereally dum post.
Sitation?
[quote]atypical1 wrote:
[quote]okage wrote:
Your too stupid. period. The tattoo in no way damaged the kid. Get over yourself Bro[/quote]
The irony is strong with this post.
First, let me caveat this by saying I’ve got a relatively large piece of art on my upper arm so I understand the draw of tattoos.
That being said, you eliminate the possibility of certain jobs when you get a tattoo. Not many but some jobs require you to have clean skin (or did, that might have changed). Second, the placement and style of that tattoo will give that kid a handicap in some career fields. Say he wants to become a lawyer and practice corporate law. How’s he going to wear a short sleeve shirt on the golf course without getting a lot of judgement? Maybe that’s not in his future. Maybe he doesn’t want to be that right now but why completely eliminate yourself from that option at such a young age?
How do you think he’s going to be judged by his classmates and teachers by the time he gets into High School? Do you think he’s going to be viewed highly at first glance? Should we judge a book by its cover? No. Do we judge a book by its cover? Of course we do.
As a parent it’s my job to make sure that my sons options are as open as possible for his future. The actions of the mom here really didn’t do that.
james
[/quote]
One point you need to consider about society is that it is always changing. I have seen many medical assistants with tattoos in visible areas…whereas, 30 years ago those people probably never would have been hired. What would his classmates say? Considering they grew up in a society that is slowly accepting “stigmas” that were avoided before (you probably saw very few lawyers with dreadlocks but there are some now)…probably not much.
Mind you, I agree with you for the most part which is why I keep focusing on the location of the tat.
I don’t care that a ten year old got one.
I care that he got one in such a visible area which like you said can have an affect at this time.