Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
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.
I think there is a reason why it is against the law in most States for kids to get a tattoo before they are 18. That being that kids under 18 are very immature and getting something on your skin that will be there for the rest of their lives is a big decision best left to adults. When a parent gives them the tattoo it is even worse because they may be influencing them to make a bad decision.
Yet 16-year-olds can drive cars and legally have sex with one another in most states. If I can give a 16-year-old girl license to drive to her boyfriend's house, have sex, get pregnant, and have a baby or get an abortion, she can certainly pay someone to ink something on her arm.
I agree. I can't rep you. I think that if you have a kid that is dead set on it and the parent knows that this kid is going to get one, and I would say 99% of the time parents know the kid that they are dealing with then they need to be involved and get the kid to a reputable place or to a show to have the work done. Parents should have the right to sign some type of consent form and it should remain the parents domain.
Having said that, I just can't accept that 2 unqualified people decided to do this to these children. Further, the fact that this occurred to two children that did not have the biological mother's consent speaks volumes.
Yet 16-year-olds can drive cars and legally have sex with one another in most states. If I can give a 16-year-old girl license to drive to her boyfriend's house, have sex, get pregnant, and have a baby or get an abortion, she can certainly pay someone to ink something on her arm.
The issue I would have is the age of consent, which is all over the place for all kinds of activities. Each state has a different age at which people can have sex, drive cars, get married. Americans apparently are such retards, and mature so slowly, that this is the only country in the world in which a 20-year old is still so immature that he can't be trusted with a can of Miller Lite. It is almost the only country in which the sexual age of consent is 18 in some jurisdictions.
If kids want tattoos, let them. If they're so inclined, they will wallpaper themselves with tramp stamps as soon as they are 18 anyway. But I think the question is about whether parents ought to encourage the kids to get tattooed "just like mommy and daddy" at a very young age, when mommy and daddy are still too immature to know better.
It's no different from people with eating disorders raising their kids on a diet that consists exclusively of pop and chips.
My 10 yo wanted to get her ears pierced. My husbands aunt just insisted that she wanted to do it and pay for it when we were visiting. I was upset with my husband, because he told her that is was fine. I knew my daughter wouldn't like it and I was trying to put it off as long as possible. I take responsibility because I could have said no, but I didn't. It was awful. She started crying, but she did it. She had the earings in for maybe a week. She hated them. I told her to take them out and she did. My husband was mad, because his aunt paid $50.00 to get it done, but I told him that I didn't want it done in the first place and if she wanted to take them out she could.
Now, if it was a tattoo. you just can't take it off. Unless of course it's a temporary tattoo.
My husband and I agree with you that the pierced ears are in the same question. We saw this story on TV and the parents are really different. Somehow they think this is something normal to do. Well, I don't think anyone underage should have pierced ears either. When you start altering the body, it should be an adult making the decision about his or her own body. There are some exceptions. As you mentioned, the pierced ears can grow back with just a small scar, but don't start writing on a childs skin.
My husband and I agree with you that the pierced ears are in the same question. We saw this story on TV and the parents are really different. Somehow they think this is something normal to do. Well, I don't think anyone underage should have pierced ears either. When you start altering the body, it should be an adult making the decision about his or her own body. There are some exceptions. As you mentioned, the pierced ears can grow back with just a small scar, but don't start writing on a childs skin.
The issue I would have is the age of consent, which is all over the place for all kinds of activities. Each state has a different age at which people can have sex, drive cars, get married. Americans apparently are such retards, and mature so slowly, that this is the only country in the world in which a 20-year old is still so immature that he can't be trusted with a can of Miller Lite. It is almost the only country in which the sexual age of consent is 18 in some jurisdictions.
If kids want tattoos, let them. If they're so inclined, they will wallpaper themselves with tramp stamps as soon as they are 18 anyway. But I think the question is about whether parents ought to encourage the kids to get tattooed "just like mommy and daddy" at a very young age, when mommy and daddy are still too immature to know better.
It's no different from people with eating disorders raising their kids on a diet that consists exclusively of pop and chips.
I agree that the age of consent is inconsistent. It doesn't make a lot of sense at times, and I admit that I don't have the magic answer. Sixteen seems about right.
Ought parents to encourage their kids to get tattoos? It's hard to say. I WANT to say, "No, of course not"--my husband and I have tattoos and have been very clear with our daughter that she's not getting any type of body modification (outside of pierced ears) before she's 18. A few of her friends have pierced eyebrows, lips and nostrils; those are pretty trendy right now.
However, I participated in a few threads recently about circumcision and pierced ears, and my stance there was that it's up to the parents to raise a kid according to their standards. Some people felt piercing a baby's ears or circumcising an infant boy was tantamount to mutilation and abuse, and I disagreed.
I think the line has to be drawn somewhere, but I'm not sure where it is. Still, tattooing young children without their mom's consent and with some contraption you made yourself ... that seems to be on the other side of the line.
I don't think tattoos should be allowed for minors at all. We've all been kids and anyone who tells you they never did things as a kid that they didn't later regret is a liar. This is a choice that's pretty hard to back out of. Same goes for other things such as mutilation.
Let kids be kids. How about if we put off having an individual making a grown up decision until he/she is grown up? There's almost no such thing as an emotionally mature 17-year-old.
As for arresting the parents: (assuming the deed is done) what good is that going to do now? The kid's already marked up for life. Whether it was a good choice for the child... only time will tell.
Last edited by ChrisC; 01-06-2010 at 04:11 PM..
Reason: speeling misteak.
It's no different from people with eating disorders raising their kids on a diet that consists exclusively of pop and chips.
Or homosexuals raising adopted children in a home with 2 dads.
Personally I have nothing against tatoos, I have a few & some I did myself well before I was 18 years old. But to an extent I regret the home made ones and wouldn't think of giving my kids one. Once they are old enough to make mature decisions I'll have no problem with it if they want a or some tatoos.
On the other hand I dont think parents getting arrested for it will solve anything. This wasn't about parents anyway, a parent was the one who called the authorities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
