Kids Tattooed by Parents

[pam]

Do parents have a right to tattoo their own children?

Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

[OmahaLDS]

I do think they have a right (because I cannot think of any limitation that would prevent it), but it certainly seems wrong to permanently imprint a child.

[Guest Godless]

I agree with Omaha. Technically, they probably do have the right even if it seems wrong to us. However, the allegations of child abuse are most likely perfectly legitimate due to the unsafe equipment and methods used.

[pam]

What if the laws in the state prohibited someone getting a tattoo until the age of 18?

[Guest Godless]

I think all states make an exception to that law when there's parental consent. I could be wrong though.

[Gwen]

i think how they did it seems off, why not get legit tattoo equipment? if they are not biologicly both of their kids (sounded to me from the interview this is a mixed home) they should have had the other parents permission (assuming the other parents are involved in any way).

as for if the parents have the right? parents get infants ears pierced all the time. i think it's a horrid practice. i saw some folks in walmart doing ear piercing on a kid looked to be about 3 months old. made me sick to my stomach to hear it's screams. the parents and everyone were standing around smiling and all happy while the baby screamed, not a little crying like when they get immunizations where they stop after a second or two, this was screaming. the child was in pain. do they have that right? yes. will the kid get over it? i'm sure it will.

i personally don't think parents should be doing anything that causes intense pain and is permanent that isn't medically necessary (immunizations, etc) until the kid is old enough to understand and be part of the decision. over 8?

sounded like most of the kids (if not all, i didn't keep count) were old enough to be part of the decision and wanted to do this. not sure they broke any laws (unless the home made tattoo equipment is against the law).

[bluedreams]

I think the parents had the right to do it, though their use of equipment is definitely dubious at best. Though I don't think they were the smartest at going about it I don't think they necessarily deserve to have the book thrown at them like they apparently are. The charges do seem a little much.

as for if the parents have the right? parents get infants ears pierced all the time. i think it's a horrid practice. i saw some folks in walmart doing ear piercing on a kid looked to be about 3 months old. made me sick to my stomach to hear it's screams. the parents and everyone were standing around smiling and all happy while the baby screamed, not a little crying like when they get immunizations where they stop after a second or two, this was screaming. the child was in pain. do they have that right? yes. will the kid get over it? i'm sure it will.

Meh, doesn't seem all that bad in comparison with things like circumsicion. Besides babies react differently to pain. When I got my immunizations at 5 (not exactly a baby, but still) you would have thought I was going in for a branding. 4 Nurses had to hold me down as well as my mother. I got my ears pierced way later in life (around 18). Pain wise ear piercings are far better.

(I didn't want to add another post....but I thought I should add that I don't have much of anything against circumsicion. Makes me squirm a little at the idea, but next to that there's nothing really wrong or right about it to me. I don't want it to become a circumsicion thread, simply pointing out that pain isn't necessarily the best indicator of what family decisions should be made)

With luv,

BD

Edited January 4, 2010 by bluedreams

[Gwen]

let's not turn this into a circumcision thread, we have enough of those.

when it comes to kids if at all possible i think they should be involved in the decision. of course very young children can't be prepared for the pain they will face, but older kids can. i talk to all my kids about their immunizations and such before hand. obviously at 3 months when my son needed an iv all the talking in the world didn't help him understand and he had to be restrained. broke my heart but it was what he needed. that's different from tattoos or piercings. that same son when he was 3 needed to have blood drawn for a medically necessary test, we talked about it and he went in very prepared. he did better than some adults i've seen. i've only had to restrain one of my kids once for a shot once they were old enough to be talked to about it.

yes we are "in charge" of our kids but they are still intelligent beings, i think they deserve that respect. if something is optional it should wait till they can be part of the decision. even if the parents are persuading them to a decision they are old enough to be prepared for what that decision involves.

i may personally disagree but i think parents do have the right to let their children get tattoos.... even at a young age.