Georgia Mom Arrested for Allowing 10-Year-Old to Get Tattoo

Originally posted by sweetnlow
you know whats really disturbing and quite disgusting is the fact that they have these baby lingerie beauty contests in that state which promote kiddy porn and you don't see them locking the mothers or the promoters up and whisking those bay's away to foster homes

See that is my point. There are lots of things that parents do to kids that some of us may deam HORRIBLE. I personally think parading your toddlera round as if she is an adult woman is disgusting and life altering...while others think it is super cute and perfectly fine.

as someone else mentioned, moms get their girls (and boys too) ears pierced as a baby.....boys are circumsized....others feed their kids mass amounts of junk food (which I find is absuive).....others SMOKE near them (which I find is abusive)....

however, i would not want the government to sweep in and start arresting these parents!

judge them negatively is fine.....arresting them is wrong...

reply to post by blupblup

she is his legal guardian so maybe it should be her choice.... I dunno, I'm kinda torn.

There's nothing to be torn over. Even if you disagree with her, she's the boys Mother and can make those decisions. We cannot, and should not, and the government, whether State or Federal, should not have the ability to either.

reply to post by caladonea


It does say "medical or cosmetic" but I read that to mean corrective cosmetic, not just decoration. I'm sure, as with all legal-eze, the courts could interpret it to mean anything they want though.

It should say, "or parental consent."

The mother and the tattoo artist should both be jailed for this IMHO.

I've been getting tattoos since before they became mainstream and a badge of the "metrosexual" moron brigade and as someone who has been inked for more than half his life, this doesn't sit well with me. Like babies having their ears pierced, though that would at least be less permanent than a tattoo.

In my country no reputable tattoo artist would ever tattoo a child nor will they tattoo hands, visible areas of the neck, faces and heads. Don't get me wrong, there are fuc-wits in every profession that will do anything for a quick buck (thus all the morons/hooligans with ink depicting Nazi images and worse all over their face) but anyone who has a good reputation and does good work will give jobs like this a wide berth.

Tattoos are for life and as such require an adults mind/maturity to chose to have one done, no matter what the reasoning is.

Rev

The son made a choice, asked his mother, his mother gave permission and most likely supervised the tattooing. In the end, this is a victimless crime. Nobody was hurt, property was not damaged, nothing was stolen, nobody was hurt (except the son I guess, tattoos can be painful to get, I hear).

It makes sense that the mother would get arrested. After all, the son is the government's property. How dare she willingly allow damage to government property.

Well, Chuntera, Gaqua and Malik apparently don't know what country they are in. I don't know where they came up with those names, but from the way they talk they sure sound like they are American. Still can barely speak English, really, but not with any accent. They are not Maori from New Guinea. And in fact, the Maori, who all get tattooed, it's a right of passage, would probably KILL the mother for allowing a tattoo before the proper time.

There are laws about this stuff, FOR A REASON. Ten year olds are not qualified to make up their minds over something that is going to affect them FOR LIFE. Even at eighteen, you are not really qualified to make that decision. I see pinheads every day with Superman or Tweety Bird or the Tasmanian Devil tattooed on them, in a visible place. They are going to regret those later, duh.

Obviously, she KNEW it was illegal. She took him to a real tattoo parlor, who said, "No, we can't tattoo a little kid, it's against the law," and that should have been the end of it. Instead, she took him to some back alley illegal guy, and the kid got a really crappy looking jailhouse type tat. Oh yeah, when he grows up, and the tat gets all stretched out and blurry by the time he's eighteen, he's gonna be singing a different tune. And it's not high enough on his arm to really hide it. That kid is now guaranteed he will NEVER be able to get a real job, thanks to that tattoo.

And she won't tell the tattooers name, because she KNOWS what she did was illegal, and the tattoo artist would go to jail, not her.

Parents that are too stupid to make the proper decisions for their kids, need Big Brother to tell them what to do, or alll hell will break loose.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Yes, to all the above. None of it is the government's business!

Well I guess.... As I said, I'm torn.
I see both sides so I'm not gonna argue one side, just trying to see where you'd (the general you) draw the line ya know?

What is acceptable parenting and what is not?

(and yes, I know you'll say anything you deem fit for your kids within reason and within the law, and I get it)

My parent's let me try their beer when I was very, very young, and I didn't like it, and the problem was solved. I sipped margaritas later, and liked them, and learned a little about alcohol from the safety of my own home!

Same as that, no problem there at all.
I'm not really a big drinker so had no affect.

My point was about a bar (Not drinking in general) and I don't think that's a good place for a kid.

Parents are supposed to help us experiement and try some things with their supervision. That is the whole point of having parents.

Indeed, but structure, rules and discipline is necessary too... it can't be just do what you want and it doesn't matter... there has to be some things to look forward to doing when you get older... we need taboos and limits as a kid... I think?

(I don't believe I actually just typed that... I must be getting old)

When I was in high school, most of our girl's basketball team got suspended from school and kicked off the team, because of a picture of them sipping champagne at a wedding! Their parents were all in attendance, they were not driving, they didn't hurt anybody, yet it cost some of them college scholarships!
The government has no business in parenting!

Well yeah that's just ridiculous.

Trust me, I'm not some square or prude... there isn't a lot I haven't done before (none of which I'll discuss as per ATS rules) and I'm not one for thinking kids have no say or should just be seen and not heard.
Kids are people too and I guess if that kid wanted a Tattoo and his mum OK'd it... then who am I to argue?

Then again I'm not the law... this is the problem.

Where does the law stop and parenting take over and vice-versa...

And yes, I know... the Gov has no place in rasing your child etc etc....

Hmmmm



Cheers.

Originally posted by revmoofoo
The mother and the tattoo artist should both be jailed for this IMHO.

I've been getting tattoos since before they became mainstream and a badge of the "metrosexual" moron brigade and as someone who has been inked for more than half his life, this doesn't sit well with me. Like babies having their ears pierced, though that would at least be less permanent that a tattoo.

In my country no reputable tattoo artist would ever tattoo a child nor will they tattoo hands, visible areas of the neck, faces and heads. Don't get me wrong, there are fuc-wits in every profession that will do anything for a quick buck (thus all the morons/hooligans with ink depicting Nazi images and worse all over their face) but anyone who has a good reputation and does good work will give jobs like this a wide berth.

Tattoos are for life and as such require an adults mind/maturity to chose to have one done, no matter what the reasoning is.

Rev

i take it that you dont children ??

While I agree that the government is too involved in our decisions with our children... And I'm not sure I agree with the law... But I think the mother showed extremely bad judgement.

1) Tattoos are painful. I'm impressed the child was able to withstand it as his young age, because many adults have to go to their "zen happy place" to withstand it. However, the mom, who has tattoos, thought that pain at 10 years old was a good idea.

2) His size. He's 10. He's going to grow significantly.

The smart thing to do would have been to acknowledge the fact that he wants to memorialize his brother, but to explain how much his body is going to change over the next decade. Then wait til he was 18 - 22 (men actually don't stop growing until about 21-22) to encourage the tattoo. He would then be (presumably) more mature, physically and mentally, and be able to make potentially different decisions on how he wanted to memorialize his brother, or even where he wanted to place it.

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

n this case, Mom needed to show some backbone with parenting and stop trying to be the kid's best buddy in letting him get whatever his 10yr old mind could conjure up as a good idea.

You do realize that you are just assuming that the woman has no "backbone" as a Mother right?

Indeed... I am assuming the best case scenario in the mother's motivations and personal thinking in what led to a small child getting 'inked' for the rest of his life. Tatts are a major decision and commitment for an adult, given that it will be there to the day one dies...or insanely painful steps to remove it are necessary. (a family member had a shoulder tatt removed..the pain was barely tolerable WITH the drugs they Rx'ed for the recovery time)

As far as judgement and parent's having absolute rights...Well, I agree to a POINT. However, society has laws to counter outright BAD judgement on the part of parents in decisions that effect children. Female 'circumcision' is considered an outstanding and perfectly reasonable idea in many areas of the world too... Should that also be a Parent's absolute discretion in the U.S.? Absolutely not....and for the same, albeit more severe, reasons. Life long actions...and health issues that can be downright life changing, if not terminal if it goes badly in whatever way.

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by blupblup

 

There's nothing to be torn over. Even if you disagree with her, she's the boys Mother and can make those decisions. We cannot, and should not, and the government, whether State or Federal, should not have the ability to either.

Of course there are times when the government have to intervene.... child abuse cases and drug issues etc.
But mostly I agree.

Originally posted by revmoofoo
The mother and the tattoo artist should both be jailed for this IMHO.

I've been getting tattoos since before they became mainstream and a badge of the "metrosexual" moron brigade and as someone who has been inked for more than half his life, this doesn't sit well with me. Like babies having their ears pierced, though that would at least be less permanent than a tattoo.

In my country no reputable tattoo artist would ever tattoo a child nor will they tattoo hands, visible areas of the neck, faces and heads. Don't get me wrong, there are fuc-wits in every profession that will do anything for a quick buck (thus all the morons/hooligans with ink depicting Nazi images and worse all over their face) but anyone who has a good reputation and does good work will give jobs like this a wide berth.

Tattoos are for life and as such require an adults mind/maturity to chose to have one done, no matter what the reasoning is.

Rev

edit on 20/1/2012 by revmoofoo because: My kingdom for mad spelling skills!

With that attitude, there will be lots of parentless children being raised by the foster care system.

Look, im someone who believes in criminal law. I believe in enforcing it. I believe in changing many of the laws. I study it. It is my career of choice....but jail should be for very select crimes. Study the prison system (if you havent been part of it)....and you will see that throwing a mother into jail for this is NOT the solution.

If she needs to be held accountable there are a zillion other ways of doing so w/out ripping her from her sons's life. She has already lost one son!!

I don't agree the government should tell parents how to raise their children, yet I don't believe the child was old enough to accept such a permanent decision.

I think the arrest was justified, it shows complete irresponsibility of a parent, who was a mentality on the same level as the child.

reply to post by sparksfley




Exactly..... he's physically not old enough and that Tattoo will probably be unrecognisable by the time he's 18-21.

reply to post by nofear39


I've fostered in the past, but have none of my own as my wife and I are both celibate and looking after my wife is enough work for me everyday. There is no reason to allow a child to mutilate their body on any level. And that's all ink, piercings (and my personal favourite) and brands do...mutilate the person receiving them.

If I ever have kids, I'll be fine with them making a decision to be inked in exactly the same way that I will go with their timetable when it comes to them choosing whither or not to be Christened. But again, they have to be making said decisions with a more mature mind, so I'd say at least 16 (18 is the legal age in my country) before they contemplate such things. After all, I moved out of home when I was 16 as I was considered an "adult" by my Government.

Rev

reply to post by silo13


I got my tattoo in Georgia when I was fourteen. Kids at my middle school thought it was fake. Either way, this is insane! Georgia is crazy, I lived there for quite a few years and love the place but not the insane laws and harsh punishments they dish out.

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Like I said, both she and the tattoo artist have to be held accountable for what they've done. After all, in some countries they'd be done for child abuse because of insane laws. All I'm really suggesting is a fine for both of them and an audit of the tattoo artists business because he is not operating an ethical establishment.

So please don't draw conclusions from my "attitude" that aren't there.

Rev

Originally posted by sparksfley
While I agree that the government is too involved in our decisions with our children... And I'm not sure I agree with the law... But I think the mother showed extremely bad judgement.

1) Tattoos are painful. I'm impressed the child was able to withstand it as his young age, because many adults have to go to their "zen happy place" to withstand it. However, the mom, who has tattoos, thought that pain at 10 years old was a good idea.

2) His size. He's 10. He's going to grow significantly.

The smart thing to do would have been to acknowledge the fact that he wants to memorialize his brother, but to explain how much his body is going to change over the next decade. Then wait til he was 18 - 22 (men actually don't stop growing until about 21-22) to encourage the tattoo. He would then be (presumably) more mature, physically and mentally, and be able to make potentially different decisions on how he wanted to memorialize his brother, or even where he wanted to place it.

You can not take your experience and apply it to others in every situation.

1. tattoos are not painful. i have them. they were not painful to me. therefore they are not painful to anyone else, correct?

2. kids get on bikes and skateboards and do some VERY dangerous things on them resulting in MUCH MORE painful things than a tattoo....


the issue of pain is absolutely irrelevant in this.

the issue of your body changes is absolutely irrelevant in this.

what is revelant is that people want to arrest the mother and throw her in jail for this.....when it will serve NO purpose at all. that is not the solution. if what she did is so horrible than force her to take parenting classes. but for her to sit in a jail cell does nobody any good.

Has it ever occurred to you, that when it comes to another parents children, your opinion is irrelevant? Because it is. It does not matter if you agree or disagree with what the Mother allowed her son to do, she should have the freedom to make such judgements for her children.

So then, according to your train of thought, if I decied I want my 10 year old son to have sex, because he wanted to, or if he wanted to get drunk or to experiment with drugs because he wanted to that it is my call.

So that would be alright then?