Parents Arrested for Tattooing Their Kids


Fake, of course!

Photo by Angmreagan

A Georgia couple face cruelty to children charges for giving six of their kids, ages 10 to 17 small homemade cross tattoos with an old tattoo machine and used guitar strings, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

The couple says they didn't do anything wrong -- that their children asked for the body art to look like mom and dad, and they obliged. They're out of jail now, and still don't know why this is such a big deal.

But it is, according to Georgia law. It prohibits tattoos on children under 18 from from anyone other than a licensed professional.

Moms were discussing the ethics of tattoos and parental involvement in Answers. Lots of CafeMoms have tattoos, and have no problem with their kids displaying body art ... when they are grown up enough to decide that for themselves.

But, really? A 10 year old making this decision? I think of myself and 10 and thank my lucky stars my parents said "no" to pretty much everything I asked for.

"The reason they need to be 18 is because children are not capable of making a grounded decision on something that will affect them the rest of their lives," says Steph107 in the Answers thread. "Why don't we give them each a pack of cigs and a glass of wine, too. It won't hurt them."

The dad who forced his 7 year old to get a gang tattoo against his will also comes to mind, here.

Sure, the media is probably blowing this way out of proportion, but it raises an interesting discussion about how much control a parent has over the lives of their children. The Georgia authorities classifies this a matter of health and safety, and maybe a homemade machine wasn't the wisest choice. But as dumb as it was, the intent was not to hurt the kids.

Was the law was right to intercede here, or should parents have more control over the lives of their children in non-health and safety matters?

Are children, say under 13, old enough to decide to get a tattoo without a parent's permission?

Related posts:

When Parents Get Tattoos to Honor Baby

Nose Piercings and 56 Face Tattoos

health, in the news, safety


To add a comment, please log in with

Use Your CafeMom Profile

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Comment As a Guest

Guest comments are moderated and will not appear immediately.

Jenny... Jennymomma3

Though I support tattoos and have one of my own, I do think this was very wrong.  So they want to tattoo now, to look "cool" like mom and dad, how are they going to feel when they are older.  It was not a good call on the parents part. Also, not a good call doing it from a "home-made" me its really dangerous and not sanitary.  Make the kids wait until they are older, or use temp tattoos for the younger ones!! Seriously....we are the parents, right????

MamaH... MamaHardy2008

haven't they ever heard of giving them temporary tattoos. i can see letting the 17 or 16  year old get one, but it makes me wonder how old the kids were who got one. i imagine the 10 year old didnt. maybe there was a set of twins at 16 years old or something.. i dont know. lol. i wish the story had more info so we could see the full scoop on how old the kids were that DID get the tattoos.

Cafe... Cafe Jenn

Wow is all I can say.

Kryst... Krystal.Ingalls

At that age if they want a tattoo like mom and dad why not do something temporary??  If my son wants a tattoo he can get 1....when he's 18! 

scien... science_spot

An important point that wasn't brought up in the BUZZ - the "mom" here isn't the biological mother of at least two of the kids.  Maybe the bio mom, since she is getting at least visitation, should have been included in the decision?


WesAn... WesAndNicksMom

i don't think i would have had as much of a problem with it if they hadn't tattooed them in a very visable place.  many employers won't hire people if they have visible tattoos (i have one on my wrist which can sometimes be a pain to cover for job interviews).  it just seems like by doing this, they've forever "handicapped" their children from having the same chances as everyone else.

pumpk... pumpkinpie778

Theres nothing wrong with those fun kids temporary tattoos that do come off. These children are not old enough to make justified choices on tattoos for themselves.

Pnukey Pnukey

They broke the law, easy enough. They should be punished. What's sad is that the kids are punished even more because now they're stuck with tattoos. There's a reason the law exists.

Carey... Carey2006

Hm, it was a it was religious in nature so the courts might have over-stepped their boundary there......I think 13 is too young!

clean... cleanaturalady

I was going to say - no way, but then it occurred to me that ear-piercing children seems perfectly acceptable to most people.  What's the difference really?  Both are permanently altering the body of a child.

1-10 of 12 comments 12 Last