Reply
Van West Auckland, NZ, New Zealand 3091 posts
29th Jan '13

That's horrible. Poor kid.

κατι 1 child; Memphis, Tennessee 3143 posts
29th Jan '13
Quoting BrookeT:" OMG I have tattoos and even at 18 they hurt sooo bad. I cant imagine how much worse it would be for a ... [snip!] ... isnt going to remember is a lot different than holding down a child for the extended period of time it takes to do a tattoo."


totally agree.

BrookeT Due April 26; Fort McMurray, Alberta 440 posts
29th Jan '13
Quoting κατι:" totally agree."

I cant even believe someone would compair those three things and saying they are even similar... Some people are way too quick to say things they dissagree with are abuse IMO

KissMeFinnNelson<3 1 child; 2 angel babies; Glasgow, Scotland, UK, United Kingdom 4484 posts
status 29th Jan '13

I seen this on FB too and was horrified by it however admittedly the first thing that popped into my head was it is no different to circumcision. I wouldn't draw a comparison to ear piercing but circ absolutely. The actual act itself in that it is an unnecessary thing to do to a child, they have to be restrained, it is permenant disfigurement of the body, they have no choice in the matter, it is painful, etc AND also in the reaction to it. What I mean by that is tattooing a child in certain culture maybe seen as acceptable and part of what they do as a society however in a culture where it is not acceptable people see it for what it is an throw their arms up in the air screaming it's abuse, this is exactly the same with Circumcision in America. It's the only country in the western world that actually does it and it is so part of the culture that it is accepted but to all other western countries and cultures we're completely disgusted by it and see it as abuse and a major human rights issue.

usernametx Texas 19748 posts
29th Jan '13

No one said it is exactly the same as circumcision or that they thought it was acceptable. The similarities of circumcision were pointed out - that it's done against the child's will, probably paid for by the parents, that it's permanent, for aesthetics and probably a cultural or family thing, that the child is held down and it can't really be fixed and it's illegal in some places.



And then someone said i was just as bad as the parents who do this because i was raped infront of my child.

KissMeFinnNelson<3 1 child; 2 angel babies; Glasgow, Scotland, UK, United Kingdom 4484 posts
status 29th Jan '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting Mama*AtoZ:</b>" And then someone said i was just as bad as the parents who do this because i was raped infront of my child."</blockquote>




WTF? :shock:

BrookeT Due April 26; Fort McMurray, Alberta 440 posts
29th Jan '13
Quoting Mama*AtoZ:" No one said it is exactly the same as circumcision or that they thought it was acceptable. The similarities ... [snip!] ... in some places. And then someone said i was just as bad as the parents who do this because i was raped infront of my child."


What??!! That doesnt even make sense... I suppose the person who said that is also the type of person who likes to say rape victems brought it on themselves by the way they dress...
As far as Circumcision being for aesthetics, there are medical benifits to the procedure, it reduces the HIV risk by up to 60%, it reduces the risk of transmitting HPV and herpes, reduces the risk of penile cancer, and reduces UTIs during childhood. Whether a parent sees these benifits as a valid reason for the proceedure is a personal choice.

KissMeFinnNelson<3 1 child; 2 angel babies; Glasgow, Scotland, UK, United Kingdom 4484 posts
status 29th Jan '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting BrookeT:</b>" What??!! That doesnt even make sense... I suppose the person who said that is also the type of person ... [snip!] ... reduces UTIs during childhood. Whether a parent sees these benifits as a valid reason for the proceedure is a personal choice."</blockquote>




In comparison to other western countries where Circumcision virtually doesn't exist to America where it is the norm America has the highest rates of sexually transmitted infections, diseases and UTI's in males so no those "facts" are wrong. That is why they must call it a cosmetic procedure and they cannot call it a medical one on a child because the overwhelming evidence from around the world shows those statements are completely false.

meggymama Due July 30; 97 kids; United Kingdom 510 posts
29th Jan '13
Quoting κατι:" There were a few of them. Some people said it's no different then getting your baby boy circumcised or getting ears pierced. I can't find the threads they're lost lol."

Please tell me you are joking, me and DH saw this link yesterday but neither of us can watch, I keep thinking about it and cannot imagine what why or how anyone can do this, let alone the three 'adults' involved? the tattooist is the scary one, this is a qualified proffessional who is mutilating a child, There is a reason its illegal to tattoo anyone under 18 (in the UK) I just cannot even think how you come up with the idea of doing it let alone actually doing it.

Alicia Holz 2 kids; Fond du Lac, Wisconsin 534 posts
29th Jan '13

i was reading laws in US about tattooing a child that young and the only one i saw was in wis where only a physcian can do it..and i have to admit wis has some scrit laws when it comes to tattoos




Tattoo artists and establishments where tattoos are performed must be licensed by the state health department, and establishments must be inspected before a licence is issued (statute 252.23). Alternatively, in areas with a population over 5000 people, the state health department can authorize a local health department to do inspections and licensing (statute 252.245).
No one may tattoo children except doctors doing so in the course of their medical practice: "(2) Subject to sub. (3), any person who tattoos or offers to tattoo a child is subject to a Class D forfeiture.". (3) Subsection (2) does not prohibit a physician from tattooing or offering to tattoo a child in the course of professional practice.[30]

meggymama Due July 30; 97 kids; United Kingdom 510 posts
29th Jan '13

What would be a medical reason to tattoo anyone? this is a genuine question

κατι 1 child; Memphis, Tennessee 3143 posts
29th Jan '13
Quoting Alicia Holz:" i was reading laws in US about tattooing a child that young and the only one i saw was in wis where only ... [snip!] ... (2) does not prohibit a physician from tattooing or offering to tattoo a child in the course of professional practice.[30]"


Alot of places in the US don't allow it at all,some do though. :?



Indiana




In the State of Indiana a minor can be tattooed but a parent(s) or legal guardian(s) must be present. must be present during the time the minor is being tattooed and the parent(s) must provide written permission for the person to receive the tattoo(s).[11]

Alicia Holz 2 kids; Fond du Lac, Wisconsin 534 posts
29th Jan '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting meggymama:</b>" What would be a medical reason to tattoo anyone? this is a genuine question "</blockquote>




yeah i tried to look it up to see why and got nothing which is odd

meggymama Due July 30; 97 kids; United Kingdom 510 posts
29th Jan '13

Surely minor doesnt extent to baby though? i just cannot get my head around it

KissMeFinnNelson<3 1 child; 2 angel babies; Glasgow, Scotland, UK, United Kingdom 4484 posts
status 29th Jan '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting meggymama:</b>" What would be a medical reason to tattoo anyone? this is a genuine question "</blockquote>



Has anyone claimed the tattoo was done for medical reasons, is that what the parents are saying? I didn't know they had been found and identified.