Is it okay to tattoo a seven-year old child?
Is it okay to tattoo a seven-year old child if at least one parent gives consent?
Does it make a difference if the seven-year old child allegedly begged and pleaded until the parent gave in? (Note that this fact is disputed; the father claims this, but the child’s mother claimed that he was held down and forcibly tattooed. The child himself testified at the ensuing criminal trial that he didn’t want the tattoo and cried throughout.)
If any of these things do make a difference, what’s an appropriate charge? Aggravated mayhem? Injury to a child? Felony f-ing stupid?
Who bears more of the responsibility here? Certainly, you’d expect the parent to be the bigger party here and say, “I don’t care how much you whine, I’m not letting you get a tattoo.” But we all know there are parents who give in to whatever their kid wants. And it’s easy to imagine a parent who says, “Hey, what’s the big deal with a tattoo?” Does the tattoo artist have a duty to say, “I don’t care what the parents say, I’m not tattooing a freakin’ seven year old”?
Edited to add: Speaking of irresponsible parenting and art, Patrick over at Popehat makes an interesting argument that Rachel Stieringer is a more important artist than Andres Serrano. For those of you who are unfamiliar with Ms. Stieringer and her artistic output, I won’t spoil it for you; I’ll just encourage you to click over to Patrick’s blog entry.