Baby Ink: The Right to Tattoo Your Kid

baby-ink

A 7-year-old wants a gang tattoo just like his daddy. Awe, that’s so sweet. So daddy holds him down while he gets it. Hmmm, are we liking this parental freedom or not? I’m sure you can guess what the story is about, but now it is going to a judge. Is tattooing your minor a form of permanent disfigurement that can land a parent in jail with a life sentence? Maybe it’s something less than a mayhem charge? That remains to be seen.

This case made international news because a father, along with a fellow gang member, tattooed his 7-year-old son. Yep, a quarter-size pawprint that represents a dangerous gang in Fresno, the Bulldog, was forcibly placed on the child’s hip. The child did want it, but the reality of the painful process seems rather abusive.

The defense attorney is arguing the idea that routine circumcisions are equally painful, so getting a tattoo is no worse. Right, right, right. So getting a circumcision in the hospital when you’re a tiny newborn is just as bad as getting a gang tattoo that will last a lifetime. Then again, parents can pierce their baby’s ears easy-peasy. Is it really that different? We’ll soon find out.

One thought on “Baby Ink: The Right to Tattoo Your Kid

  1. Jenny says:

    > So getting a circumcision in the hospital when you’re a tiny newborn is just as bad as getting a gang tattoo that will last a lifetime.

    So a circumcision doesn’t last a lifetime?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.