Man Sentenced for Tattooing Toddler; Should Piercing Baby's Ears Be Illegal Too?

Tattooing toddlers, piercing babies' ears: Is there really a big difference?

Man Sentenced for Tattooing Toddler; Should Piercing a Baby’s Ears Be Illegal Too?

Is there really a big difference?

-April Daniels Hussar

baby girl earring

Well here’s a nice cheery tale of sterling parenthood out of Georgia: A miserable excuse for a man tattooed the letters “DB” on his 2-year-old son’s arm. You might assume, as I did, that DB stands for the father’s initials (Dirt Bag), but  you would be wrong; DB is “Daddy’s Boy” — isn’t that just heartwarming?

According to Newser, “The father—who told police he was drunk and didn’t remember tattooing the letters—is no longer allowed to have contact with the toddler.”

OH THAT EXPLAINS IT. Eugene Ashley, 26, was so drunk he didn’t realize what he was doing when he gave his innocent child indelible, painful proof of what an a-hole his father is. Totally understandable! I mean, don’t you hate it when you have that extra glass of Chardonnay at your play date and whoops! out comes the tattoo gun! Happens to me All. The.Time.

After a little digging I discovered that this moron who was actually arrested a year ago, when Child Services paid a visit to his home (surely an uplifting back-story there as well. And where exactly was mommy?) and discovered the tattoo on the boy, who was by then 3 years old. But now Daddy has finally had his day in court: he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of tattooing a minor, and was finally fined $300 and sentenced to a year probation. Frankly that’s a ridiculous punishment — I don’t understand why it’s only a misdemeanor. Just look at this photo:

tattoo toddler

I’m with the district attorney, who called the case “egregious.” Chopping off Daddy’s hands seems like more fitting a punishment in my book. (In general I’m a liberal, pacifist-y type; when it comes to child abuse I tend to lean more toward draconian, medieval torture methods. Bring back the thumb screws!)

The judge, however, had an intriguing perspective. “I am trying to figure out why this is illegal,” she said. “Is it illegal to pierce your little girl’s ears?”

Well hey now. She actually makes an interesting point, no? I will say now I’m not a fan of piercing infants’ ears, but I know plenty of perfectly lovely people who do it and I’m not going to argue about it here. It certainly doesn’t seem anything like giving a drunken tattoo … or … does it?

What’s the fundamental difference, really? Would it be different if it was a nice looking tattoo?

What do you think?

April Daniels Hussar is BettyConfidential’s Executive Editor.


follow BettyConfidential on... Pinterest


Read More About...
Related Articles...

10 thoughts on “Man Sentenced for Tattooing Toddler; Should Piercing Baby's Ears Be Illegal Too?

  1. vodka7tall says:

    An ear piercing is not only significantly less painful than a tattoo, it’s not permanent. Earrings can be removed, and the holes grow over quickly. Removing a tattoo is not so simple.

  2. Catca says:

    There’s also the whole “daddy’s boy” thing. Tattoos are about self-expression and somehow I don’t think this boy will ever want to express himself as a “daddy’s boy” no matter how much he might love his father. But, I do think it’s not good to pierce an infants ears either. As adorable as it looks, it does hurt to get your ears pierced and it’s kindof dangerous when you think of all the ways an ear ring can get caught on something when a child is playing. It only takes 2.2 pounds of pressure to rip an ear off (I learned that in self-defense class). So maybe the judge is right about it being difficult to discern the difference.

  3. Reaganella says:

    Ouch,poor baby! Bet the jerk kept telling his son he was a brave boy during the needle digging torture followed by more torture digging in the ink.

  4. K S says:

    If we’re bringing up piercing infants’ ears, how about circumcision?

  5. ifuaskme2 says:

    Good one KS. I personally refused circumcision for my son based on moral grounds.

  6. maddingcrowd says:

    Baby ear piercing is tacky and it is, in fact, marking a child incapable of decision making. So, the judge made a logical point. However, it is also mostly a matter of class, often in addition to cultural ethnicity, and has nothing whatsoever to do with a drunk bozo who shouldn’t even be breeding. Nor, apparently, ought the mother. But, again, we’re talking about groups and areas with enormous rates of teen births that just keep spiraling in place into their twenties without the benefit of education and maturity. Circumcision is a real-world health issue – for males and females, apart from religious or cultural influence, whether the anti crowd wants to accept that, or not. Might be a good idea to rethink that hyperventilation about hand cutting, though. Thoroughly undercuts any salient concepts.

  7. BB39 says:

    Somebody ought to ink “child abuser” on that throw-back’s forehead.

    Those low-rent jerks who pierce a baby’s ears should have theirs notched like a pig’s.

    And I’m not even going to elaborate on circumcision and what the parental penalties should be for that……

  8. jmckinnon says:

    WHAT DOES ANY OF THIS HAVE TO DO WITH TEEN MOMS? DID YOU EVER NOTICE THAT MOST OF THE WOMEN THAT KILL THEIR KIDS ARE WELL INTO THEIR 30′S? PEOPLE LIKE YOU PISS ME OFF

  9. Rachel.H says:

    i agree, i dont see how teen mums have anything to do with this?
    i am a teen mother and i disagree with all of this, so why go by what a couple of teen mothers are like and make out that all teen mothers are the same? You have no right to talk about us that way, if you don't know what its like to be a teen mother and get talked shit about all the time because we are not "mature" like all the other older mothers. We are exactly the same in the sense we bring our child into this world to care for them and give them what they need, in a way we think is best fit for our children.

  10. Jason says:

    It's legal to cut off portions of your baby son's genitals. Tattoos can be partially or fully removed. Not even all the kings horses and all the kings men can restore the nerve endings in your genitals.

    If circumcision is legal, I see absolutely no reason why tattooing your son would not be legal.

Leave a Reply

top of page jump to top