Wales is to consider regulations that enforce parental consent for piercings for minors.
Proposals to stop children under 16 getting body piercings without their parents’ permission are to be announced by the Welsh government.
It has said it will consult on whether there should be a legal age of consent for piercings, including to ears.
Ministers fear young people being exposed to problems after being pierced, such as infections.
Health Minister Lesley Griffiths is due to make a statement to AMs in the Senedd chamber on Tuesday.
Here we go again. This has nothing to do with the government. Nothing. Yet here they are wading into the private lives and decisions of citizens with their plans to regulate that which does not need regulation.
Ms Griffiths said: “Cosmetic piercers should get permission before they body pierce anybody under the age of 16, but we know that doesn’t always happen.”
That is a matter for parents, not the state. What happens when youngsters still go out and get a piercing without consent? And there will be places that will ignore the new law – and, likely as not, they will be the less salubrious establishments. The problem will be worse, not better.
The lead petitioner was Russell Downe, a father of two and a town councillor from Llantwit Major, Vale of Glamorgan.
He said he felt piercings for minors should be regulated, other than to ears and the nose, when his oldest daughter Jessica wanted her tongue pierced at age 13.
“I said to her when she’s 16 we will talk about it again,” he said.
See? It’s simple. He said no and that should have been that until she is sixteen. But, no, he wants the state to take over his role as a parent. He isn’t alone in being weak and lily livered when it comes to personal decisions that are nothing at all to do with the state.
The chain Blue Banana has 15 shops in the UK offering piercings, including in Cardiff, Swansea and Newport.
Managing director Jon Taylor said the business already asks for the consent of parents before piercing under-16s and would support the age restriction being made legal.
So they already have a sensible policy. Why does the dead hand of the state need to be involved? If the industry feels that there is a problem and I’m not aware that there is one, then they can form an association and a common policy. What is not needed is more regulation. If children are going to ignore their parents’ wishes on the matter – or the parents don’t give a hoot – regulation won’t make it go away.
Yet again we have the weak of mind and spirit deciding that the state is mother, the state is father.
In 2004 the UK Department of Health said it had no plans for legislation to make piercing of minors a criminal offence and that a minimum age of consent might result in children piercing themselves or each other in unsafe and unhygienic ways.
Well, quite. I knew a couple of kids at school who did just that. Also, I’d like to know how parental consent will reduce those complications…
Do the Welsh Assembly Government ever allow children under 16 to be prescribed contraception without their parents’ consent? If so, is that consistent with the proposed policy on piercing?
Why would they worry about consistency?
See? It’s simple. He said no and that should have been that until she is sixteen. But, no, he wants the state to take over his role as a parent. He isn’t alone in being weak and lily livered when it comes to personal decisions that are nothing at all to do with the state
Don’t know how you draw that conclusion. Quite clearly these regulations are targetted at the commercial body piercing parlours, some of which clearly have few scruples about piercing anyone who comes in the door, regardless of what age the child is. Considering that the parent is still free to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’, I can’t see how this affects the role of parents in the slightest.
Do the Welsh Assembly Government ever allow children under 16 to be prescribed contraception without their parents’ consent? If so, is that consistent with the proposed policy on piercing?
There is such a thing as medical confidentiality, even for children. The clue is in the word ‘prescribe’. Somehow I don’t think you can compare the relationship between a doctor and patient to the fleeting relationship between body piercing parlour and customer.
And that will continue irrespective of any law. The decision remains entirely with parents and their offspring – the state should have no say in the matter at all. Ever. If children take it upon themselves to get pierced against their parents’ wishes, then something has gone wrong between them and it is for them to sort out, not the state wielding a stick over the service provider who will find themselves having to demand ID from anyone who looks remotely like they are under the requisite age on pain of prosecution and fines. This is not something that the state should be interfering with. But, then, politicians can never pass by an opportunity for more regulation.
If you as an adult try and insert anything into a child, even using the biologically provided apparatus and with parential approval, you would be in for serious trouble and lifetime on the sex offender’s register.
Yet you suggest it’s OK for an adult to entice a child into a salon and cut a hole in that child and stick a bit of scrap metal into it?
I have to disagee with you on this one. Children are not experienced enough to give informed consent, that’s why they are called children and we are called adults.
Who said anything about enticement? No one. This is not a matter for the state. The decision is between parents and their children. The state should have no involvement whatsoever. The comparison with paedophilia is just silly.
I also refer to my previous comments. Making something illegal doesn’t stop it, it merely means that it will go underground with the associated consequences.
Another law, another crime. More grounds for prosecution and criminalisation, more fines, more criminals.
Government won’t be happy until we are all criminals. Government officials above the rank of minion will have immunity for all crimes, even real ones.
Winston Smith
The decision remains entirely with parents and their offspring
Er, that’s the whole point. At present it doesn’t, for the child can simply go to the parlour and be done against the parent’s wishes. This regulation requires the parlour to seek parental approval beforehand in the case of an underage child. I really can’t see what the problem is.
the state should have no say in the matter at all
It doesn’t. The say so is with the parents. The regulation ensures that the parent does indeed have the opportunity to express an opinion before the act is done.
Ever. If children take it upon themselves to get pierced against their parents’ wishes, then something has gone wrong between them and it is for them to sort out, not the state wielding a stick over the service provider who will find themselves having to demand ID from anyone who looks remotely like they are under the requisite age on pain of prosecution and fines
Hang about. Before you were saying that most responsible businesses would do this anyway. If so then what’s the problem?
This is not something that the state should be interfering with. But, then, politicians can never pass by an opportunity for more regulation
This seems to be me to be exactly what the state should be doing. If some businesses refuse the behave responsibily then regulation will come.
Children are not experienced enough to give informed consent
Spot on. There are a thousand real violations of civil liberties without fretting about entirely sensible and reasonable measures like these.
Imposing regulation for a non-problem, you mean? There is nothing reasonable about the state micro-managing peoples’ lives.
There is precious little evidence that this is a problem. Some children might go against their parents’ wishes. However, the majority will abide by them. It simply is not something that needs the state to get involved. We do not need micromanagement of our lives, which is precisely what this regulation is all about.
When a parent says “no” that is the end of the matter. Regulation such as this assumes that the state cannot trust parents and children to reach a conclusion by themselves and it assumes that salons will not behave responsibly despite the evidence suggesting that they do.
All micromanagement by the state should be resisted – give the buggers a micron and they will see this as encouragement to seize a parsec.
Frankly, I’d sooner a child of mine who decided to go against my wishes went to a salon rather than use a compass like my school fellows did.