Liability of a Tattoo Parlor

[jeff_corazon]

Please advise on the following issue.... Although 18+ years, my son has a form of Haemophilia and when I found out that he had gotten a small Tattoo -I was horrified and notified all of the Tattoo Parlors which I could find locally, (in writing) of his condition.

A few weeks later, my Son came back with an 'arm-length' tattoo which was done by one of the Parlors I had notified (he had falsely signed the waiver saying he had no health conditions).

When I followed this up, I did receive a response from the Tattoo Parlour whom I had previously advised of my Son's condition (and who performed this procedure anyway) however, their response in my view was more of an 'admonition' to me for not having a better communication level with my Son - INSTEAD OF being in the least bit concerned that they had been fully on notice that he had this possibly Life threatening condition.
They seemed to feel that they had an 'out' simply because my son was 'of-age' and falsely signed a Waiver form for the procedure - even though they had been notified otherwise.

Their attitude in my opinion was 'cavalier' to say the least.

As we know, teenagers tend to defy Authority and want to be accepted by their peers (my son being no exception to the rule despite the possible danger to his health) and indeed, - provided that it had been cleared by a Doctor, I would not necessarily have objected to him having a tattoo (regardless of my own ambivolence regarding these adornments).

I do not feel that my relationship/communication level is really the point here (although it is normally Excellent).

In my opinion (and I am sure legally ?), the Company is vicariously Liable for the actions of it's Employees given that they knew or should have known or should have been all appraised by Management of my Son's condition - and as such could have challenged him prior to continuing with the procedure.

Their action was negligent in that they chose not to heed the notification of my Son's condition or they simply chose to ignore it.

Could anyone advise if there is a requirement in these Tattoo Establishments to have some form of Policy and Procedures in place for such cases which cover instances that their simplistic 'waiver forms' do not cover. (Whether it requires making announcements at Staff Meetings/ Placement on Each Tattoo Station Notice Board or mirror/NewsLetter or Staff Memo) etc.

My Son's Uncle almost died of a simple Dental Procedure whilst suffering from the same condition as my Son and it is only through the grace of God that my Son has been spared any ill-effects this time . Given his past History of non-stop Nosebleeds etc (which have required several visits to Emergency) he may not be so lucky with a Tattoo on another part of his body and then, it would be my intention to take legal action for Negligence.

If my son died as a result of this procedure - would the Tattoo parlor not be liable in Negligence (despite the fact that my Son was of age), given that they were on full notice (and indeed acknolwedged receipt of such notification) prior to doing the procedure ?

[jk]

well, since your son is an adult for most purposes, he is in control of his life. How was the tattoo parlor to know you were simply just trying to control your son and were making attempts to make it so he could not get a tattoo just because you didn't want him to?

Your son then went in and signed the appropriate waivers stating there is no medical reason he could not get a tattoo.

How do you know the parlor didn't ask him about what you had said? If they did and your son blew it off as you just being an over protective mother, you lose.


and I know you don't want to hear this but:

your son is an adult. Until he is declared mentally incompetent, he gets to do what he wants regardless of what you want or believe should happen. It's hard to allow a child do things you know could hurt them but once they are of age, it is no longer a parents choice.

Time to cut the apron strings and let him grow up.

and this exemplifies it:

and then, it would be my intention to take legal action for Negligence.

YOU would have no standing to sue anybody unless your son died. Only then might you have a right to sue on behalf of your sons estate in a wrongful death suit.

[cyjeff]

I have to admit to a bit of confusion.

Your son is an adult. He is now legally capable of making his own decisions... even if you think they are the worst decisions in the world.

The tattoo parlor has absolutely no responsibility to listen to the mother of an adult about providing legal services to that adult. The tattoo parlor's responsibility is to their adult patron... not you.

Sorry.

[PandorasBox]

I agree.

I have 3 tats myself.

A reputable shop works like this:

- Certification of training, licensing, health inspections all posted.

- You must be 18 or older, or accompanied by a parent. Proof of legal age, or proof of parentage must be proven (in a reputable place, your kids best friends parent won't be able to approve Johnny for his tat).

- There are waivers to sign. Another form is medical info. This pertains to medications (including aspirin), any bleeding disorders, etc.

- In reputable shops, you come in and discuss your tattoo design with someone, then make an appointment. You don't just walk in, say "I want this" and get it done *now*.

- You are given instructions before your appointment (no alcohol, don't take certain OTC meds, no illegal drugs). You are given instructions for taking care of your tattoo while the site heals.

- If you bleed more than "normal", you are again asked about medical issues, alcohol, drugs, OTC meds. And a reputable artist WILL stop mid-job if bleeding is an issue.

Seriously, the amount of blood from a tattoo is very minimal. I cut myself shaving my legs once and had more blood from one little nick than from 3 tats combined.

I can understand where you want to protect your son. But...you have to realize he is 18, and legally an adult. He needs to be able to take care of himself, make decisions for himself.

[Bubba Jimmy]

I do not feel that my relationship/communication level is really the point here (although it is normally Excellent).

I'd say it is the whole point. You seem to have some real control issues, which is probably why your son wants to do the exact opposite of what you say at this point in his life. Not uncommon at all. But you might want to rethink your approach because you're on the losing track in this power struggle.

[KeyWestDan]

Simply put, as other messages have stated, your son is an adult.

You simply have no standing. This is a legal forum, not a health advice forum, and thus you legally have nothing to say in the matter and no tatoo parlor has to listen to you in the slightest.

Hopefully they will take note of your son's condition and be careful in the procedure.

It really boils down to your relationship with your son.

This really has nothing to do with a legal forum and legal advice.

[Mr. Knowitall]

From the standpoint of a tattoo parlor, I doubt that there's one in the country that has a system set up to accept third party claims about the health of possible future patrons, let alone to cross-reference those claims against the names and contrary information provided by customers coming through the door.

When an adult comes into a tattoo parlor, sober and clear of mind, authorizes himself for a tattoo, and gets a tattoo with no health consequence, there's no liability. Even if somebody once sent a letter saying "Don't give that guy a tattoo because he has a health problem." Why not? Because there is no injury.

In the event of an injury, I would expect that the release signed by the mentally competent adult client would overcome any prior third party report. Not just because I don't think it's within the scope of a tattoo parlor's duty to maintain records of such past, third party reports, and to have them at their fingertips for each and every client who comes in, but because the competent adult customer said, either expressly or by implication, "That information somebody sent into you is false."

[jeff_corazon]

Thanks to all,

I think Mr. Knowitall's advice is particularly good guidance.

Just to note, the whole issue had nothing to do with trying to impose my will on my son - as mentioned , and to repeat (for jk) I really feel neither one way or the other about Tattoos - I was certainly not trying to stop him from getting one - just to have him go in considering the possible consequences with his condition - but yes, as a Parent I have to do whatever I can to protect my children (despite themselves).
Your point jk regarding the Legal action was precisely what you underlined - My concern that such a procedure could cause his death.... How would I feel if that had happened and I knew I had done absolutely nothing to try and prevent it ?

By the way, I spoke to my Son after getting the Tattoo and he did apologize for not discussing it - he said he genuinely did not think it would have been an issue or he would have consulted me first so, I accept some of the comments and agree that I probably should be less overprotective - I feel my concerns were pretty normal - at his age - (they don't come with a rule book unfortunately) and we are all still learning as we grow.

I take Bubba jimmy's point but no there is no power struggle here and certainly you are wrong about my having a Control issue - concerned parent issue maybe.Haemophilia is a funny condition - as I mentioned, his Uncle had what should have been a simple Dental procedure and nearly bled to death. Any normal Human being has to be concerned about his family member/s with such conditions - I think this overrides any issue/s of Control.

Interestingly, one of the other Tattoo Parlors that did respond stated to me that not only would they not perform any additional procedures on my son - they specifically stated that as a well established Tattoo Parlor with many years experience - they would indeed consider that doing so (in light of the knowledge imparted by my notification) would not only be unethical, but in their own opinion, possibly illegal.

In other words, if nothing else, they would have challenged his fraudulent signing of the waiver.

At the end of the day - you all make good points - at 18, he is now responsible for his own actions regardless as to the benefit or detriment to himself.
I guess I made a similar decision when I decided to pierce my ear (back in the day) - hole healed up and one forgets eh? :-)

[jk]

Interestingly, one of the other Tattoo Parlors that did respond stated to me that not only would they not perform any additional procedures on my son - they specifically stated that as a well established Tattoo Parlor with many years experience - they would indeed consider that doing so (in light of the knowledge imparted by my notification) would not only be unethical, but in their own opinion, possibly illegal.

many tat shops will deride another tat shop's procedures in an attempt to garner your business. Take note that he said:

but in their own opinion, possibly illegal.

wouldn't you think that a business that believed they could be sued over such a situation would be smart enough to find out before they were faced with such a situation?

I do.

and I never said anything about you being for or against tattoos. Not sure where you would have gotten that in my post.

just to have him go in considering the possible consequences with his condition

that is between you and him. If some parent came into a tattoo parlor I owned like you had, the kid would get a free full back tat for free just to piss dad off. If I were your son and I had heard about your actions, I would have gotten a full shirt tattoo just to show you that you do not have that kind of control over me.

I understand your concern but when you start sounding like you are protecting an under age child, I think you have crossed the line, especially since you apparently believed you were right in demanding they not tattoo your adult son.


this entire situation is only between your son and yourself. I am pleased to hear it appears to have come back to that level.

By the way, I spoke to my Son after getting the Tattoo and he did apologize for not discussing it - he said he genuinely did not think it would have been an issue or he would have consulted me first so, I accept some of the comments and agree that I probably should be less overprotective

it sounds like you need to be more informative, not attempting to be controlling. Your statements are that your son was not aware of the possible complications due to his illness. You should have already taught him about his illness so he would have been able to make an informed decision. If anybody would have been to blame for your son experiencing a complication due to the tattoo, it would be you, not the tattoo parlor.

anyway, it sounds like there are no problems from the tat and you now get a chance to educate your son about his illness.

just don't go around making your son look like a momma's boy anymore. I would bet you hurt his feelings and self worth with that.

[jeff_corazon]

jk "and were making attempts to make it so he could not get a tattoo just because you didn't want him to?"

- implies that I am against tattoos.

jk "I understand your concern"

Respectfully, you appear to have no understanding for my concern although you pay 'lip-service' to it - if you had a Son with a potentially fatal condition then I would accept that you do actually understand.

jk "If some parent came into a tattoo parlor I owned like you had, the kid would get a free full back tat for free just to piss dad off. If I were your son and I had heard about your actions, I would have gotten a full shirt tattoo just to show you that you do not have that kind of control over me.

Fortunately, my Son is not that immature so I guess I HAVE done something right.

I hear what you are saying and although you are way off-base on most points (especially my educating him on his condition) I respect your right to give them.

Look, I accept the comments that I may have been overprotective but until you yourself have a Son with this condition, do not judge me. I was looking for guidance, not condemnation.

This is why I accept Mr. Knowitall's guidance - his comments are constructive without being judgmental.