<p>Romani, of course the government and I have slightly different definitions of “necessities” (I think a ticket to fly home for TG is a necessity, as well as a pair of tickets to see Muse in convert 
), but we both agree that booze, smokes, and wasteful fashion spending is not covered. </p>
<p>^I think that’s the key phrase: “We both agree.” As in, you and your child. If the child doesn’t want a tattoo, or at least agrees not to use your money (as in the case of me and my parents), cool. If your child makes a decision to do something you disagree with and as a result you withdraw all parental support…who’s really the impulsive one in that situation? (Both, probably.)</p>
<p>“I think that’s the key phrase: “We both agree.” As in, you and your child.”</p>
<p>No, “both” means me and the govt. in the context of my post.</p>
<p>I misunderstood, but I still think the agreement is key.</p>
<p>I also reserve the right to withhold some future gratuitous acts depending on what led the kid to get a tattoo. Small Olympic rings on the shoulder versus a gigantic snake slithering down one’s butt… To me, the story underlying the need to get a tattoo is key. If this is just because (rebellion, fashion, peer pressure, snakes on the plane, etc…), this would be no different than doing any other stupid thing out there, like getting a boob job, but if the kid qualified for the Olympics and wanted a rings tattoo, that’s a different story. Remember the kid who wanted a mickey mouse ears tattoo because he missed his grandpa? That is a legitimate reason in my books, if it helps him cope with his loss.</p>
<p>My two cents, coming in late:</p>
<p>Tattoos have been found on some the oldest discovered human skin remains - after 20,000 years, I don’t think you can just call it a “fad”. They may wax and wane in popularity, but I see no indication that they are going to be anything besides more popular - each year the safety, artistic quality, and acceptance just keep going up!</p>
<p>To the extent they can be about rebellion (or such), it is not necessarily your parents that you might be rebelling against. It might just be about rebelling against those various types of people who won’t get them. And there are (and always will be, if only for the permanence and pain) be people who won’t get them and are there to rebel against!</p>
<p>There are of course bad tattoo decisions. That does not mean that tattoos themselves are bad. A swastika on your forehead is a heck of a lot different than a set of equations on your inner arm.</p>
<p>Tattoos are not cheap, but having one does not mean “financially independent”. There were a lot of times when the fact that I had scraped together $300 for a tattoo or xbox or road trip did not in anyway represent an ability to pay college tuition, any more than buying a couple of candy bars means someone must not need food stamps. It’s a matter of scale! And if you are going to go this route, at least be consistent - monitor those purchases, see what they are spending their money on and tell me how their bar bill or collectibles or whatever mean anything financially different! And if you think of them as being so different, what does that say about your idea of “adult”? Your 18+ kids must agree with how they spend their incidental cash, or you try and cripple their career??</p>
<p>FWIW, I work as an engineer and know a ton of people with tats. I know a few doctors with them as well, including my neurosurgeon. I only know one congressman personally (old family friends, a Republican no less!), and he has at least one that I know of.</p>
<p>I do not monitor my kids’ spending because I trust their judgement. But I reserve my right to give conditional gratuitous gifts. Do you see the difference? My kids know this and appreciate it. </p>
<p>Do you really consider college tuition to be a “conditional gratuitous gift”?</p>
<p>What else is it? A contractual obligation? Can you get restitution on other theories, e.g., promissory estoppel? Go sue me. Really. I dare you to find a court that would side with the kid on this. I bet you will find some case law, but I guarantee that none involved the same pattern of facts involving frivolous spending of allowances ;)</p>
<p>I’m not talking about tuition. I’m talking about spending money. If my kid were to choose a tattoo or a pair of Louboutins over buying fruit, I would send no more spending cash. The kid would not die of starvation - plenty of college kids live off their dining plans (pre-paid by parents). </p>
<p>Caveat: My comment was not really directed at you BB, it was directed at those upthread who were endorsing a withholding of tuition based on getting a tattoo. But to continue:</p>
<p>
In New Jersey it is! More than that, I would consider it part of the moral obligation of raising children, but I think that should be a discussion for another thread!</p>
<p>
I do not think that NJ would think a tattoo would matter at all (that being the only state where this would come up). Beyond that, I don’t see why the “frivolous” spending of money that would be acceptably spent on a Muse concert would suddenly be punishable for spending it on a tattoo! More, I would expect this kind of parental edict to encourage one of two behaviors from my children - either secretive defiance or rigid, unthinking compliance, neither of which I want for my kids.</p>
<p>
I think that if your kid ever chooses a tattoo, you are going to have a hard time with your relationship. Not because of the money - heck, most tattoos are not that expensive, there are all kinds of ways to earn that amount of money (like selling secondhand Muse tickets!). But because nothing says “letting my kid figure out the adult they are going to be” like rigidly enforcing rules by financial penalty.</p>
<p>If there were any publicly listed companies that manufacture tattoo removal equipment, I’d sell my house and dump all the money in their stock to capitalize on the boom of buyer’s remorse.</p>
<p>I think the type of tattoo also gives me a hint into the person’s judgment, I might not aesthetically care for the small rose on the wrist or ankle or whatever, but it’s small and discreet and cover-up-able so whatever. Full sleeves or something? That suggests poorer judgment to me. Partly aesthetic, but also partly impulse control. </p>
<p>I’ve also posted this before. I dislike tattoos for the same reason I dislike graffiti on the side of a beautiful building or bumper stickers on cars. I do not, however, have any say in what my adult children do but hope that any tattoos they get are small, classy and in spots that can be covered so I don’t have to see the disfigurement daily.</p>
<p>I also do the hiring for our company and since we’re a service industry I would not hire someone with a sleeve tattoo to represent our company in a customer’s home. There are enough people who dislike them that they would hesitate to call us back. If our employees want a small tattoo in a non visible spot they are free to do so. </p>
<p>Sure there are people who don’t care. It’s also becoming much more acceptable. But I will never think they enhance anybody’s looks. I will also never understand the desire to mark your body permanently. If some symbol is important to you, wear it on a chain.</p>
<p>I don’t “get” tattoos. That being said, my son got one his Sophmore year and got another about one year after graduation. I don’t see why I should impose my values or aesthetic taste on him. I say pick your battles and this is not one that should be waged other than mentioning your concerns. It’s his life, not mine. </p>
<p>Ha! Muse did electronic ticketing last time they were here, so selling the tickets to buy a tattoo would have been hard. Heck . . . I had to buy a third ticket after I realized that the GA pit tickets that the kids wanted required me to be there to swipe my card for entry. It was a great show! It was worth every hour of standing out in the winter cold so they could be in the front row. </p>
<p>As someone said, a typical tattoo is not that expensive. So the argument that the kid must not need your support if he can afford a tattoo isn’t really logical. </p>
<p>I think I am far too indecisive to get a tattoo. And I sm not a particular fan of them. But my husband has 3 (in his chest so other than at the pool you’d never see them. His pet peeve is implosive tattoos. He researched his for a long time. And he always hated it when people would ask if he was drunk when he hit them. Because he thinks that permanently altering your body is something that you should only do if you have all your wits about you. </p>
<p>My 18 year old son gig a tattoo a few months after his birthday. It is a religious symbol of the faith we raised him in. So I feel pretty pleased about that actually. He talked about wanting it for several months do it wasn’t an impulsive thing. It’s on his shoulder so easy to cover. I told him that is always wise, and his dad agrees. </p>
<p>One thing I did note for my kids is that guys have kind of an easier time when it comes to covering. My son’s tattoo is covered even with a typical t-shirt. But the same spot for women–I have cap sleeved tops that I wear to work that would show a tattoo there. . And certainly lots of formal dresses expose most/all of the arms. So a woman may more often have to choose clothes specifically to cover a tattoo if there’s a need. A guy in a suit or even a shirt and tie is always covering the same area. </p>
<p>My kids, aged 17 and 20, are wanting to get matching wrist tattoos in memory of their father who passed away a year and a half ago. I am inclined to support them–with the caveats that they give a lot of consideration to design, that it be cover-able, and that they go to a reputable tattoo artist. I will probably take them. And the cost will come from money they inherited from their dad. </p>
<p>I would like to know how the parents who say they would cut off their kids would know if their kids got a tatt? I assume you don’t make them strip naked so you can check. They could very easily pick a spot for a tatt that you will never see. </p>
<p>^^^ That applies to my earlier question about why bother get one if it can’t be seen ? Not just by others , but by the person who inks themselves .That makes no sense to me.
None of our daughters have them or like them…they are not always in agreement with us on many issues and certainly have their own opinions , but they are all against tattoos and wouldn’t get them.</p>