I just saw a man tatooed in a black and white checker board pattern that covered his face and arms. I can’t imagine this person having any kind of normal work or personal life, and my first thought was that he is mentally ill. Do tatoo artists have a responsibility to reject requests to perform such extreme tatoos?
No. They have a *right *to refuse service to anyone, and most of the artists I know will refuse someone service if the tattoo is “bad” (which can mean anything from poorly drawn to offensive to the artist) or if the person requesting it seems not to have thought it through properly. Those are judgement calls that they are allowed, though not compelled, to make. They do, I think, have an ethical obligation to refuse service to those who are intoxicated and can’t give informed consent to a procedure that does have health risks. (All the artists I know personally won’t work on a drunk person, though I’m sure that’s not a universal, or the tattoo parlors in New Orleans and Las Vegas would go broke!)
Who are we to determine what “normal” work and personal life he needs? Maybe he’s a hermit. Maybe he’s a sideshow performer. Maybe all his friends accept his tattoos and like him anyway.
Until there’s a law that we all have to be bankers and lawyers, there’s plenty of room for individual freedoms of appearance.
Oh, I forgot to add - a tattoo artist is not legally or ethically able to diagnose mental illness (nor, I suspect, are you), and so should not be using that as an indicator of fitness for a tattoo.
Good posts and good points. I was just so schocked to see this person, and to think that someone helped him get to look that way over what I assume was a matter of weeks.
Perhaps he had some kind of skin condition he wanted to camoflage. I once saw a picture of a woman who had a sort of “tattoo bra”-basically her breasts had been tattooed in a lovely pattern of flowers. At first it looked weird because you couldn’t find her nipples. It turned out that this was a woman who had had reconstructive surgery after a double masectomy. I guess she decided to “hide” the fact that she now had no nipples by getting said tattoo.
I’ve talked to a few tatoo artists, and they do seem to have some understanding of ethics. They’ll talk to the subject of a major tat like the one in the OP to make sure it’s what he/she really wants, they won’t work on people who are too drunk to know what they’re doing, and while they’re not mental health workers, they can tell if a guy’s “nuts” in the same way we all can, and won’t facilitate his nuttiness.
That’s just my experience, of course, and I’ve no doubt there are unethical, anything-for-a-buck tatoo artists out there. But at least a few of them have guidelines they try to follow.
As others have said, the man may have his own reasons for getting those tats. He may be willing to sacrifice conventional career goals for his own path. he may be independently wealthy, he may be an artist, he may follow a strange religion. Who knows? But without knowing more I wouldn’t assume the tatoo artist did anything wrong.
Don’t get me wrong. If I saw checkerboard guy I’d do a double take too. So I think you’ve asked a legitimate question.
I think it’s actually illegal to tattoo or even pierce someone who is obviously under the influence.
I suppose, much like with cosmetic surgeons, there is also the thought that “He’ll eventually find someone to do the big checkerboard face piece. Better me than some scratcher.”