Mom Arrested for Letting Child Get Tattoo, But There’s an Elephant in the Room That Nobody Mentioned

Authorities in Upstate New York acknowledged that it’s against the law to mutilate a child’s body, with or without parental consent. You don’t say!

Even as New York State schools allow children to decide to switch genders without their parents’ permission or knowledge under a nebulous “case-by-case basis” standard, a mother was arrested Oct. 4 for allowing her 10-year-old son to get a tattoo.

Crystal Thomas, 33, was slapped with charges of child endangerment after she let the boy get what the police report called a “large permanent ink tattoo on his body,” the Washington Examiner reported.

The mother had been staying at a motel frequented by transients in the town of Highland with her son and his sibling and permitted a man in an adjacent room to ink the boy’s name in large block letters on his forearm.

She didn’t even bother to supervise the procedure. “She wasn’t in the room with him,” Lloyd Police Chief James Janso reportedly said, according to the Examiner.

Police were alerted to the body art after the boy asked the school nurse to apply Vaseline to it.

Following her arrest, Thomas was ultimately released with a ticket to appear while the boy and another child were removed from her custody.


On Saturday, Lloyd Police arrested the man who allegedly administered the tattoo, 20-year-old Austin Smith, the Examiner reported.

Smith was charged with unlawfully dealing with a child, second-degree, and endangering the welfare of a child, the police department reported.

In this case, the police and Child Protective Services absolutely did the right thing.

After all, New York State law deems it illegal for someone under 18 to get tattooed, regardless of parental consent.

It’s understood that allowing a child to make such a permanent and irreversible decision about his body — even with the permission of a parent — is absolute madness.

However, if this same child and his mother decided to set him on the path to being drugged and mutilated in the name of so-called gender transition, that would have been A-OK.

In fact, California Gov. Gavin Newsom was falling all over himself to make sure that kids from states like Texas, which have rightly deemed it child abuse to mutilate children in the name of gender-affirming care, have a willing accomplice in the Golden State.

Last month, Newsom effectively turned California into a sanctuary state for gender-confused kids and their parents wishing to skirt state laws against the drugs and bodily harm inflicted by these procedures, Fox News reported.

“Newsom signed into law a bill that ‘protects’ transgender kids and their families from bans against ‘gender-affirming care,'” James Bradley, who lost his GOP primary bid to represent California in the U.S. Senate, tweeted about the law.

“In other words it transfers the rights of parents not to have their children mutilated, to the state,” he added.

“Just one more reason to VOTE REPUBLICANS,” Bradley urged.

This move to allow young children to make life-altering decisions about their bodies in the name of so-called gender-affirming care — including forfeiting their fertility and sexual function for life — is nothing short of insanity.

While New York and other places rightly recognize that permanent body art is the domain of adults, those same legislatures will look the other way while children are given puberty blockers, elective mastectomies and other interventions that are irreversible and profoundly impactful.

Children cannot consent to the most basic adult things like getting tattoos, signing contracts, taking out loans or even having sex.

So why are they trusted to initiate transgender care? As the adage says, follow the money.

Health care facilities charge a median of $30,000 each for these surgeries, so the facilities that carry them out have a clear incentive. Some surgeries can bring in up to $100,000 for hospitals that perform them.

Also, parents of these kids are praised as progressive heroes on social media, rather than derided as the criminals that they are.

The sad fact is that if Thomas had opted to give her child puberty blockers instead of ink, she would have received a commendation instead of a criminal record.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.