wrighty Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 This case troubles me a bit: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47198786 In summary, extreme tattooist/piercer/body modifier has pleaded guilty to GBH after the local council prosecuted him following a complaint from some random person about something they'd seen. None of his clients complained, and remain happy with the results of their procedures, and are adamant that they were fully informed about the procedures and offered plenty of opportunities to back out. I can understand that the middle class white males that represent 'the authorities' find his work to be not to their taste, and I can sympathise with them questioning the sanity of anyone that wants to have horns implanted, or their tongue split etc. But that's not the point. I don't really like nose piercings that much, and lips/eyebrows less so. But I have no problem with people having them if they want, and are aware of the risks. So where do we draw the line? Perhaps ear piercing will become illegal, or no-one will do it for fear of being convicted of GBH. What's the difference between what this guy does, and some of the more outlandish jobs carried out by plastic surgeons? For me, consent is everything. If someone wants their nipple removed for some reason, and someone is prepared to do it for them, why is this a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Harm prevention innit. You aren't allowed to stick 10mg of diamorphine into your blood, you aren't allowed to let someone cut your ear off. Nah, its a nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Complicated issue. Regina v Brown et al 1993. Consent during sadomasochism. Law Lords Concluded there were matters where consent wasn't enough. Lot's of details here. Lords Templeman, Jauncey and, to a lesser extent, Lowry start from the basic premise that the causing of actual or grievous bodily harm, including wounding is prim facie unlawful and therefore an offence. ... The minority [opinion's] approach emphasises consent as an element which legitimises the harm-doing. The majority [opinion] marginalise consent; it becomes one possible relevant element within policy reasons for creating exceptions to the rule that causing actual bodily harm is unlawful. The practicality of paternalism triumphs over the theory of individual freedom. What should the rule be? Should it be complete freedom to act consensually, a liability for all harms, minor or not, consensual or not, or some compromise? Modem society for the moment seems to demand a compromise. It is the nature of this compromise which has been asked of their Lordships and, by their failure to grasp the issue openly, they have produced no clear rule. ... This is judicial law-making at its worst and most confused - unchallengeable because unacknowledged. Paternalism triumphs, and it is the paternalism of an unelected, unrepresentative group who use but fail to openly acknowledge that power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted February 12, 2019 Share Posted February 12, 2019 Just to add, the area is confused, but in many ways I agree with this: "Surgical procedures must be carried out by properly trained, qualified and regulated surgeons or healthcare professionals," senior prosecutor Rhiannon Jones said. GMC guidance says doctors must be appropriately trained and experienced before practising cosmetic procedures. It adds doctors must consider their patients' psychological needs and follow protocols for safe interventions. If a doctor failed to do these things, aren't they assaulting their patients and opening themselves to criminal charges? I realise this bloke wasn't passing himself off as some regulated professional, but issues about having a duty of care prior to undertaking something as radical as cutting somebody's ear off doesn't seem unreasonable. The duty of care trumps the consent and doesn't allow you to just mutilate people because they agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted February 13, 2019 Author Share Posted February 13, 2019 I agree it’s a complicated area. Another couple of examples may be relevant. There was a case a few years ago of a chap who arranged to meet someone with the wish to be killed and eaten as his ultimate masochistic fantasy. Even though he’d agreed to this his cannibal killer was prosecuted. Rightly in my view. And then there’s labial reduction surgery carried out by some gynaecologists or plastic surgeons. Consent is the only difference between this and female genital mutilation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 1 hour ago, wrighty said: And then there’s labial reduction surgery carried out by some gynaecologists or plastic surgeons. Consent is the only difference between this and female genital mutilation. And hopefully the facilities, conditions and medical/surgical qualifications of those involved in the former? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrie Stevens Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 Another issue amongst West Africans down on my manor and environs is the use of native medicine or witchdoctors. I personally know of a six year old boy born in UK of Nigerians who suffered splitting headaches. The mother worked in the office where I live and was like our warden. One of the old dears in our retirement complex was a nurse and she said boys that age should not get bad headaches like that.. Well they went to a native doctor in London an next day the boy was dead. Did not hear the end of it but I would have thought that was criminal also? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 Cured the headache though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted February 13, 2019 Share Posted February 13, 2019 15 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said: Cured the headache though. Dark, even for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 Not my fault. I just cut and pasted it from wiganforums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 Not many Mohammeds with inhalers in Ramsey, yessir... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
display name Posted February 14, 2019 Share Posted February 14, 2019 On 2/13/2019 at 10:27 AM, wrighty said: And then there’s labial reduction surgery carried out by some gynaecologists or plastic surgeons. Consent is the only difference between this and female genital mutilation. Hardly anything to get in a flap about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 Now sentenced to a remarkable 40 months in jail. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/21/tattooist-dr-evil-jailed-for-performing-ear-and-nipple-removals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 36 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: Now sentenced to a remarkable 40 months in jail. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/21/tattooist-dr-evil-jailed-for-performing-ear-and-nipple-removals Should have been much longer. The idiots who ask for such modifications to their bodies are too thick to give consent, regardless of who thinks otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted March 21, 2019 Share Posted March 21, 2019 Why should it have been much longer? What for? And for what purpose? That's an absolutely stupid position to take. Change my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.