MASSACHUSETTS JUDGE SAYS IT WITH STYLE... BY BOB MONTAGNA

When tattoo artist Stephan Lamphear gets tired of doing something, take him at his word. He got tired of driving to New York in order to ply his trade, and just because Massachusetts said you couldn't tattoo in that state without a medical license doesn't mean it's so. And so he set out to prove it. He and one of his customers sued the state for a First Amendment violation, by preventing him to practice his profession, essentially gagging his free speech, and for the other fellow by preventing him from getting tattooed by Lamphear without having to go to NY for the work. While the other guys case was dismissed by the judge, Lamphear's was deemed to have merit, and the case rolled on.

The Massachusetts Superior Court, in the personage of Justice Barbara Rouse found for the tattoo artist, overturned a 38 year old ban on the practice of tattooing and refuted the states' claim that their ban was in place to enhance public health and safety. The judge eloquently pointed out that by maintaining the illegality of tattooing, artists tend to be secretive and difficult to locate, and certainly made them not subject to any kind of inspection process, or licensing or registering of tattoo artists and piercers. While many tattoo artists who understand safe and clean practices can effectively ply their trade in a private home, it is not preferable. Clean, brightly lit professional facilities are the norm around the country and world, and for the State of Massachusetts to deny its citizens equal protection and opportunities others have was seen for the farce that it was. Judge Rouse correctly saw that public safety would be greatly enhanced if the archaic law was overturned, and a proper system of checks on both facilities and artists put in place.

The State of Massachusetts Health officials charged with development of a workable law were given only a short period of time to have something implemented, and to their credit, have looked to other states who have already had years to fine tune their rules governing tattooing and the Body Arts. They also looked to the National Environmental Health Association (NEHA), an organization of state health officers. In 1995, NEHA brought together medical doctors, dermatologists, pathologists, and public health officials as well as representatives of each of the affected industries, tattooing, piercing and the cosmetic tattooing.

The Body Arts Committee, under the coordination of Paul Fell, of Volusia County, Florida, worked diligently to word a comprehensive model bill for states to adopt or use parts of, to help them develop their own rules. They also called on the industry's professional organizations, the Alliance of Professional Tattooists and the Association of Professional Piercers, to attend a seminar at the College of Holy Cross, in Worcester, Mass. The meeting's agenda showed the gravity of what was happening there, and was comprised of state legislators, representatives from the attorney generals office, and Massachusetts Environmental health officers, who will be in charge of whatever enforcement ensues following enactment. Bethra Szumski, a member of the Executive Board of APP, presented a very informative history of the piercing field, and the training and requirements of their member base. APP publishes voluminous amounts of informational pamphlets designed to educate the public, and these were distributed to the attendees.

I was asked by the APT to present tattooings perspective on self -regulation at this seminar. I pointed out how the convention scene, as well as individual artists training their apprentices and employees properly, has caused changes to occur regarding everything we do, from the shaving/prep of the skin, gloving techniques, the evolution of the stenciling process, and cross-contamination prevention through effective plastic barrier use. They were interested in what measures the body arts fields had developed in self-regulation over the years, and, based on the questions asked and the input from the officials in attendance, most were truly interested in working out a manageable plan. The 150 or so health officials and inspectors in attendance were given handouts, statistics and information pointing out how far both fields have gone to assure public safety and artist/piercer safety, without the intervention from government. They were told that an informed consumer base has been the key to driving body arts practitioners to update and fine tune things like their knowledge of bloodborne pathogens training to prevention of cross contamination between clients.

Massachusetts has entered into a period of public comment regarding the new rule. I feel that the only setback I see is that they anticipate NOT making a statewide rule or law, but having individual counties adopt the promulgated rulings wording as their own, allowing them to add whatever individual goodies each county seeks. This is bad politics in that Massachusetts artists may still face multiple interpretations of what the judge most clearly stated.

The First Amendment guarantees a right to citizens to express themselves through tattooing, if they so choose. She went further, adding that since most people do not, in common practice, create these tattoos themselves, but seek out a professional to help them express their Constitutional freedom, that the act of tattooing itself IS the protected act. Since reading a magazine or newspaper has surely been held to fall within First Amendment protection, so has the printing of the paper. When a person wants to assert their rights in court against a criminal charge, they seek out the services of a lawyer, to help them secure those rights, then so does the tattooer, when producing apiece of artwork for the client. Judge Rouse's written decision is one that should be read word for word, and hopefully we can obtain a copy for inclusion in the next month's magazine. For now, remember you can and should fight city hall, if city hall is illegally keeping you from expressing yourself or from having you help others express themselves through the age old medium of Tattooing, after all it is your birthright as an American! (Editors Note: It is actually your right in a lot of countries, but the Americans have proven the point.)