GALERIES

  MY SPACE

  Site Flash
  Biographie
  Convention
  Contact
  Knowing
  Press
  Studio
  Dragon
  Tatouage
  Piercing
  Liens
  Ancien site

PIERCING BODY ART :

The bodysuit-piercing, the Anglo-Saxon term possessing no French equivalent means literally drilling physical (piercing) (bodysuit).

The question which is imperative(leads) before envisaging the merits of a medicalization is to define the nature of the act in him even. Some will consider that at the moment or there is voluntary burglary of the cutaneous barrier of a subject by a third(third party), it is about a medical act, we are so possible consider in this optics that the exercise of the profession of Driller recovers from the illegal exercise of the medicine. However, the ethical debate does not appear to rest(base) on this epidermic burglary which requires in her even as not enough knowledge, so the nursing staff, although under the supervision(guardianship) of a doctor is authorized to have a practice this type of gesture(movement) also.

The major suceptibles elements to allow the name as medical or not of an act of piercing rest(base) on the necessary skills for the procedures accompanying the perforing. Indeed, a preliminary interrogation allowing the anamnËse of the subject is imperative(leads), so much the complications are frequent, allergic complications ( In metals and in iodine especially), scar (histories of scar chÈloÔde or of hypertrophique scar should forbid the concerned subjects such a practice) and heart patients, a pre-existent valvulopathie being a ground favorable to the bacterial colonization in case of bactÈriÈmie, so leading(inferring) an endocarditis. One Study led in 1996 to the United States reveals the absence of interrogation, notably about chÈloÔdes during the piercing little finger for a great majority of the cases, this absence putting bankrupt the notion of free and lit assent and principle of autonomy of the patient ( 37 ).

The asepsis and the control(master's degree) of the haemostasis are so many notions indispensable to acquire to practise this kind(genre) of operation in satisfactory conditions. Nevertheless, a systematic medicalization of the piercing would be an ethical, human error and medical so leading(inferring) grave repercussions in term of public health and this for various motives.

The first one is that an appeal compulsory for a doctor would have, in an optics of public health, the effect inverts of that expected and this for several reasons.

Certainly the patients addressing a doctor to be leaked out will have guaranteed in hygienic and ethical term, but how much will they be? That will happen the customers Which(Who), for a majority will turn(shoot) either to the lounges(shows) of piercing (in the uncontrolled hygiene) because a medicalization would be synonymic of ban, but towards drillers furtively armed with a pistol, by far the most dangerous.

 

Furthermore, although the tribal and mystic aspect of the primitive tribes is not any more the first motivation of the followers, the act of piercing is often lived as an initiatory passage where the atmosphere and the exchange with the other similar initiated hold an important role. We imagine badly how a doctor's practice or a hospital would be able To recreate this atmosphere, it is only there their role? It is also difficult to admit that a customer avid be put Apadravya is suitably received in a cabinet(office), the doctor having acquired the scientific knowledge but ignoring everything of the know-how while even if criticism can be made for drillers Material(Subject) of hygiene and medical knowledge, we cannot claim to ignore their artistic qualities, their experience(experiment) as well as their knowledge of the world of the piercing.

 

To want to mitigate the gap in the law surrounding the piercing by imposing a systematic medicalization seems thus inappropriate so much the risks of perverse effects are present. However, it is not either a question of excluding the medical profession of this phenomenon so much its role, if he(it) is suitably defined, can turn out crucial.

 

4. Duty of help(assistant) of the doctor.

The medical profession in general and the doctor in particular cannot stay away from a practice having repercussions in term of public health. The doctor, if it is in no cases question that it replaces the driller, has rather a duty of medical and educational information of the rules of hygiene, the driller first of all and the general population, that is the prospect in particular.

A driller interviewed during the made searches(researches) indicated that the customer having been leaked out was for free invited to resume(to take back) meeting three weeks later for a control of the check followed by the healing. This initiative, excellent however seems nevertheless uncalled-for. Indeed, this postoperative control is an act purely Medical which(who) should fall only to a qualified and awarded a diploma professional of health, if necessary recovering from the illegal exercise of the medicine. We could so imagine a postoperative medical examination advised for any subject recently leaky. However, a venal(mercantile) drift of patients' recruitments " at the exit(release) of the lounges(shows) of piercing " or by means of advertising(publicity) made within the lounge(show) would be to be dreaded(to dread).

The role of the doctor would not know how to limit itself to these some examples and he could hold, as we shall see again(revise) him(it), an important place(square) in the conception of adapted structures allowing to regulate the piercing 5. Bodysuit piercing and public health. The real risks that can engender the bodysuit piercing alert(notify) for reason the public authorities. However, you should not however legislate hastily, at the risk of deteriorating(aggravating) the situation for lack of checking(controlling) her(it). The specific American legislation in the bodysuit piercing, in spite of a sure advance on France because the first date of 1994 seems to understand(include) a lot of youthful mistakes which it would be a question of understanding(including) and of interpreting, afin The real risks that can engender the bodysuit piercing alert(notify) for reason the public authorities. However, you should not however legislate hastily, at the risk of deteriorating(aggravating) the situation for lack of checking(controlling) her(it). The specific American legislation in the bodysuit piercing, in spite of a sure advance on France because the first date of 1994 seems to understand(include) a lot of youthful mistakes which it would be a question of understanding(including) and of interpreting.

The first one(night) concerns the natural heterogeneousness of these laws, varying according to the considered state (as a rough guide, only 14 states on 51 possess effectively specific laws). The second results from the nature of the law, so the state of Louisiana and Delaware imposes since 1997 a single obligation(bond) relative to the age of the customer, this last front Be at least 18 years old. This law, besides not assuring(insuring) the major subjects the harmlessness of the operation because no hygienic limitation is put, increases the risk of seeing the minors(miners) turning(shooting) to the amateur drillers, "the savages", little worried about the age of their customers as long as they are paid. So, thanks to this law Professional drillers can infect whoever at leisure, to be major and allows the minors(miners) to go be leaked out in disastrous conditions.

Other states as California excluded the use of the pistol of the definition of the bodysuit piercing, so exempting from regulation the drilling of the cartilage little finger in the help(assistant) Of this instrument. In the sights of the character indÈsinfectable of the pistol and the suceptibilitÈ increased in the infection of the cartilage, we imagine the consequences Ö

To envisage the bodysuit piercing in term of public health means two things, it is a question at first of identifying the priorities to allow so secondly to organize the means filling the current gaps.

First of all, the number of drillers in exercise at present in France is totally ignored, authorities as drillers themselves. The first one(night) of the measures to be taken thus seems to be a census(inventory) of this population, the dialogue to be established between the state and the world of the piercing will be there only better if the Ministry of Health knows whom it addresses.

On the other hand, the same ministry, in its optics of evaluation of the infectious risk bound(connected) to the practice of the piercing sent in this task the Superior Advice of Health service of France which organized on February 29th of this year a meeting the object of which concerned the rules of disease prevention concerning the transmission of the responsible viruses Of hepatitis in the exercise of the occupations in touch with the body. A drill of Paris was invited to it, but contrary to the United States where drillers grouped together(included) in association ( the APP), it represented nobody otherwise she(it) even, which could thus express himself only in a private capacity. The necessity of a grouping in association with Election of representatives speaking in the name of all thus seems to be imperative(to lead), the current anarchy which can not be convenient to a dialogue balanced between both parties.

 

The purpose looked for through this proposition of census(inventory) and unionization is to facilitate the exchange between the state and the drillers, in interest of the parties first of all and in that of the general population especially, the absolved priority being the limitation of the risks of infection and complication. It requires afterward an organization of the means to reach there.

 

The first one(night) of the propositions where the doctor in a role to play is the wide information of the public and the professional of the piercing in hygiene to awaken the consciousnesses on the risks at first then educate medically speaking about the concerned subjects. The Canadian example with a distribution(broadcasting) by means of internet Methodologies and procedures of the piercing seeming to be an interesting point of departure but we would not know how to limit themselves to this only means of distribution(broadcasting), at the moment too elitist in France. The second role that the medical profession could play consists of the implementation of repository one clear for the procedure of sterilisation. As things stand at the present, these procedures are empirical and varied and in spite of a will to make well can sometimes miss reliability. So, if a clear and compulsory standardization was conceived, It would allow to avoid the chances met at the moment. The last roles of the doctors concern the utility of a recommendation of vaccination against the hepatitis B or the tetanus which seems composed, as well as the recommendation of a medical examination of control at a doctor and either a driller.

Finally, the implementation of a legal frame(executive) framing(supervising) the formation(training) of the driller as well as its installation seems more than desirable. The practice of such an act without verifiable skills not being acceptable any more at the dawn of the XXIth century. It is a question on no account of saying that drillers are incompetent, but rather to make sure of Their knowledge in hygiene, in complication and in networks of existing care if it arose. The final goal would be to allow the medical world and the world of the piercing to collaborate in synergy in interest of each, prospective customers in particular.

 

CONCLUSION The practice of the bodysuit piercing, in spite of a recent revival does not date of yesterday. If he(it) was soaked(filled) at the origin of a mystic sense(direction), the motivation of such an act at the moment does not seem to dress(to take on) any more the same aspect. Although the pioneers of the epidermic burglary claimed in the 70s to have the same inspirations as the tribes Primitive and what a part(party) of the current followers share these motivations, the category of followers knowing the biggest growth at present is certainly the one motivated by aesthetic reasons. However, this effect of mode(fashion) does not have to make forget that it is not about a harmless practice because the cutaneous epithelial barrier is crossed(exceeded), leaving so opened the door to any types of infection. Any types because according to the found publications, the hypothesis of an infection by any microbody cannot be thrown back(rejected). Of More, the current status does not allow the health control of the practices and the practitioners, letting so free the opportunity to whoever declare itself driller.

The qualification as the ethics of such a practice requires the respect for the fundamental principles that are the principle of autonomy and charity, the application of these principles imposing a complete revolution of the legal frame(executive). If the fact of replacing the driller by a doctor appears as non-ethics, the medical profession having no specific place(square) so much the ignorance of this environment(middle) is a handicap in this exercise, the role to play of the doctor is not less major there. Role dressing(taking on) several facets. The first one(night) is the information and the education of the public as Drillers in hygiene. To set up repository one clear for the procedure of sterilisation, as well as to recommend various preliminary vaccinations in the piercing also seems to be one of homework(duties) of the doctor. Finally, the last role which we could envisage is a suggestion of postoperative visit to the customer, the suggestion because an obligation(bond) of medicalization would be go against the medical code of ethics.

 

The question of the formation(training) of the driller as well as the modalities of its installation is to be taken(to take) into account. We could so envisage, after a necessary census(inventory), a check of the medical knowledge of the driller, both at the level of the anamnËse and at the level of the care lavished during and after the operation. This check Made, the installation of a lounge(show) of piercing would then be authorized, under the condition of the respect for the elementary rules of hygiene. However, these measures if they would allow a better regulation of the risks of the piercing, are not exempt from defects. Indeed, if the opening of a lounge(show) was subjected to authorization, allowing So a state control, it would require the control of the follow-up of the procedures, thus the existencedecontrÙleurs. It brings a double question: who would be these controllers and what formation(training) would they have received? And especially, by what way they would be paid? The example of the dissatisfaction of the beauticians practising the tattoo-make-up Permanent employee forced to pay themselves the controllers of hygiene should put back to(hand) us in spirit the heresy of this payment. If the same application was made for the piercing, how as it would be be capable of guaranteeing the objectivity of the control while it would be the driller which would pay the controller.

In front of the urgency of the situation, it is doubtless that the Ministry of Health is going in the months to come to begin to take capacities(measures) in piercing. It remains to wish that no restrictive measure wrongly is taken, such as an excessive(unfair) medicalization or a ban on practice of drillers, for ethical reasons At first but especially in an optics of public health. A too big limitation would have the opposite effect to put back(to hand) the fate(spell) of the followers in the hands of these infectious vectors that are the amateur drillers armed with their pistols.