|

Technicians
Membership
General
Membership
Ethics
Directory
Educators
Technicians
Suppliers
Manufactures
Facts/ Fiction
FAQ
MRI concerns
Your Thoughts
Trade Secrets
News &
Events
Information &
Legislation
Insurance
Message Board
Classified Ads
Links
Contact Us
Search
Home
Guest Book
AROUND THE WORLD
SPANISH
TRANSLATION
FRENCH
TRANSLATION
GERMAN
TRANSLATION
ITALIAN
TRANSLATION
PORTUGUESE
TRANSLATION
JAPANESE
TRANSLATION
KOREAN
TRANSLATION
CHINESE
TRANSLATION
| |

      
FACTS or FICTION:
This is an open forum for emails comments that benefit the
Permanent Makeup Society. These messages will be posted.
Don't let this happen in your state:
Oklahoma micro-pigmentation regulations can be found at:
www.health.state.us/program/prc/234micropigtext.pdf
Oklahoma regulations were initiated by a nurse whose motive was to decrease
competition. The committee consisted of 5 nurses, 3 doctors, 2 others. The
regulations violate amendments of the US Constitution. Not being able to
advertise permanent makeup services in this state without having OK
certification violates freedom of expression: speech and press. Tattoo shops
across the state line advertise in our phone books. Is it a form of
discrimination that they approve makeup tattooing but not body tattooing? They
have written in the rules that one cannot apply the numbing meds unless you are
a nurse or doctor. This makes it impossible for non--medical people to do the
procedures without a nurse standing by to apply tag or whatever is needed. They
have confused nursing with micro-pigmentation and are violating Inherent rights:
pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry. To
further demonstrate their confusion of nursing function and micro-pigmentation,
the OK nursing board has been given the power of serving as micro-pigmentation
police. A violation of their regulations first gets your nursing license
suspended, domino effect then gets your micro-pigmentation certification
suspended, then they can prosecute you at the county level. They have
administrative fines all along the way. A person could go bankrupt. Does this
violate the amendment of excessive fines - cruel and unusual punishment? The
fact that a physician must be present before, during, and after makes it seem
even more like a medical treatment, and shows little faith in micro-pigmentologists. Sure, there are some bad jobs out there, but the same can
be said about cosmetic surgery. It is up to the individual to carefully choose
who does the job. By the way, the worst permanent makeup job in town is done by
a surgeon.
The physicians are enjoying keeping control of this occupation and only allowing
it in their offices because 1) it gets their name out there more for advertising
purposes, 2) they get a cut of the money, and 3) it brings in the type of client
that spends money on cosmetic services - the client would be likely to use other
services at the office.
Body piercing is much more invasive, bloody, and has a much higher risk of
infection, but they do not care about that and do not want that in their office
because those clients are not in the age and income bracket targeted by their
services (also, just not "the type" of client wanted).
Sincerely,
Oklahoma Micropimentologist.
|