Treatments on children

[williams1862]

Just interested on where people draw the line regarding children, we have been approached today by a mum who wants us to do gelish fingers and toes and a spray tan on her nine year old and last week we had another mum who wanted us to wax her 13 year old daughters eyebrows, the questions are
1 would you perform the treatment
2 if not what reason would you give
:Love:

 

[Beauty_Geek]

I had a mum booked in for a facial and her daughter booked in for an eyebrow shape by my college a couple of weeks ago. The daughter was only 12. I did them as it was 2 of the topics I needed for my assessments. I was happy doing the eyebrows as her eyebrows were very heavy and made her look lovely after. You know what children can be like. But I walked past a salon the other day who were advertising specifically for children's nails. Believe it was something along the lines of rock stars for £10 but only for children. I was disgusted but my boyfriend pointed out its easier and cheaper than a babysitter... It's difficult as I wouldn't want my daughter growing up too quickly but want her to feel like a princess if it was for a special occasion. I didn't even know what gels and fake tan were when I was 9 so would probably have been just as thrilled with a lovely polish done either in a salon or by my mum... X

Sorry for essay!! X

 

[KimMarie]

I personally wouldn't mind doing a child's nails, I was painting my own at quite a young age nor would I mind waxing the 13 year old eyebrows (although I don't do it so not a clue about it )
As for the tanning I think nine is a tad young but if the mother is alright then I don't see why now (again not trained in that so not a clue lol)

Hope this helps

XoX

 

[pure]

First you would need to check with ŷour insurers, they may have a minimum age allowable. After that its down to your personal preference. Always get the parent to sign to record card and ensure that both parties know exactly what is involved with the treatment and a parent has to remain present throughout the treatment also.

 

[sarah123110]

I have been asked recently for gel polish on a 5 year old. I refused and explained that if the gel polish was picked off it would damage the nails. I have also refused a spray tan on a 9 year old.

I have waxed my 12 year old nieces legs as she was starting high school & very embarrassed by them.

I also paint young girls nails. I have also preformed a mini facial on 13 year olds.

My personal opinion which may be right or wrong is that certain treatments such as nail painting with polish is fine on young girls but most treatments I would only do on teens with mums permission.

Sent from my GT-S5360 using SalonGeek

 

[McBeth]

I have a 13 year old daughter, and she has her eyebrows waxed every 3-4 weeks, but no other type of waxing at this stage.
As far as the tans and gel polish, are they pageant girls it seems a little over the top, I myself would say no, and would use my insurance as the reason, for example, my insurance will not cover me for treatments on children under a certain age, but a simple polish I would do for sure.

 

[gems-gem's]

I wouldn't. Def not a tan def not a gel polish. Bet then that's more than I personally feel its wrong at that age. Teenagers are a different kettle of fish especially regarding things like waxing as that is more grooming than vanity at that point. Good point regarding check with insurer as of course we need parent permission and presence bit some may have min age. X

 

[cloughers]

I have done my 3 year olds nails with Gelish but didn't buff or file the nail. She always wants me to do her nails and obviously she wipes varnish off before it dries. To be honest the Gelish just peeled off some nails the next day as I didn't prep properly so not much point doing it. I wouldn't do other children's nails unless they were at least 14 and their Mum was there.

 

[geeg]

I don't think our own personal preferences for our children should make any difference .... It's not up to us to judge what other parents think is suitable for their children.

If I am insured to do treatments for nails on children, with parents consent, then I will do them. Nothing I do poses any threat to a child or the health of their nails, so why wouldn't I do them? Whether I personally think it is suitable or not at a young age doesn't come into it.

 

[Wooshka]

I have to agree with Geeg here, as long as your insurer says it's ok then why not do it.

So, first point of call is making a call to your insurer if you don't have these details on your policy.

How many times have we done a set of nails that we personally would never wear or like?? but we still do them, this is the same thing because it isn't our place to tell another parent, how to parent. Our job is to offer a service that is insured and then applied correctly according to manufacturers instructions and if we do this, then we know we are offering a safe service that no matter the clients age, will not affect them and if it does, we and them are covered by insurance.

If your insurance does not allow it, then this is what you tell the client, end of story, full stop. You should never perform a service on anybody if not covered by insurance.

 

[*Carly*]

I'm really curious as to what the different insurance companies say.

When I trained in hairdressing, my boss did kids parties. I'd paint little girls nails with varnish and do a bit of make up, I used lots of glitter and tried to keep it more play time, depending on age. The ages varied from 6 to 14 and they were mostly very good, sat still and were careful not to smudge, bless.

Once, one of the mums asked me to put some make up on her baby. This poor kid couldn't have been more than 12 months at a push. I really didn't want to, it's a baby and they are more prone to sensitivities, plus that is all kinds of ick in my mind. My boss told me to do it (I was only a kid myself and didn't stand up to him) and I did the bare minimum, tiny bit of blush and tiny bit of lip colour, if I recall. 14 years later I'm actually still haunted by it *shudders*

Some things are age appropriate and some are not. Regardless, If that baby ended up with some allergic reaction I'm pretty positive we wouldn't have been covered.