You are on page 1of 4

COMMENTARY

You Need to Cover Your Tattoos!:


Reconsidering Standards of Professional
Appearance in Social Work
D. J. Williams, Jeremy Thomas, and Candace Christensen

ocial work is committed to promoting cultural competence, celebrating human diversity,


and empowering clients. In this commentary,
we acknowledge these values and provide a brief summary of scholarly literature on body modication
practices to call attention to the need to rethink common standards of professional appearance, specically
with respect to workers who may have visible tattoos or piercings. As societal norms shift and new
knowledge develops, it is important that attitudes
and policies among social workers keep up with
such changes.

IMPORTANCE OF PROFESSIONAL APPEARANCE

Issues of professional appearance may be classied


under the private conduct heading of the ethical
responsibilities as professionals section of the NASW
(2008) Code of Ethics. In addition, the Council on
Social Work Education (CSWE, 2013) has drafted the
2015 Educational and Professional Accreditation Standards,
wherein the rst competency is identied as ethical
and professional behavior, including the subcompetency to demonstrate professional demeanor in
behavior and appearance ( p. 3). These ofcial designations clearly imply that professional appearance
remains an important issue in social work practice.
However, the question arises as to how social workers with tattoos and piercings (and perhaps other
modications) navigate these standards.
Kirst-Ashman and Hull (2015) suggested that if an
unconventional appearance (for example, colorful
hair or piercings) turns off your clients, colleagues,
and administration, then workers may wish to
forgo such bits of self-expression ( p. 419). At the
same time, it seems that a growing number of new
professional social workers complain that they are
required by their employers to cover any tattoos
or piercings. They frequently add that, from their

doi: 10.1093/sw/swu025

2014 National Association of Social Workers

perspectives, policies requiring such modications


to be covered are outdated and perhaps inconsistent
with social works own core values. This tension
seems to reect a major shift in popular interpretations and intentions concerning body modication
practices that has recently occurred within Western
society.
PREVALENCE AMONG AND DEMOGRAPHICS OF
PEOPLE WITH TATTOOS AND PIERCINGS

Over the past few decades, body modications such


as tattoos and piercings have become much more
prevalent (Braverman, 2012; Laumann & Derick,
2006; Stirn, 2003). In a recent Internet survey,
Harris Interactive, a marketing research rm, found
that 21 percent of American adults have a tattoo and
11 percent of American adults have a piercing not
located in the ear (Braverman, 2012). Laumann
and Derick (2006) reported percentages of 24
and 14 as prevalence rates for tattoos and piercings
(other than ear lobe) among American adults.
Tattoos are slightly more common among men
compared with women (Adams, 2009; Laumann
& Derick, 2006) or perhaps nearly equally prevalent
(Braverman, 2012). However, body piercings are
more common among women (Laumann & Derick,
2006). Studies of college students report prevalence
rates of piercings to be between 32 percent and 51
percent (Koch, Roberts, Armstrong, & Owen,
2010; Tate & Shelton, 2008). Tattoos are more common among a slightly older age group, particularly
among people in their late twenties and thirties.
Adams (2009) reported a national prevalence rate
of 35 percent for this age group.
Although white and African American adults
have approximately equal likelihoods of having a
tattoo or body piercing, Hispanic American adults
are signicantly more likely than both groups to

373

have a body modication (Braverman, 2012;


Laumann & Derick, 2006). Individuals with body
piercings seem to be less religious than the general
population but do not differ with respect to educational attainment and income level (Laumann &
Derick, 2006).
MOTIVATION: WHY DO PEOPLE GET
MODIFICATIONS?

Research has shown that there are diverse motivations for why people get tattoos and piercings
(Kang & Jones, 2007; Wohlrab, Stahl, & Kappeler,
2007). These motivations, with rare exception, are
personally meaningful to people who choose to
obtain modications, and are thus empowering
from a social work perspective. For example, increasing numbers of women obtain tattoos to negotiate their own unique expression of gender or to
symbolize resiliency in overcoming traumatic experiences, including disease or abuse (Kang & Jones,
2007). In a denitive review of the literature on
motivations for receiving tattoos and piercings,
Wohlrab et al. (2007) reported 10 frequently cited
general motivations. These are, in decsreasing order
of prevalence, (1) beauty, art, and fashion; (2) individuality; (3) personal narrative; (4) physical endurance;
(5) group afliation and commitment; (6) resistance;
(7) spirituality and cultural tradition; (8) addiction;
(9) sexual motivation; and (10) no specic reason.
More recent studies on motivation for modications
remain consistent with previous ndings (Antoszewski, Sitek, Fijalkowska, Kasielska, & Kruk-Jeromin,
2009; Stirn, Oddo, Peregrinova, Philipp, & Hinz,
2011; Tiggemann & Hopkins, 2011).
PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION TOWARD
PEOPLE WITH TATTOOS AND PIERCINGS

Research suggests that although the prevalence of


tattoos and piercings has increased rapidly and people have diverse motivations for receiving such
modications, these practices are often negatively
viewed by others and can lead to stigma and prejudice (for example, Fisher, 2002; Irwin, 2003;
Martin & Dula, 2010; Roberts, 2012). Interestingly,
the intensity of stigma and prejudice varies signicantly according to the specic type and placement
of a body modication (Irwin, 2003; Roberts,
2012; Swami et al., 2012). Perhaps not surprising,
new research shows that such stigma and prejudice
lead to workplace discriminatory effects, specically
related to potential employment and workplace

374

policies, practices, and promotions (Arndt &


Glassman, 2012; Miller, Nicols, & Eure, 2009;
Thomas et al., 2010; Wittmann-Price, Gittings, &
Collins, 2012).
WILL SOCIAL WORK LEAD OR FOLLOW?

The issue of visible tattoos and piercings being


restricted or allowed in the professional workplace,
including social work settings, is not going to go
awayresearch clearly shows an increased prevalence rate and diverse motivations for such practices. Although it remains important for workers
to try to be sensitive to the perceptions of others
who personally may not like such modications,
it is also important that expectations of professional
appearance are sufciently exible to avoid contradicting core values pertaining to human diversity,
cultural competence, and empowerment. It may
seem obviously unethical for workers to harbor
prejudice toward clients who may have tattoos or
piercings, but it is also unethical to do the same
toward coworkers.
Social work, like many professions, is facing, or
should directly face, this issue. Given that social
work is expressly committed to reducing prejudice,
marginalization, and oppression, we are in a position to lead in advocating for more exible workplace expectations and policies regarding professional
appearance. Indeed, if human diversity truly is an
important professional value, then it is time to model
this value across social work contexts and demonstrate
better consistency in practicing what we preach.
REFERENCES
Adams, J. (2009). Marked difference: Tattooing and its
association with deviance in the United States. Deviant
Behavior, 30, 266292.
Antoszewski, B., Sitek, A., Fijalkowska, M., Kasielska, A., &
Kruk-Jeromin, J. (2009). Tattooing and body piercing:
What motivates you to do it? International Journal of
Social Psychiatry, 56, 471479.
Arndt, A. D., & Glassman, M. (2012). What tattoos tell
customers about salespeople: The role of gender
norms. Marketing Management Journal, 22, 5065.
Braverman, S. (2012, February 23). One in ve U.S. adults
now has a tattoo. Harris Polls. Retrieved from http://www.
harrisinteractive.com/vault/Harris%20Poll%2022%20Tattoos?2.23.12.pdf
Council on Social Work Education. (2013). 2015 Educational
and professional accreditation standards. Alexandria, VA:
Author.
Fisher, J. A. (2002). Tattooing the body, marking culture.
Body & Society, 8, 91107.
Irwin, K. (2003). Saints and sinners: Elite tattoo collectors
and tattooists as positive and negative deviants. Sociological Spectrum, 23, 2757.
Kang, M., & Jones, K. (2007). Why do people get tattoos?
Contexts, 6(1), 4247.

Social Work Volume 59, Number 4 October 2014

Kirst-Ashman, K. K., & Hull, G. H. Jr. (2015). Generalist


practice with organizations and communities (6th ed.).
Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Koch, J. R., Roberts, A. E., Armstrong, M. L., & Owen,
D. C. (2010). Body art, deviance, and American
college students. Social Science Journal, 47, 151161.
Laumann, A. E., & Derick, A. J. (2006). Tattoos and body
piercings in the United States: A national data set.
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 55,
413421.
Martin, B. A., & Dula, C. S. (2010). More than skin deep:
Perceptions of, and stigma against, tattoos. College Student Journal, 44, 200206.
Miller, B. K., Nicols, K. M., & Eure, J. (2009). Body art in
the workplace: Piercing the prejudice. Personnel Review,
38, 621640.
National Association of Social Workers. (2008). Code of ethics
of the National Association of Social Workers. Washington,
DC: Author.
Roberts, D. J. (2012). Secret ink: Tattoos place in contemporary American culture. Journal of American Culture, 35, 153165.
Stirn, A. (2003). Body piercing: Medical consequences and
psychological motivations. Lancet, 361, 12051215.
Stirn, A., Oddo, S., Peregrinova, L., Philipp, S., & Hinz, A.
(2011). Motivations for body piercings and tattoos: The
role of sexual abuse and the frequency of body modications. Psychiatry Research, 190, 359363.
Swami, V., Stieger, S., Pietschnig, J., Voracek, M., Furnham,
A., & Tovee, M. J. (2012). The inuence of facial
piercings and observer personality on perceptions of
physical attractiveness and intelligence. European Psychologist, 17, 213221.
Tate, J. C., & Shelton, B. L. (2008). Personality correlates of
tattooing and body piercing in a college sample: The
kids are alright. Personality and Individual Differences, 45,
281285.
Thomas, C. M., Ehret, A., Ellis, B., Colon-Shoop, S.,
Linton, J., & Metz, S. (2010). Perception of nurse
caring, skills, and knowledge based on appearance.
Journal of Nursing Administration, 40, 489497.
Tiggeman, M., & Hopkins, L. A. (2011). Tattoos and
piercings: Bodily expressions of uniqueness? Body
Image, 8, 245250.
Wittmann-Price, R. A., Gittings, K. K., & Collins, K. M.
(2012). Nurses and body art: Whats your perception?
Nursing Management, 43, 4447.
Wohlrab, S., Stahl, J., & Kappeler, P. M. (2007). Modifying
the body: Motivations for getting tattooed and pierced.
Body Image, 4, 8795.

D. J. Williams, PhD, is director of social work, Sociology/


Social Work/Criminal Justice, Idaho State University,
Pocatello, and director of research, Center for Positive Sexuality,
Los Angeles. Jeremy Thomas, PhD, is assistant professor of
sociology, Sociology/Social Work/Criminal Justice, Idaho State
University, Pocatello. Candace Christensen, PhD, is assistant
professor, University of Texas at San Antonio. Address correspondence to D. J. Williams, Sociology/Social Work/Criminal
Justice, Idaho State University, Campus Box 8114, Pocatello,
ID 83209; e-mail: willdj@isu.edu.
Original manuscript received March 7, 2014
Final revision received July 8, 2014
Accepted April 4, 2014
Advance Access Publication July 24, 2014

Williams, Thomas, and Christensen / You Need to Cover Your Tattoos!

375

Copyright of Social Work is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

You might also like