Tatoos suck.
Bullock sucks.
James sucks.
Start a vacuum cleaning service.
Kid reports to foster home.
Janine was a LOT more attractive pre-tattooing.
Sandra Bullock has ZERO legal standing in this issue no matter what state the argument is being heard in.
She is by blood unrelated to the child and only married to the Father; that gives her ZERO rights with the child.
Very misleading headline.
What do you have against Sandra?
When I see tattoos like that on an otherwise serviceable woman I like to think they are faux tattoos. But probably not. Is there some limit to the amount of ink you can carry in your skin before it becomes unhealthy? I realize that tattoos are often part of a self-mutilation behavior which is linked to some serious psychiatric and behavioral problems, but is there an “ink load” limit that has been determined?