baby ear piercing

[PumpkinPie]

I don''t consider it barbaric or child abuse - in many cultures it is the norm - but I personally would not be comfortable doing it if I had a daughter. My parents insisted I wait until I was 12 and I will probably do the same.

 

[E B]

Date: 4/15/2010 10:07:56 AM
Author: hawaiianorangetree
I honestly don''t like the look of a baby with their ears pierced, and i didn''t do it to my daughter, we waited until she asked. Having said that she has had her ears pierced twice now and both times we have had to let them close up due to infection. Maybe if i had had them done when she was an infant we wouldn''t have had that problem.

I don''t think age has anything to do with whether or not a piercing becomes infected, but someone correct me if I''m wrong.

 

[that_someone_special]

It doesn''t. It has more to do with how it was pierced (ahem, piercing gun- NOT STERILE!!) and how well it''s taken care of.

 

[packrat]

London doesn''t have hers done yet. She wants it done and has asked often, but she has to be old enough and responsible enough to take care of them herself. I can''t get her to clean her room w/out a fight, so no getting her ears done. I was in 3rd grade before mom allowed me to have it done. And this is how it went-mom bent down, finger in my face, mean mom look on her face and said "You''ll get your ears pierced. You will SIT there and you will not move. If I hear one PEEP out of you, you''ll leave with one ear pierced and a blistered butt" Dude, I didn''t even flinch.

I liked looking for earrings w/mom, it was fun and something we liked to do together. I felt like I was a "big" girl, getting to do things that women did.

 

[jaysonsmom]

Oh, and I wanted to add, we have baby ear-piercing earrings in the US, the "butterfly" in the back is like a mushroom cap, rounded, enclosed, so no snagging, accidental poking etc. Babies at 4 months don''t have the motor skills to play with their earlobes either, they can''t pick up small things like cheerios until about 5 months remember? taking care of my daughter''s newly pierced ears was a breeze, not horrific or barbaric at all I want to add.Please be more informed before making such comments. Even hospitals here provide the piercing service so that you don''t take a sewing needle and go at your baby''s ears!

 

[janinegirly]

I think in some cases it''s a cultural thing so not just about liking the "look".

I personally am not a fan, but that''s just me. But then I come from a family where my dad didn''t want me to pierce my ears ever and when my mom finally let me do it (aged 13) he was like "why would you want holes in your ears?". hehe

 

[lilyfoot]

I don''t think it''s inhumane, barbaric, or abuse of any sort.

I had my ears piereced when I was a baby, and as far as I know, there were/are no complications.

I''ve never given any thought to whether or not I would do this if I have a daughter .. Honestly, I''d probably be too paranoid that something would go wrong (I foresee myself being a very over-protective parent).

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

Date: 4/15/2010 10:12:16 AM
Author: E B

Date: 4/15/2010 10:07:56 AM
Author: hawaiianorangetree
I honestly don''t like the look of a baby with their ears pierced, and i didn''t do it to my daughter, we waited until she asked. Having said that she has had her ears pierced twice now and both times we have had to let them close up due to infection. Maybe if i had had them done when she was an infant we wouldn''t have had that problem.

I don''t think age has anything to do with whether or not a piercing becomes infected, but someone correct me if I''m wrong.

NO you are probably not wrong, but a 4 month olds ears would probably be alot easier to care for and keep clean than a 9 year old who likes to play in the sandpit everyday and get her extremely long hair caught around the back of the studs and then cries and carries on when you try and clean them.

 

[E B]

Date: 4/15/2010 10:17:13 AM
Author: jaysonsmom

Babies at 4 months don''t have the motor skills to play with their earlobes either, they can''t pick up small things like cheerios until about 5 months remember?

True. However, my 10-month-old has been able to grab at his ears for some time now, and everything goes in his mouth, so I can see it being a legitimate concern.

 

[that_someone_special]

Date: 4/15/2010 10:17:13 AM
Author: jaysonsmom
Oh, and I wanted to add, we have baby ear-piercing earrings in the US, the ''butterfly'' in the back is like a mushroom cap, rounded, enclosed, so no snagging, accidental poking etc. Babies at 4 months don''t have the motor skills to play with their earlobes either, they can''t pick up small things like cheerios until about 5 months remember? taking care of my daughter''s newly pierced ears was a breeze, not horrific or barbaric at all I want to add.Please be more informed before making such comments. Even hospitals here provide the piercing service so that you don''t take a sewing needle and go at your baby''s ears!

I''m not surprised (though, I''ve never heard of hospitals offering that...)

I''m sorry, but again, a doctor should be doing "doctor things" not piercing ears. A reputable piercer (they actually go through a ton of training/ an apprenticeship/ including being a member of the A.P.P) should be the one doing it. With a piercing needle. But, then again, I don''t know of a single reputable piercer that will pierce children.

 

[geckodani]

A lot of times piercing studs aren''t solid metal. In my case, both times I had my ears pierced I had to take out the piercing studs and put in solid gold studs. The minute I switched, infection went away.

 

[that_someone_special]

Also, the studs that are used are blunt. They literally tear your skin open, where a piercing needle is a clean cut.

Don''t get me wrong, when I was in 3rd grade I got my ears gun pierced (and since then, I''ve had a total of 14 piercings, with 2 more on their way soon). In general, I think people believe it''s safe to get it done with a gun, in a mall, by some teenager because so many people do it that way.

 

[steph72276]

Date: 4/15/2010 9:28:16 AM
Author: Circe
I don''t think it''s barbaric, but I do think it''s more fun to do it once the piercee is conscious of it and can have fun choosing earrings, feeling fancy, etc. - I got mine pierced at 9 after weeks of begging, and I really appreciated it more than a baby-me could have, I think!

Ditto! I don''t have a problem with it, but if I had a daughter I would want to wait till an important birthday (13th maybe?) to have a fun mother/daughter bonding experience!

 

[vintagelover229]

Date: 4/15/2010 9:07:41 AM
Author: Cehrabehra

Date: 4/15/2010 9:00:34 AM

Author: PinkAsscher678

I don't have a problem with it really, but for my daughter I'm choosing not to. IMO it's one more thing to clean, one more thing for her to grab at, maybe a choking hazard, risk of infection, you get the idea. I'm not crazy with how pierced ears look on babies either, but that's just a matter of taste.



My view is, they are her ears, not mine. When and if she wants them pierced, I will be more than happy to take her, but it's her decision to make. Simple as that!

not to start an entirely different debate... but I have seen people use this argument for not getting their daughter's ears done and then go and circumcise their boys. I did the opposite - pierced the girl and left the boys intact!

On the verge of TMI I have to agree w you PA. When I saw my first (and only) boy that had been "left alone" I looked

and his reply "yup I'm ALL NATURAL" and I couldn't help but be fascinated by it! It's funny this topic has come up because I had this conversation with my bf just the other day what he thinks of baby girls w/ pierced ears. He is totally okay with it! Thankfully! I have seen babies with cute little sapphire or diamond studs and it's just darling! It heels faster, you don't have to do though the, I want my ears pierced but when they get there they cry and change their mind, then go back and fourth, and deal with making sure they clean them, etc. It's much easier to do it when they are a baby. I see this as being less painful than cutting the extra skin off a baby boys you know what. Not saying I'm not going to do it, but, calling it barbaric is kinda harsh IMO.

The wonderful thing about it is...if it's your kid...you get to choose! Doesn't matter if someone else thinks it's a good idea or not. So, my darling daughter that will someday be born will have pretty little studs in her baby pics

 

[Laila619]

I think the kid should be given a choice on what happens to her own body. Not every girl automatically wants pierced ears just because they are born female.

 

[Brown.Eyed.Girl]

I''m one who had it done as a baby (less than a year old) and I''m honestly really glad my mom had my ears pierced then. They''re perfectly placed (more so than my second set which I got done when I was in 8th grade), and I didn''t have to worry about keeping it clean, didn''t suffer through infections (because my mom took super good care of them), and honestly, I think it''s a personal choice. I''m definitely biased, but I really don''t see what the big deal is if some mothers want to get their babies'' ears pierced early. Definitely not barbaric IMO but, again, personal preference. Live and let live - if you don''t feel comfortable doing it, don''t.

And tattooing definitely does not equate to piercing.

 

[rierie26]

I wouldn''t call it "barbaric." In fact that''s a pretty harsh statement considering a lot of cultures have their daughters'' ears pierced at a young age.

I had mine done at 18 months and since I can''t remember getting it done, I guess it hasn''t traumatized me in any way, shape or form. Mine were pierced using a needle (at a licensed piercing place), if I have daughters, I''d get their ears pierced (with a needle) around the same time as well.

As to piercing being the same as getting a tattoo, they really aren''t. I have both (piercings not just in my ears). A tattoo is a much more permanent and scarring thing than getting something pierced. Simple piercings can close with no problems and I liken the experience of piercing to getting a vaccination. The pain is similar or even less.

 

[hisdiamondgirl]

Date: 4/15/2010 9:27:16 AM
Author: swedish bean
I also wouldn''t tattoo and infant... so.... that about sums it up for me!

Please. This is a ridiculous comparison, come on. Really?!

 

[elrohwen]

My PSA of the day is to get your kids'' pierced by a professional piercer. Yep, that''s right, at a tatoo/piercing parlor. I know the mall seems safer and friendlier, but those piercing guns are the devil. They just rip a hole in the ear and they''re operated by 18 year olds with no training (and no autoclaving equipment). A professional piercer will have immaculately clean equipment and will use a really sharp needle (and place the holes in the right place). I have quite a few holes in my ears and the only ones that ever got infected or gave me a problem were the ones done at Claire''s.

Ok, PSA over

 

[that_someone_special]

I''ll say it again, tattooing is a body modification. So is piercing and scarification.

So you would pierce your child but you won''t scar them or tattoo them? Why? How is one more or less "barbaric" than the other? All 3 modify the body, all 3 cause pain and all three have a level of permanence.

I really think that any modifications that are made to someones body (unless health related) are up to that sole individual. But, that''s another discussion. There seems to be several arguments here.

 

[that_someone_special]

Date: 4/15/2010 11:04:26 AM
Author: hisdiamondgirl

Date: 4/15/2010 9:27:16 AM

Author: swedish bean

I also wouldn''t tattoo and infant... so.... that about sums it up for me!

Please. This is a ridiculous comparison, come on. Really?!

Really.

 

[hisdiamondgirl]

Date: 4/15/2010 11:06:16 AM
Author: swedish bean

Date: 4/15/2010 11:04:26 AM
Author: hisdiamondgirl

Date: 4/15/2010 9:27:16 AM

Author: swedish bean

I also wouldn''t tattoo and infant... so.... that about sums it up for me!

Please. This is a ridiculous comparison, come on. Really?!

Really.

 

[that_someone_special]

If you can''t see parallels between piercing and tattooing, there is really nothing I can say that will help you understand how I feel about this subject.

 

[RaiKai]

I don''t see it as barbaric...as others have said it also has cultural implications....but I don''t like the idea and would not do it.

I see non-medically-necessary body modifications as something someone should elect for themselves. This comes from someone who has pierced ears, a bellybutton piercing, and two tattoos. A baby does not have this freedom of choice and not everyone likes having piercings (I have met a few of them in life!). Even if they remove the earrings later, there is still going to be at least a tiny scar there (maybe a more noticeable one if there are complications). As some others have mentioned circumcision...I will say I feel the same way about circumcision (so does DH though he is himself circumcised) - we don''t have children of either gender yet, but we have discussed these sorts of issues quite thoroughly.

For the record, I got my ears pierced when I was 10. I wanted them done earlier but my mum made me wait until I was 10....I did not find it traumatic AT all. It was quick and painless and done within seconds. Plus it was a fun memory to have of just me and my mum (my mum was far more uncomfortable with it than I was!). Better than the potato and pin option some of my friends took when they were not allowed to pierce theirs!

My brother and sister had theirs done when they are 7 & 5 (I remember being a little bit ticked I had to wait until I was 10!). My mother did not get hers done until she was in her early 40''s!

 

[Guilty Pleasure]

Pros

1. baby can''t remember pain
2. baby is not afraid of needles, so very little "anxiety" compared to that of an adult
3. baby is not in charge of cleaning own ears; much less likely to get infected than if a ten year old is responsible for the proper care and cleaning.


Cons

1. What is that baby doing with earrings? Is she in a beauty pageant?




Personally, I will not be piercing my baby''s ears (when I have one). I don''t have a problem with other people doing it according to their own culture, but I find the idea of a baby wearing earrings about as ridiculous as if she were also wearing makeup. I never thought about it, but I like the point that someone else brought up: It is elective body mutilation, and only that person should have the choice of doing it to herself.

 

[E B]

Date: 4/15/2010 10:20:40 AM
Author: hawaiianorangetree

NO you are probably not wrong, but a 4 month olds ears would probably be alot easier to care for and keep clean than a 9 year old who likes to play in the sandpit everyday and get her extremely long hair caught around the back of the studs and then cries and carries on when you try and clean them.

I can't say that I agree. I can't imagine my son sitting still while I clean a very *tender* area near his head. The nine year old might whine more, but at least she can understand what I need to help her with.

Piercings are a responsibility, and if wearing her hair in a ponytail and keeping her head sand-free is what it takes to avoid infection during the healing process, that's what she'll (my hypothetical daughter, that is) need to do.

 

[LadyBlue]

I had my ears piereced when I was a baby, and If a have a baby girl, she is going to have her ears pierced as well

 

[Hudson_Hawk]

Date: 4/15/2010 11:14:30 AM
Author: swedish bean
If you can''t see parallels between piercing and tattooing, there is really nothing I can say that will help you understand how I feel about this subject.

That''s fine. It''s OK to feel the way you do. Just like it''s OK for the rest of us to feel the way we do. We can agree to disagree on the subject.

 

[that_someone_special]

Yeah, I will agree to that.

Aside from my personal beliefs, if anyone IS planning on doing it, I strongly urge going through the proper precautions and channels to get it done right. I think that is probably more important than anything.

 

[swingirl]

Date: 4/15/2010 11:05:35 AM
Author: swedish bean
I''ll say it again, tattooing is a body modification. So is piercing and scarification.

So you would pierce your child but you won''t scar them or tattoo them? Why? How is one more or less ''barbaric'' than the other? All 3 modify the body, all 3 cause pain and all three have a level of permanence.

I really think that any modifications that are made to someones body (unless health related) are up to that sole individual. But, that''s another discussion. There seems to be several arguments here.

Very true. Circumcision fits in there too. Can''t be reversed. Done on someone without their permission.

What is the harm in letting the person make their own choice? Female does not equal pierced ears. Although the holes may close up somewhat the scars are there forever.