Sorry earpiercing again

[sue52]

DD2 aged 14 wants her ears pierced. I have always said not till 16 (when DD1 had hers done) but her constant moaning about it is grinding me down. In other ways I am a fairly indulgent parent and her wardrobe is stocked with Top Shop and Jack Wills clothes but I've always stuck to my guns on this one. Am I being unreasonable and Victorian as DD says or should I make her wait as I did with her sister. If most replies side with DD, I shall let her win this one.

Let her have it done.

I think 14 is reasonale BUT you have said she has to wait 2 more years

it is how you can back down and save face

it has to be contingent on this being a one off on backing down and not setting a pattern for every age limited request in teh futuyre

I think 14 is generally old enough to appreciate the consequences and be able to look after her ears (and be fully informed of the pain)

but you are the one who knows your daughter - do you think the same?

I would let her. My parents were very strict and I was one of the last of my friends to have them done but I only had to wait until I was 14. I had them done on my 14th bday, wore them for about 6 weeks and they've never been back in. I hated the pointlessness of not being allowed them. Its not like having a tatoo on your face.

I think you should let her have it done. I had mine done for the first time at 11 so thats the age I have said DD1 needs to be to get hers done. At 14 she is old enough to know it will really hurt and to keep them clean etc.

what does DD1 think and how old is she now? would DD2 use it as one-upmanship?

I am still resentful of the fact that I had to wait till 16 but my Dsis had hers done at the same time - she was 11 !!!! So not fair!!

just let her....

Oh lordy, she's 14, let her have it done.

(I'd let her do it on condition I didn't have to waste my money on any more jack wills. A good deal )

Personally I'd make her wait til 16 but only because her sister had to wait.
It would be unfair to have one rule for one and not the other IYSWIM.

On the other hand if big sis is old enough not to take a resentment to it and you feel she is responsible enough then let her have it done.

I'd say let her

I had to wait till 16 too. The last 5 years went veeeeeeeery slowly

possibly as a reaction to that I let ds get his done at 12

surely the first rule of parenting is to treat your DC both the same? DD2 should be perfectly able to understand that, plain and simple. ask her how she would feel if DD1 had hers done at 14 and you had decided that was too early and DD2 should wait till 16

then hear her cries of "its not fair"

unless the older DD is an adult and couldnt care less, then this will open a whole can of worms/rivalry/jealousy/resentment

oh I see. You made dd1 wait. Bad move.

I would admit I'd made the wrong decision re dd1, let dd2 have her ears done and treat dd1 to a new top.

But isn't it standard for the younger child to have more freedoms than the older one? As an older sister myself I would be have been philosophical about this.

I think 14 is old enough. I got my ears pierced when I was 13 and I think I was one of the last of my peer group, except for those who never wanted to.

If you let DD2 have them done now, then DD1 will hold it against you. You have the perfect excuse, she has to wait until she is the same age her sister was.

no, I'd treat dd1 to a nice pair of ear rings

I'd say 14 was old enough, in that the September after I turned 14 every girl in my school year seemed to turn up with newly-pierced ears.

Tricky though, having made her sister wait to 16. I'd still be inclined to let her. Isn't this standard stuff? Second child gets something older child didn't, thus giving older child something to gripe about?

i had mine pierced at 5!! but i would say make her wait, as you did with the elder of the two. my DH says our DD isnt allowed hers done til shes 16 but im a little more lenient

My older sisters weren't allowed theirs done until after they left home. Supposedly the same rules applied to me. When I was 14 I did them myself with a sewing needle. Now of course I was far naughtier and sillier than your DD, but in my case I think it would have been better if my parents had just agreed to let me have it done properly in the first place!

I would make her wait. But maybe that's just me. I suppose you might ask yourself why you made DD1 wait? Do the same reasons still apply? What is the school's attitude to pierced ears? (Most schools locally do not allow any jewellery at all, even studs/sleepers) would that have any bearing on it? How would DD1 feel if you were to agree to DD2 having it done now? Would she feel hard done by? I do think there is a lot to be said for waiting for some things. How would she react if you agreed she could have it done just before her 16th birthday so that she could choose some lovely earrings to wear on her birthday?

DD1 is now 26 and has left home, however she is still capable of sulking if she thinks DD2 has been allowed to get away with something she wasn't. I suppose I made DD1 wait because not many of her friends had them, now according to DD2, all teenagers have them .

16 is OLD. I'm surprised your DD hasn't just gone and had them done.

If DD! is 26 just let DD2 have them done. 14 is old enough to realise it will hurt and that she needs to look after them

My DD1's best friend has had his ear pierced and he is only 8yrs old.
I can't stand the fashion of single earrings for boys, it's so....Gypsy?

Yes, I'd let her - nothing is set in stone. I'd always been told 16, but when I got my first job at 15 I went into town with my wages and got them done anyway - and I was the least rebellious teenager ever!

I got mine done at 14 and then I remember my younger sis getting them done at 12.
I would let her get them done too. I will be making my dds wait til they are about 14 i think, haven't really thought about it as they are only 4 and 5.

My younger brother's dd2 has just got hers done at 6 years old - MUCH too young, i reckon it looks a bit chavy (sp?) at that age.