to not let my dd have her ears pearced

[libbylobs]

my dd has come home from a playdate, and now wants her ears pearced, she is only 6 and i think its to young ., what do you think? x

16 as a minimum!

Claires probably do them both at the same time to avoid having to rugby tackle and pin down toddlers to do the second ear when they realise it bloody hurts! I would imagine they put some kind of mark on the earlobes to make sure thry're even?

it seems like im a chav then!
im black caribbean and in our culture, its the norm to get your babies/toddlers ears pierced. Friends of mine who are Indian and Italian also say the same applies with their culture.
So if you are not comfortable YANBU

Claires mark the ears, the mom gets to look at the marking before the piercing and then two separate employees will do each ear, clicking on the 'gun' at the same time. They give plenty of advise on the cleaning, and provide a large bottle of cleaning solution also. They also use sterile earings, and gloves.

It only truly painful for a few minutes, my DDs described a 'hot'/tender feeling (as opposed to painful feeling) for maybe a few hours. My two girls has got over the pain by time we were leaving the shop. But both had tears in their eyes when the piercing happened, even thought they knew it was going to hurt, it hurt more than they were expecting.

You are the parent, you think it is too young so stick with your decision. There will be endless calls from now on to allow her to do whatever her friends are doing - are you going to give in to all of them? Start now by making your decisions for your own dd, not going along with the decisions other parents make for theirs. Just say 'no - pierced ears are for grown ups, it's something to look foward to when you're older - and that's the end of it'

Personally I would say 'no', too - no reason for small children to be piercing holes in themselves for the sole purpose of how they look - especially when earrings are generally an adult look. But that's my perspective...everyone can make their own decision.

Not getting it done due to sports, care issues, etc. is a very good reason.

I was 12 when I was allowed mine done and on reflection, this is an entirely sensible age! I was able to clean them properly and look after them without my Mum having to bother to check to much. Any younger is entirely unecessary really.

My mum didn't want me to get any more done but when I was at uni I got an additional 3 holes put in one ear.. finished now though I promise.

People who pierce the ears of babies/toddlers are stupid and common and should be prosecuted for child abuse.

that comment makes YOU sound stupid. As well as snobby.. stuck up.. yeh i could go on

Why is piercing holes in babies and toddlers ears not classed as child abuse though ? They can't express a desire to have it done can they, it is damaging a perfect child, it hurts and it is a risk.

I feel a bit of a hypocrite, as I have 4 earrings in each ear and a nose ring, but 7yo DD has been told she has to wait until she's 11 or so.

child abuse?? really? with all the disgusting, evil, sick things some people do to kids, you want to class ear peircing along with that? it hurts for a moment, but then its over with. I do understand some people saying wait until the child is older. But each to their own

Worzsel - if you follow that line of reasoning through, then giving children vaccine jabs is also child abuse - it hurts, it's sticking metal sharp things in them, they can't express a desire to have it done and there is a risk - probably similar level to having ears pierced. Can't see anyone agreeing that vaccination qualifies as child abuse though...

Of course I pierced my own DDs ears who better to do it than their Mam I wanted it done right. Who do you think used to pierce bairns ears before they had those gun things

Yes but the 'gun things' are quick, fast and instant and would have stopped your poor child from (as you put it yourself) "screaming the house down" and shouting stop Mammy' then 'no Mammy I wants them' then 'stop Mammy

Thumbwitch - How can you say that if you follow the 'child abuse' line of reasoning, that routine vaccinations would also be 'child abuse'?? Vaccinations are done for an obvious and proven health benefit for the baby (and the larger society). (Not remotely interested in starting a vax-denyers argument here, btw.) Piercing a baby or todder's ears carries no health benefit - quite the reverse, going by some of the anecdotes on this thread - and is done because the parents seem to think that their lovely baby would look even better with some holes and tat stuck in their pretty ears.

I was following Worszel's line of reasoning.

I dont get how people think its only us commoners do it. I live on a council estate and had never got my older 2 dd's done till they were 6. They go to a school outside the catchment area. Its very hard to get into the school as the catchment area is small and includes half a private estate and a newbuild luxuary estate with houses rainging from 250K to 500K. Quite a bit up North. They never asked for them done until all the 'posh' kids started getting theirs done. I dont agree with it but to say its child abuse is harsh. It somewhat disminishes what i would class as child abuse

I was 6 or 7 I think (so 30+ years ago). It was unusual not to have pierced ears by about 10. I think if I had a dd I'd say 10, simply because she'd be less likely to tear her ear playing.

It's entirely up to the parents before a child is about 12. But insisting they wait until 13 (or 16 ffs!) is just plain mean.

I'm struggling with the 'child abuse' thing because it's not my 'usual' idea of abuse...and I'd hate ear piercing to be likened to some of the horrific abuse some poor kids/babies have to go through.

But having said that, a parent who puts holes in their children so they can decorate them without the child/babies wish to have it done...well I'm struggling to see how that's not abusive if I'm perfectly honest.

I wouldn't decorate a baby with make up and that washes off. So I wouldn't put holes in them either.

Blimey, this is hideously sexist of me but I'd be apprehensive about ds getting his done before 10 - on the assumption that he's more likely to get into scraps at school than my phantom dd

Not that he's asked.

I think 13 is about right, but I honestly hope any DD of mine never wants it done - I wouldn't know where to start with looking after them as I never had mine done and the only jewellry I can stand to wear is a watch (hate fiddling with sharp bits of metal!!)

I went through a (very short) phase as a youngster of wanting it done because my BFF had hers done, and my mum said "wait til you're 13" - she also never had hers done, so it's sort of a family tradition. By the time I was 13 every girl in the class had it done and I wanted to be different :)

Personally, I dont like to see earings on young children, but thats just my preference and its none of my business what other people decide to do with their kids.
For me, I think that earings go along with makeup and heels - as my DD gradually becomes image concious and begins to take notice of her clothes/shoes/makeup/hair etc etc (and of course boys) that will be the time for her to get her ears pierced.
She has already asked several times, but she's only 5 and I've told her she can have them done when she's 16 and not before. I plan to relent in the summer holidays before she starts high school to give them plenty of time to heal without having to be removed for PE etc, thus sparing me incessant wittering in the months leading up to the event.