Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be upset that 'Claire's' pierce babies ears...

150 replies

ConstantlyFrazzled · 01/02/2012 14:53

.... right in the main window for everyone to see... Sad

I hate to think of little babies having painful things done to them that they have not consented to, need or asked for. I know ear piercing isn't the end of the world, but I was really upset to see a baby today sitting on her mother's lap being held still, about to be 'pierced' for the sake of 'beauty'. Seconds later the baby did of course scream out in pain and cry, and I have to admit I felt extremely angry and upset for her sake Sad.

Am I being unreasonable to think that a child should be old enough to consent to have their ears pierced or is it right to allow parents to make this decision?

I would like to see 'Claire's' setting a minimum age for ear piercing - am I being unreasonable to suggest that?

OP posts:
gourd · 01/02/2012 15:16

It is a type of mutilation, in that it's causing a wound (albeit with a small health risk) and altering the natural state of the body (more or less permanently) and is not done for any medical reason. It is not dissimilar to having a tattoo or having cosmetic surgery, although it is less invasive than either of them and carries a lower associated health risk. I have my ears and navel pierced (and also have a tattoo) and so I am prepared that my child may ask me if she can have piercings done, as she sees mine every day, but I wont allow it until she's a teenager and can take some responsibility for it (and I know she may go and get it done anyway at that point regardless of anything I say) although I also know that until she is 16 the adult responsibility for this action is still with me. I would and could not have a baby's ears or anywhere else pierced though. To me, this is a procedure that causes some pain and leaves a wound and is more or less a permanent alteration of the body done for no medical reason. However in the grand scheme of things it is relatively minor so it doesn?t bother me as much as much more awful things people might do to their children, but I do understand why many think there should be a minimum age requirement for piercings as there is with tattoos. I am leaning towards thinking this myself and many piercing places already do have a minimum age requirement.

FutureNannyOgg · 01/02/2012 15:17

Craic, they aren't using "clean" instruments, and their aftercare advice is dodgy too.
www.homiegfunk.com/gunssuck.htm

olgaga · 01/02/2012 15:18

It's not just the pain either, if it's done with a gun it makes a very sudden loud noise in your ear - and a baby's hearing is very sensitive.

I think it's horrible - why not let the child decide when she's older?

RitaMorgan · 01/02/2012 15:19

You're right LyingWitch, people hurting their babies shouldn't bother anyone else. It's their baby, they can do what they like to it.

Kayano · 01/02/2012 15:21

I had mine done at 4

Thank god I did because I developed severe needle phobia at 7 lol but
My ears look fabulous Grin

LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726 · 01/02/2012 15:24

RitaMorgan... What's the point in wailing about it on a chatboard. Do something about it if it bothers you.

The law needs to be changed; there are laws being transposed into being all the time. If this is something that truly bothers people - and perhaps it should - then it needs teeth to get it made illegal.

The people who will do this to their babies/young children won't be swayed by what somebody rails about on a chatboard.

TheCraicDealer · 01/02/2012 15:27

:O that's pretty fucking shocking Ogg! You'd think that a company as big as that might look to find the most hygienic way to do it.

(also now slightly concerned I may have hepatitis or one of the other nasties from your link!)

NellieForbush · 01/02/2012 15:27

What about 'honour' killing agincourt? Do we have to respect that as well?

ArielNonBio · 01/02/2012 15:28

Why is "cultural reasons" an excuse for everything? Look at the reponse on MN to circumcision.

I hate seeing babies and small children with pierced ears. Yes, it's nothing to do with me and yes it may be cultural, but so what?

Kendodd · 01/02/2012 15:28

YANBU

I am going to email Claire's right now and ask what their policy is on this and if they can change it. We should have a legal minimum age on this. Also if we did it would stop my children badgering to have their ears pierced while young.

The poster up thread who talked about torturing babies was spot on imo.

Agincourt · 01/02/2012 15:31

I agree LyingWitchInTheWardrobe, what you need is a placard and get yourself outside claires

usualsuspect · 01/02/2012 15:32

who cares

SirSugar · 01/02/2012 15:36

YABU for going into a Claires Accessories in the first place. What would anyone need from the piles of shite stuff they peddle in there?

floralsanddresses · 01/02/2012 15:40

I don't like it. I wouldn't put my child through unnecessary pain. I was allowed my ears pierced at 12 when I could take care of them myself but I had such a phobia of pain I waited until I was 15. Five piercings and two tattoos later...

My issue with Claire's is that the staff aren't trained piercers and use a gun for ears and nose. If my child wanted a piercing under the legal age to do it without parental consent they'd have it at a proper piercing place with a needle.

hackmum · 01/02/2012 15:43

Half-wishing I hadn't read that link. DD begged and begged to have her ears pierced, and of course one of them got badly infected afterwards and she was in agony. I assumed the gun method was OK - I had mine done with a needle years ago and it was quite painful.

Just to put the other point of view on this: I remember mentioning to an Indian friend of mine about DD's infection, and she said, "That's why it's better to get them pierced when they're babies, because then they can't play with the earrings and get an infection."

MidsomerM · 01/02/2012 15:45

I think it's abuse, "cultural" or otherwise. Deliberately inflicting pain and injury on a baby for no established medical reason is abuse. And I also think it looks horrible. I find it impossible to look at a baby with ear studs without imagining how much they must have cried when it was done. Horrible.

NormanTebbit · 01/02/2012 15:47

Bollocks to 'culture'

No it shouldn't be allowed. There should be an upper age limit.

'Culture'...

queenebay · 01/02/2012 15:51

Its one of those debates again which no one will ever agree on . I however think there should be a legal age limit for piercing too . I was in Claires once and i heard a woman saying come here ya wee poof. And this poor boy practically getting held down screaming, kicking etc as they pierced his ear. Clearly he didnt want his ears pierced!

leddeeburdee · 01/02/2012 15:51

YANBU - I saw someone doing it to a toddler when I was walking past s Claire's once. The screams and watching her being pinned down by both parents to have the second one were horrific.

Feminine · 01/02/2012 15:52

Its popular for babies to have them done here (US )

The doctor can do it.

You can also get it done in Wal-mart, two assistants do it at once.

For some completely unknown reason, my DH decided to get his done ...he said it was like an electric shock going through him!

he has now removed them Wink

coraltoes · 01/02/2012 15:53

Um, somehow you seem shocked Claire's are tacky....

redridingwolf · 01/02/2012 15:53

YANBU. I don't think anyone under 16 should be able to have their ears pierced.

rootietootie · 01/02/2012 15:53

Personally I dont think its that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. My son asked when he was 4 if he could have his ear pierced. I explained how it was done and he said he accepted this. I took him and he had it done. He didn't so much as have a wobbly lip, although even i'll admit I was highly surprised at this at his age. He wore it for a year then decided he did not want it any more so I took it out, and obviously his hole closed up. You wouldn't even know he'd had his ear pierced now (that was 7 years ago).

lashingsofbingeinghere · 01/02/2012 15:56

Culture should never be an excuse for cruel behaviour. Sticking a sharp object through a baby's earlobe would be called abuse in any other context. Excusing it on the grounds of "cultural identity" does not make it any more acceptable or palatable.

In this country it used to be culturally acceptable:

to hit children with a cane
for husbands to beat their wives
to hang murderers.

Times change. Find a kinder way to assert cultural identity. Stick on studs for example until the child is old enough to decide for themselves whether they want pierced ears.

Haziedoll · 01/02/2012 15:58

Yanbu.

I don't understand why they do it.