to pierce an 8 week old babies ears???
(I just said it was barbaric on another askers question and I can't tell you the abuse that I've got over email by mothers!!! Bloody hell..... they are still going for me!)
2006-10-13 04:50:44 · 36 answers · asked by James M 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
I'm not a parent... but it just doesn't sound right to me.
2006-10-13 04:55:54 · update #1
I agree with you,why put a baby through the pain for the sake of it. whats the harm in waiting until they are old enough to make their own mind up.
2006-10-13 04:53:54 · answer #1 · answered by fairyb04 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't call it barbaric. If the babies ears are aneastatized (spelling???) then they won't feel anything except some minor irritaion.
I think the question you have to ask yourself is why would you do this? Is it to make the baby look cute? Seriously, the issue is not whether it is abuse or not, but what is being accomplished by doing this with a baby????
I don't think you would have a baby tattooed. I don't think you would have a body piercing of some other sort done to a baby -- which is what this really is.
I don't mean to sound crule, but you do need to ask yourself -- why am I doing this to this child???
God has entrusted you with this child's well-being and I just cannot see doing anything to it that serves such a useless purpose. Children are cute enough as they are.
It appears on the surface to be an issue with you and wanting to almost see your baby as a plaything or a doll. A babies life is still a life and as the parent you need to examine your motives. This shouldn't be about you and what you want -- it is about the well-being of the baby.
I wouldn't do it.
I just can't come up with enough good reasons.
Again, I apologize is this sounds crule -- but you are asking and that is my answer.
I do hope it helps you.
Good luck.
2006-10-13 04:58:31 · answer #2 · answered by BShakey 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Although it is very cute I would wait untill the baby is at an age where he/she could make their own choice. Most of society finds it acceptable, but I look at it as "respect of other persons." Perhaps the baby when older will not want pierced ears, then again maybe he/she will.
Personally I would wait so the child can make his/her own choice. Maybe around 12 or so depending on how responsible the child is.
Then again if it is done know as the child grows he/she will learn the responsibilty to keep the ear and earrings clean.
Sorry I can't give you a straight answer, but truely it is up to the parents to make that choice.
2006-10-13 05:01:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think that there is anything wrong with it. It may hurt a little, but not a lot...I think they cry because of the sound it makes, not pain. It scared me when I got my ears pierced...but it didn't hurt. Also, the mother can take care of it so it won't get infected..its better then being 13 and not being able to remember to clean them out. I think it's cute...and even if it does hurt the baby just a teeny tiny bit, they won't remember it the next day.
2006-10-13 04:55:32 · answer #4 · answered by JulieW 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There's nothing wrong here. The fact that you had them pierced young, means the baby won't play with the earrings as much as she would when she's older. She will most likely not even think about them. Yes, its hurts a little when they're pierced, but that hurt will go away before she knows it. Just make sure to keep them clean so they don't get infected. :-)
2006-10-13 04:56:12 · answer #5 · answered by Milkaholic 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you
I have never had my ears pirced because I think it's somewhat barbaric, but then there have been earrings I have seen in shops, that were so lovely they were almost worth getting my ears pierced for!
It's not for small babies
2006-10-13 08:42:33 · answer #6 · answered by used to live in Wales 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I didn't have a girl but I did take two of my nieces to get their ears pierced. One was six weeks old and besides the intial piercing she was fine with an a few minutes. My other niece however was five and cried about it for two days before she got over it and she made the choice herself to be taken. So I don't think it is wrong but I do think that they should be younger than a year..
2006-10-13 04:58:15 · answer #7 · answered by Celeste P 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i totally agree with you i think its disgraceful.
I´m irish but i live in Mallorca Spain and am 4 months pregnant with my first baby and have heard that here when you have a baby girl they take her (without asking) and pierce her ears as soon as shes born!
i told them not to touch my babys ears.... a baby is traumatized enough right after being born... (lights noise cold etc) without putting them through more pain.... i was 7 when i got my ears
pierced and i don´t care what anyone says that hurts and would hurt a baby even more its just they cant tell you
2006-10-13 08:00:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it's perfectly fine to pierce an 8 week old babies ear because my aunt pierced her daughters ears at the same age and it is better because they won't have to get them pierced when the get older which makes it a lot easier
2006-10-13 04:57:42 · answer #9 · answered by Julio 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Its absolutely out of order to pierce a babies ears,it really hurts for days,i think they should decide for themselves if they want theyre ears pierced when they are about 16 or 17,also it looks bloody awful,little girls should look like little girls ,not miniature women!
2006-10-13 04:55:47 · answer #10 · answered by Pat R 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Actually, I agree with you. And you might be surprised because both my daughters had theirs pierced when they were seven. When they asked for it to be done.
I also think circumcision on the grounds of religion is barbaric, too.
2006-10-13 06:03:01 · answer #11 · answered by True Blue Brit 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋