I wanna hear your thoughts!!
My husband and I have been debating this....I was made to wait until I was 13, and BAWLED my eyes out!!
I was so freaked out...my cousin was 16 when she finally got hers done and they freaked her out too!
Whereas my friend had her baby girls done at 6 months, and she cried for a minute and was fine.
What do you think? Which is better??
Is it cruel to babies??
I personally feel any body modification should be the choice of the owner of the body and only done when they are old enough to understand it and take care of it. My son is intact and my daughter does not have earrings because of this beleif. My cousin had her daughters done and as she grew her ears did not grow evenly and she had to let them grow shut and have them redone at 12 because they were so uneven it was ridiculous. I was 13 for my first, 16 for my second, 18 for my third and don't remember my 4th. When done by a professional there should be no freaking out about it.
I was 2 months old, My sis was 3 months, my 1st niece was 2 months, my 2nd was 3 years ol and she of course didnt take it well. I rather do it when they are small and wont know whats going on or remember feeling it.
I am having a girl within the month and i won't be piercing her ears until she can take care of them herself.
I'm not risking it. I have a metal allergy and I'd hate to find out that LO has the same allergy if we did get them pierced. I'd also rather she make the decision on her own. I think it's important lesson in responsibility as a little girl... kind of like earning your stripes. lol.
We're waiting until dd is old enough to make the decison herself. It's her body to alter, not mine.
I'm not a fan of it but I don't judge people who do it. I think it's a personal choice.



- briebaby123
on Mar. 6, 2013 at 1:08 PM