Should It Be Legal to Pierce Your Infant Child's Ears?

km23:

With proper care most piercings don't get infected, unless the body tries to reject it and even then it can be treated easily. Anyway the infections can be caught early and treated before they even cause pain. I should know because my skin has tried to reject my second and third piercings several times through infection and nothing bad has happened.

Death from an infection is a different subject. If a parent cannot take care of a simple ear piercing then chances are they are neglecting their children in other areas. Translated, if the infection gets bad enough to cause death the parent will be charged with abuse.

I was trying to point out that you're comparing something that's truly without consequences, to mutilation (ear-piercing, while small, is mutilation).

What about piercings that can cause nerve damage if done improperly?
And what about piercings, that, even if it's a minor infection, are still pretty awful? Did you know that an infection in the area of your nose can lead to infections in your skull?

As well, what about infants who play with their piercings? They can do permanent damage to their ears by pulling on them.

The point is that the law should have no hand in it.

Most parents with common sense will not have a facial piercing done on a child. When my ears were pierced my mother did her research and made sure the place was compete safe and reputable. Even then the recommended solution caused me to begin getting an infection so she took me to the doctor and he told her what to do and what to use.

As long as they don't play with them during the first few hours and they are properly cared for it won't be too much of a problem in the area of infection. They will be sore for a little while and usually this prevents the child from pulling on them enough to cause any real damage.

Listen if you have an issue with it then I can respect that. Some people don't like it. But the law has absolutely no right to say what a parent can and cannot do with their child's appearance.

Bottom line, this is my opinion. If someone doesn't like the idea of piercing an infant's ears then they shouldn't do it. But if I ever have a baby girl and when she is at least 3-5 months then if I want to have her ears pierced then I will have them pierced.

km23:

But the law has absolutely no right to say what a parent can and cannot do with their child's appearance.

So it's cool to give your kid breast implants?

druscilla ryden.:

So it's cool to give your kid breast implants?

Considering it would be pretty much impossible for a someone who has not hit puberty to receive implants, sure. A plastic surgeon won't give breast implants to someone if their body is not mature enough to handle them. If they are at the age where a body can handle them and surgeon would be willing to do the operation then what is the problem? No parent with any sense would force their child to get breast implants if they didn't want them. If for no other reason than most parents couldn't afford it.

Besides an invasive surgery is a huge leap from a simple ear piercing. Does an ear piercing require the child to be put under anesthesia, be cut open, and be stitched up? No, it doesn't.

Finally, most surgeons will not do breast implants until the patient is 18 because they need to finish growing first.

km23:

No parent with any sense would force their child to get breast implants if they didn't want them.

The laws aren't always there for people with sense or most people. Most people wouldn't kill someone but we have a law about it. People with sense wouldn't drink and drive, but we still have a law for it. When it comes to laws I think you have to look at the worst case scenario.

druscilla ryden.:

The laws aren't always there for people with sense or most people. Most people wouldn't kill someone but we have a law about it. People with sense wouldn't drink and drive, but we still have a law for it. When it comes to laws I think you have to look at the worst case scenario.

But you cannot make laws that violate everyone's rights because some people lack sense. Yes people drive drunk, but the aren't going to outlaw alcohol for everyone again. The key is finding a balance. Enough law to fight the people that lack sense without crossing the line for the people that have sense.

Either way, most surgeons won't even do the surgery. If they place the implants into someone's body if said body isn't developed enough to handle them, which is almost everyone until the age of at least 18, they can be sued or they could loose their license. So it really isn't an issue for anyone.

I like I said before, people have different opinions and I can respect that. But if I ever have a baby girl, when she is old enough to handle it, if I want to pierce her ears then I will. Because that will be my right as a parent.

I would be okay with laws prohibiting invasive surgeries that are for appearance purposes only for young children. I'd even support putting an age limit on facial piercings, so long as it ends when the child becomes a teenager. But I will not support a law against a parent piercing their child's earlobes.

km23:

I'd even support putting an age limit on facial piercings, so long as it ends when the child becomes a teenager. But I will not support a law against a parent piercing their child's earlobes.

I don't understand this. It's sounds awfully contradictory. Unless you're saying an ear piercing isn't a facial piercing . . .

They fall into two different categories in the eyes of the law right now. In my state it is legal for a minor to pierce their earlobes without parental consent, given that the establishment they plan to use will do the actual piercing. Nose, eyebrow, lip, tongue, ect. classify as a facial piercing and have to have parental consent. So yeah, an ear piercing legally does not classify as a facial piercing in most places.

km23:

They fall into two different categories in the eyes of the law right now. In my state it is legal for a minor to pierce their earlobes without parental consent, given that the establishment they plan to use will do the actual piercing. Nose, eyebrow, lip, tongue, ect. classify as a facial piercing and have to have parental consent. So yeah, an ear piercing legally does not classify as a facial piercing in most places.

In Iowa, Nebraska, and Missouri I had to have an adult with me to get an ear piercing.

druscilla ryden.:

In Iowa, Nebraska, and Missouri I had to have an adult with me to get an ear piercing.

Because the laws for piercings and tattoos are regulated by each individual state. That is why in my state I could legally pierce my ear without my mom being there when I was 16 but other states have a higher age.

Like I said before though, we have different opinions. I respect yours but I disagree and I'm not going to change mine.

km23:

Because the laws for piercings and tattoos are regulated by each individual state. That is why in my state I could legally pierce my ear without my mom being there when I was 16 but other states have a higher age.

I understand. I'm just not sure how many states are encompassed by your "most".

I'm sorry that was a mistake I made in my typing. When I did the research on it for a paper a few years ago it was like 23 states, but that may have changed. So it was a little less than half the country at that time. I shouldn't have used the word "most" in my earlier comment and its just been a really long day and I over-looked it.

Another issue that affects the age limit is that the piercing shop may have their own rules. Most places in my state will admit that it is legal to give an ear piercing to a minor without parental consent but they still won't do it.

Quote

But if I ever have a baby girl, when she is old enough to handle it, if I want to pierce her ears then I will. Because that will be my right as a parent.

What about a six year old boy?
Piercing his ears is pretty much the same. If you're doing it without his consent, because, clearly, you have no respect for the bodily autonomy of children, what does it matter that he may very well get teased for it?

What about parents who spank/hit their children? They're parenting the way they believe they should. In cases where it's a punishment for acting out, it's certainly effective discipline (when not taken to extremes. Anything taken to extremes is bad, I know.) Is it not violating their right to parent as they see fit by making spanking illegal?

Why, in your opinion, do children have no rights to their own body?

curious acorna:

What about a six year old boy?
Piercing his ears is pretty much the same. If you're doing it without his consent, because, clearly, you have no respect for the bodily autonomy of children, what does it matter that he may very well get teased for it?

Why, in your opinion, do children have no rights to their own body?

Kids get teased for multiple things. Some parents give their children weird haircuts that they get teased about (even when the child is old enough to articulate that they don't like it), but are you proposing that adults cannot dye or cut their child's hair either and it should be made illegal?

Children should have rights to their body but until they can articulate those rights, parent's make decisions for them. That's nothing new.
I personally wouldn't pierce my daughter's ears until they are at a toddler age (and by then I could ask her if she did/didn't want it done), but I don't see anything wrong with parents piercing them at an earlier age.

^
Hair grows back and dye grows out. A child may always have marks on their ears. Not to mention if something goes wrong . . .

I personally think that you should wait until the child is ready to answer or ask for themselves. That;s what I'll be doing with my kids. I never asked for my ears to be pierced, so I never bothered to get them done, but I do have multiple piercings on other parts of my body.

However, I do respect that piercings at infancy is carried out in many cultures.

To be honest I think there are much worse things that a parent can do.
I absolutely hate when parents enter their children in beauty pageants and smother them in make up or force them to take up loads of extra curricular activities.
Personally, I see that as more harmful and unfair than leaving a tiny little hole in their ears which often aren't even visible.

sunflowers.:

To be honest I think there are much worse things that a parent can do.
I absolutely hate when parents enter their children in beauty pageants and smother them in make up or force them to take up loads of extra curricular activities.
Personally, I see that as more harmful and unfair than leaving a tiny little hole in their ears which often aren't even visible.

Just because there are worse things doesn't mean it's okay. There are worse things we could do than tattoo infants, but that doesn't mean it should necessarily be done. There are worse things than having sex on a picnic table in a public park, but that doesn't mean it should be done.

dru's in the dark.:

Just because there are worse things doesn't mean it's okay. There are worse things we could do than tattoo infants, but that doesn't mean it should necessarily be done. There are worse things than having sex on a picnic table in a public park, but that doesn't mean it should be done.

I was just adding a point.
I've already stated all the reasons why I think it's okay.

dru's in the dark.:

^
Hair grows back and dye grows out. A child may always have marks on their ears. Not to mention if something goes wrong . . .

I understand the concern about something going wrong, that should be any parents' concern, but having marks in their ears? More than not, if you remove a piercing and allow it to grow back, it usually won't be any bigger than a freckle. It's so small and insignificant that worrying about something like that just seems meaningless. I've had second holes in my ears for years that I've been waiting to grow back and even though they've taken forever to, you would hardly notice the holes if you looked. Even if you were trying to find them, you would probably have a hard time. Maybe it's more noticeable on some people than others but I hardly doubt it's going to leave a horrifically gaping hole or anything to be concerned about when it comes to aesthetics.

A ton of babies in my town have their ears pierced because of the large amounts of Hispanics in the area and it being tradition for us. I didn't get mine down until I was nine and asked for it, but I honestly wouldn't have cared if my parents got mine done as a baby. I wouldn't have even remembered the pain, unlike how I remember crying for hours and my mom having to carry me out of the mall when I got mine at an older age. Asking if it should be legal seems a bit frivolous to me. I understand after reading the thread that it apparently seems to be a real issue of concern for some, but it seems like one of those things that shouldn't be handled legally. Some people choose to have it done to their children, others don't. As long as it's done safely, then why should anybody else be concerned or think a parent is wrong for wanting to get their child's ear pierced? Especially when it's a part of their culture and the tradition has been pretty much carried on for generations in certain families.

I don't want to seem like I'm mocking anybody on here for not taking the issue seriously, I just don't see why it should be a big concern or something to debate.