Infant ear piercing (need advice ASAP)

[annadios]

I am the proud and loving auntie of a 9-month-old niece and more than anything, I do not want harm to come to her...especially not at the hands of her own parents. Unfortunately, her mother (my husband's sister) has decided to have the baby's ears pierced tomorrow afternoon. I've accepted that it's going to happen no matter how much I know it violates the NAP. I used to work at a store that pierces ears and I, sadly, pierced many a baby girl's ears while I worked there, so I've seen firsthand that babies cry very hard when it happens to them and it is quite obviously painful and confusing for them. It's appalling that this happens just to appease some self-centered desire for aesthetics on the part of the parents.

 

My sister-in-law does not know that I believe piercing the baby's ears is totally unethical and she wouldn't understand why if I told her (she's a fundamentalist evangelical Christian, so reason is not very popular with their family). She really wants me to come out with her, my niece, my other sister-in-law, and my mother-in-law as a big "girls' afternoon out" to get my niece's ears pierced tomorrow. I do not know what to tell her. She knows I don't have plans and that I'm available, but the prospect of telling her flat out "I don't support your violence against your daughter and I don't feel like going out to celebrate it" just doesn't seem realistic. But I also can't see myself ooh-ing and ah-ing over my screaming, crying niece's newly pierced/red/swollen earlobes along with everyone else; I feel like I would stick out like a sore thumb since I wouldn't be able to bring myself to agree with everyone how "cute" she looks with earrings.

 

I've tried deterring her from it by describing my many experiences with red-faced, screaming, tearful infants who've just had holes punched in their bodies, but that has not changed her mind. My brother-in-law (my niece's father) won't even accompany everyone because he doesn't want to see his daughter cry like that (what a coward).

 

What should I do? Should I tell my sister-in-law I'm not going with them on principle? Or should I just suck it up and go along to be with my niece since I know it's going to happen whether I agree with it or not?

[ribuck]

Can't you politely decline, saying that you'd feel uncomfortable celebrating a piercing? If pressed further, you can explain that you consider bodily mutilation to be a decision that children can make themselves when they are adults. I think that's what I'd do in your situation.

 

As you say, the piercing is going to happen regardless. But that doesn't mean you need to be complicit in fooling your sister-in-law into thinking that everyone considers piercing to be uncontroversial, normal, desirable even.

 

Also, you'll feel better if you have been authentic to your beliefs. You can give your niece lots of love and affection in the future, whether her ears are pierced or not.

[fer]

Completely crazy idea that still avoids the main issue:

 

But if you know where are they going to do the piercing, couldn't you try to bribe the store beforehand to do otherwise?

So they tell a white lie like "due to the shape of your daughter's ears a nerve might be damaged if we perform the perforation".

It could buy you some time to think something better if you still have the will to keep talking with your sister in law.

 

If they have a plan B to do the piercing, then it won't be of much help.

[Wesley]

So they tell a white lie like "due to the shape of your daughter's ears a nerve might be damaged if we perform the perforation".

I could see many situations where this wouldn't be a deterrent. They already decided to cause the girl pain for aesthetics.

[JamesP]

Parents do far more damaging things for "aesthetics" (see: circumcision).

 

I'm not sure I have any answers here, but I do have a few thoughts.

 

What is your husband's relationship like with his sister and brother in law?  What were their childhoods like?  Has he had anything to say to his sister about this?

 

Perhaps you could ask them what they want their relationship with their child to be like when she grows up, and how might causing her truly unnecessary pain affect that relationship.

 

I mean, getting a shot at the doctor also hurts, but it is frequently necessary when the child is very young.

 

To answer the more immediate question with my opinion... I think I would not go and would be very clear why: "you're asking me to celebrate causing your daughter unnecessary pain and I will not be a part of it."

[Just]

[ribuck]

You and your husband could ask your sister to name her price for not going ahead with the piercing.

 

Suppose she names a price that is acceptable to you, then you pay that to her. Your sister-in-law gains a payment which is worth more to her than a hole in her daughter's ear. You lose an amount which is worth less to you than having an undamaged neice.

 

The market at work!

 

I will contribute one bitcoin (approx. $120) towards this. Perhaps others will chip in too.

 

--- or ---

 

You could stand outside the piercing salon holding a placard that says "Piercing a baby is child abuse".

 

[annadios]

Can't you politely decline, saying that you'd feel uncomfortable celebrating a piercing? If pressed further, you can explain that you consider bodily mutilation to be a decision that children can make themselves when they are adults. I think that's what I'd do in your situation.

 

As you say, the piercing is going to happen regardless. But that doesn't mean you need to be complicit in fooling your sister-in-law into thinking that everyone considers piercing to be uncontroversial, normal, desirable even.

 

Also, you'll feel better if you have been authentic to your beliefs. You can give your niece lots of love and affection in the future, whether her ears are pierced or not.

 

Thanks, I think that is probably what I'll do. The "girls' day" has been postponed and the piercing is not happening today, so I guess I have a bit of time to ponder what to say. I really do want to communicate my reasoning so they don't just perceive it as an arbitrary preference of mine to not want to see my niece cry. I just have to try to work that in using some tact.

Parents do far more damaging things for "aesthetics" (see: circumcision).

 

I'm not sure I have any answers here, but I do have a few thoughts.

 

What is your husband's relationship like with his sister and brother in law?  What were their childhoods like?  Has he had anything to say to his sister about this?

 

Perhaps you could ask them what they want their relationship with their child to be like when she grows up, and how might causing her truly unnecessary pain affect that relationship.

 

I mean, getting a shot at the doctor also hurts, but it is frequently necessary when the child is very young.

 

To answer the more immediate question with my opinion... I think I would not go and would be very clear why: "you're asking me to celebrate causing your daughter unnecessary pain and I will not be a part of it."

 

Thankfully they did not circumcise their son!

 

My husband has a pretty solid relationship with them. However, when confronted with even the gentlest constructive criticism on their parenting, they never fail to clam up, become defensive, and sometimes they get on a high horse and act like they are good parents simply by virtue of having gotten knocked up twice (makes no sense). My husband actually wrote a very heartfelt letter to his sister begging her not to go through with something so unnecessarily painful for the baby. He even teared up while writing it last night because he has such a soft spot for his niece. He gave the letter to his sister this morning and she immediately became very upset and yelled at him that he needed to just drop it and agree to disagree and that she is the mother and she knows best, etc.

 

My husband and I are not parents yet and whenever my husband has brought up something about his sister's parenting, her number one knee-jerk defense is "when you have children, then you can come talk to me about parenting." My husband and his sisters were brought up in your run-of-the-mill violent, authoritarian household where the only way to deal with insubordinate children was to hit them. My brother-in-law (father of my niece who is about to get her ears pierced) was brought up similarly by parents whose mantra was "I'm not here to be your friend."

 

As far as their future relationship with their children, I am actually in the process of drafting an email to send to them with Stefan's video "How to Have a Great Relationship With Your Children in 20 Years." Since they also believe spanking and indoctrinating their children with religion are integral parts of being a good parent, ear piercing is actually not my biggest concern for their children. I'm making a last ditch effort to talk sense to them through Stefan's video. I say "last ditch" because my sister-in-law, unfortunately, has made it very clear that she is fed up with anyone trying to offer advice that is in opposition to the way they wish to parent.

 

Thank you for the insights. For now, I think I will do my best to muster the courage to be as blunt as possible about why I will not be attending the ear piercing ritual.

[Zimobog]

My daughter can get her ears pierced when she wants to but not when I want her to. It's not up to me to tell her what she can do with her ears. She's nine.

[ROLLNSONG]

That's tough.  When my daughter was a baby her dad wanted me to get her ears pierced. I was very much against it, and a large dispute with me pitted against him and his family. As it turned out, I put my foot down and now she's nearly eight with fully intact ears.  She began asking to have her ears pierced around age 4.  I told her that when she turned 8 she could have it done.  

[gwho]

Use stickers or substitutes!Use the technical solution if the opinionated/emotional/moral battlefront is too insurmountable.You can also use the technical solution as leverage against the moral: "You have this completely reversible, non-pain inducing method, so why do you insist on actually piercing?" (this is the same argument used against circumcision and vaccination) 

[Wuzzums]

You could agree wholeheartedly for going out with them then add something like: "...but do we really need to do the piercing?"

They'll most likely inquire why and you could then say: "...because I've been through it countless times and it was never a pleasant experience for the child nor the parents so I'd rather skip that part if possible." State it like a personal preference so they won't feel like you're preaching to them in any way. As if they wanted to go out and go to a scary movie except you don't like scary movies but you're totally for the going out bit.

 

They already invited you so going to the piercing also would seem to them like they're forcing you to do something you really don't want to do. Puts the social burden on them, so maybe they'll think it's impolite to ask someone out and also force them something they dislike, so maybe they'll think that skipping the piercing part would take away some of the awkwardness of having to change the invitation. Maybe.

 

But because other people were invited too I don't think there's a change of her changing her plans. And flat out saying "it's wrong, don't do it" without them asking for your opinion will immediately put them on the defensive so no chance of planting the seed of doubt in dubious cultural practices.

[Jay Paul]

 

I mean, getting a shot at the doctor also hurts, but it is frequently necessary when the child is very young.

 

I think when you take a young child to the doctor for something like a booster shot falls into the category of acting as a self-defense surrogate like tackling someone out of the way of a speeding car. It may hurt them, but it's ultimately in their best interest, unlike a piecing which is something done for aesthetic purposes. But yeah, I see your point and I agree. I just wanted to clarify this one.

[MysterionMuffles]

I was gonna come here and share what happened with my niece when she was about 6-10 months old, I really can't remember. Her parents wanted her to get an ear piercing early because she won't remember it...but...I dunno. The very fact that it's just an aesthetic preference for her parents' convenience gives me some pause. It's not the very same as getting innoculations is it? And isn't it the parents job to minimize the amount of pain their child will have to feel?

 

I dunno, what do you guys think of the argument that "this way the kid won't remember it because it was done to them very early."

[gwho]

valid statement, assuming vaccines work and are safe.vaccines are bullshit and dangerous.http://vactruth.com/2013/09/26/how-pharmaceutical-hide-dangers/

 

but of course, i realize that was a descriptive analogy, so. i won't derail too much here. I just recently came across this article so it's kind of on my mind. please continue.

[ribuck]

When I was a child, more than half a century ago, only gypsies and prostitutes had pierced ears. In those days, clip-on ear-rings were widely sold.

 

A quick visit to Amazon confirms that clip-ons are still available, and there are many styles designed for children.

 

If you gave your niece some really classy clip-ons, perhaps that would reduce her parents' desire to mutilate your niece's ears.

[Wesley]

I dunno, what do you guys think of the argument that "this way the kid won't remember it because it was done to them very early."

They may not consciously remember, but their brain forms around the traumatic event. This child is not going to be the same after this.

 

 

If it were true, you also would see none of the lasting negatives with circumcision after the event. After all, in America it is mostly done when the child "won't remember". 

 

I have a feeling the goal of "won't remember" is only put forward to make parents feel good about the decision and assure them that their child will not remember the abuse later in life when they have a choice.

[annadios]

I dunno, what do you guys think of the argument that "this way the kid won't remember it because it was done to them very early."

 

I definitely don't think it holds water. A parent may beat their child when they are very young and the child may not consciously remember later in life, but that doesn't make the violence okay and it absolutely doesn't mean it will not affect their mental development/health later in life as well. My mom cares for elderly people for a living and some of her clients have such severe cases of mentally degenerative diseases that you could slap them across the face and 5-10 minutes later they would not remember you had done it, but you could not argue that this is a moral action just because they don't consciously retain the memory. I think "the baby won't remember having her ears pierced" is a way to make the parents feel better about doing it and, perhaps less directly, a way to devalue the baby's experience in the here and now. I never understood why "she won't remember it" made up for the fact that she ACTUALLY did experience the pain, confusion, and mental upset. Now that I think about it, it seems like "she won't remember" is being slyly used to convince the adults involved that the baby doesn't actually experience the piercing. Hmmm....

[MysterionMuffles]

Couldnt  have put it better my self, Anna, thank you. The way I see it is that it may have been better if it was her choice as a kid from the age of 4+ to decide if she wanted her body mutilated for the sake of aesthetic enhcancements. Enhancements so menial that YES...why not get clip ons? Same crap without the bloody mess and risk of infection.