Gisele Bundchen's Decision That Has Many Moms At Odds

By SheSpeaksTeam Aug 18, 2013

It may not sound like much of a controversy to some, but the debate over when to pierce a child’s ears is still a hot topic among many moms. Super model Gisele Bundchen recently proved the debate is still very much alive when she posted an Instagram photo of her 8-month-old daughter sporting a pair of tiny gold studs. Mom bloggers and commenters lit up on both sides of the argument.

Some moms feel 8 months is far too young to have ears pierced and believe moms should wait until the child can make their own decision. But others see it as more of a personal and cultural choice. Erica Souter, editor of The Stir, is quoted by ABC News explaining why Bundchen may have made the decision to bejewel her baby. Souter says, “I think what a lot of people don’t realize is that this is something that’s very popular in Gisele’s culture. She’s Brazilian and in Latin America, it is very common to get your infant daughter’s ears pierced.”

Another argument on the side of piercing is that since most girls end up getting their ears pierced it’s best to get it done while they’re young and won’t remember the pain. Commenter Jess Torress tweeted to Good Morning America, “I got mine pierced at 6 months. I think its good because then the child doesn't remember the pain. I'm thankful that my parents got it done.”

Baby Center also posed the question whether moms feel 8 months old is too young for pierced ears and received a mixed response with one mom saying, “I’m not a fan. Moms do it for selfish reasons, the babies do not need or want pierced ears.”

What do you think of Gisele Bundchen’s decision to pierce her infant daughter’s ears?

Do you think it’s better to get it done young or wait until the child is old enough to decide for herself?

Make a Comment

Comments

by azsurferchica | Tucson, AZ

Aug 31, 2013

It's not something I chose for my daughter, personally. My parents made me wait until I was almost 13. I won't make my daughter wait that long, but I will wait until she asks and has some ability to be responsible for cleaning and taking care of her piercings. But honestly, it doesn't bother me either when other parents decide to have their child's ears pierced as an infant. It's really none of my business.

by trynitey | NORTH PORT, FL

Aug 30, 2013

I don't see anything wrong with it. I think it's the parents choice. My daughters had their ears pierced at 6 months old and they have no problems with it now. They are old enough now that if they don't want to wear them, they don't have to, but the holes remain open so that if they do want to sport some pretty diamonds in those ears, they can still do so.

by TheMrsTee | SPRING LAKE, NC

Aug 26, 2013

I honestly think it's a choice that should be left up to the parents. I don't think it is a matter of right or wrong. The pain level of getting a child's ears pierced when I inquired from my pediatrician is so minimal (equal to that of an immunization shot) that to do it from 6 months and up is considered acceptable I personally did not pierce my daughter's ears until they were old enough to say they wanted them. My oldest was 5 and then her sister was 4. I didn't think I should do it prior to them being able to voice their opinion because well they weren't my ears.

by jenuits | RIO RANCHO, NM

Aug 21, 2013

Personally, it is not something I would do. I grew up with pierced ears being a right of passage when you turned 10 and that seems reasonable. However, I do have a friend who had her baby's ears pierced because people kept confusing the baby girl for a boy. I can definitely understand her rationale there!