Parents are responsible for how their kids look as long as they can't make choices for themselves (and in some cases, even then). But sometimes, other relatives also think that they can make these decisions without even consulting the parents first. For example, a grandmother pierced an 8-month-old girl's ears at a shady salon without asking her parents first. What's even worse is that the grandmother knew that the parents didn't want the baby's ears pierced, as it looked weird to them. That's bound to create some tension in the family, right?
More info: Reddit
How would you react if someone went behind your back to pierce your 8-month-old baby's ears?
Image credits: Monica Turlui (not the actual photo)
The woman let her mother-in-law pick up her baby from daycare to spend more time with her, only to find out that during that time, the MIL pierced her baby's ears
Image credits: Britt Reints (not the actual photo)
Image credits: Bassam Abo Hamed (not the actual photo)
Image credits: u/ughmypoorbaby
Both the woman and her husband were enraged by the MIL's actions, so they banned her from picking the baby up from daycare
At the time of the post, the original poster’s daughter was merely 8 months old. And so, the whole situation was prompted by the daughter being picked up from daycare by her grandma, the OP’s mother-in-law. The grandma wanted to spend more time with her grandbaby. Mom didn’t see anything wrong with this, as it wasn’t the first time it had happened.
But then, when the OP went to pick up her daughter from her grandma’s place, she noticed that the baby's ears were pierced. Apparently, the MIL thought that asking the parents’ consent before doing something like that to their baby wasn’t necessary. Even though she knew that parents weren’t planning to put earrings on their baby, as they didn’t want to cause her pain for something purely cosmetic. Also, the mom thought that babies looked weird when they had earrings.
So, the MIL decided that doing this procedure behind the parents’ backs was OK since they wouldn’t see the baby's pain. The OP didn’t think this justified her actions in the slightest. Well, to her mom-in-law, it did, as she said that trusting her to pick up the baby from daycare meant that she was trusted with other decisions as well.
And this wasn’t even the end of the situation. Evidently, the MIL not only pierced her granddaughter’s ears behind her parents' back, but she also did it at some cheap jewelry store. This enraged the OP even further, as she said if she had chosen to go through with the piercing, she would have taken the baby to a professional place.
For more information about piercing baby’s ears, Bored Panda reached out to Rachel Smith from Clinical Ear Piercing.
According to her, the best age for getting a baby’s ears pierced is between 2 and 18 months. After that, it’s recommended to wait until the kid is a little bit older, like 4 or 5, as at that age, they can remain still during the procedure.
She also noted that there aren’t any long-term implications that parents should be aware of when piercing a baby's ears. The procedure for the babies doesn’t differ that much from the adults. The only major difference is that for babies, the medical piercing gun is used, while from the age of 6, the hollow needle is used. She added that “Aftercare protocol is the same regardless of age.”
Image credits: RDNE Stock project (not the actual photo)
After getting pushed from the list, the mother-in-law wrote a shallow Facebook apology in which she called the parents dramatic
Coming back to the story, after learning about everything, the husband also became furious. He called his mother to tell her that from then on, she would be removed from the list of approved pick-up people at the daycare. They just simply didn't trust her anymore.
So, the MIL figured out that, at this point, she needed to apologize. She decided to go with a message on Facebook, which the OP thought was kind of insincere. In it, the woman blamed the parents for having an overly dramatic reaction.
That prompted the OP to come to Reddit to share the whole story and ask what she should do. After all, she doesn’t want to start a family feud, but at the same time, she doesn’t trust her MIL with her daughter anymore.
Well, people online were pretty much united in their opinion -- the MIL crossed the line. They told the OP that she wasn’t creating a family feud by limiting her mother-in-law's alone time with the baby; she was just setting boundaries. Some netizens said that the woman also should take the earrings out and give the earrings back while letting the holes heal. It seems that a similar idea already crossed the woman's mind, as she answered: “The earrings are in the garbage.” Rightfully so.
Some people in the comments mentioned that piercing a baby's ears can be a part of some cultures. For example, in Latin American cultures and Spain, it’s a tradition to pierce a baby girl’s ears mere days after her birth. Sometimes, it happens before the baby even leaves the hospital.
Some cultures in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East also have traditions related to baby ear piercings. For instance, Hinduists practice the Karnavedha tradition. It’s an ear-piercing ceremony for both female and male kids between the ages of 1 and 5. A special thorn is used for the piercing, and butter is applied to the wound afterward.
But as the OP cleared up in the comments -- none of these traditions apply to her family. As she said, “they’re very white with no strong cultural ties.” And still, even if they would have some cultural traditions applicable to them, we can agree that the mother-in-law’s action of going behind the parents’ back was a shady one. And so, both the post’s author and her husband's loss of trust in the MIL was very justified.
"The earrings are in the garbage": People online understood the woman's loss of trust in her mom-in-law when she told them she took out the earrings and threw them away
