Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Anyone know of a doctor's office that will pierce a baby's ears? I don't want to go to Claire's, or any place that uses a piercing gun... I'm trying to find a place that will do it with a needle.

Please don't turn this into a debate whether I should or should not pierce my daughter's ears. It's our choice and that is not the question here.

Thanks a lot!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/18731-baby-ear-piercing-not-debate/
Share on other sites

@dollydaydream: a doctors office is the same thing as a doctors surgery or a doctors clinic. Although, I also have never known any doctors in the UK to do ear piercing.


Kapaxiana: wouldn't most piercing shops generally do needle piercing rather than gun? I'm not sure what the difference is though? I had one set with a gun when I was 5, and one set with a needle when I was 19. No difference to me. The people at the piercing shop in Greenwich are really nice. You could call to ask if they are ok with babyies. If not, maybe they can recommend you somewhere that is?

Hungary is not a country that generally provides the UK with role modelling examples.


Perhaps their systems are set up for it, if it is commonplace. It is unusual in the UK and our systems are certainly not set up to provide babies with hygienic and infection free ear piercing.

Drs or nurses don't pierce ears in this country. I heard of a Chemist near the post office in Peckam, which does ear piercing with a gun I think. I am waiting to do it when I go to Spain or South America, where is more common. I don't think you will find anyone who does it with the needle in the UK, unless you do it yourself. My mum did it to me with a needle and I still remember. You can buy a local anaesthetic in the chemist if you want to do it yourself.

No, definitely don't do it yourself unless you are trained to pierce and have experience with babies/children. A reputable piercing shop should be able to give you advice. They will not use an anaesthetic, but they might use a cold spray instead, which actually works better than an anaesthetic. Although for ear piercing, you really don't need it. And actually, I can imagine the cold spray really freaking out a baby!


You CAN get needle piercing in the UK. Many types of piercing are done with a needle instead of a gun, for example the belly button. So anyone who is trained to needle should also be able to do the ears.


When I was pregnant I needed to change my bellybar for a flexibar so that I could keep it in place as my pregnancy belly grew. I think Shiva in Greenwich was where I got the specialty jewellery from. I remember them being really nice. You should call and ask their advice about baby ear piercing.

http://www.shivapiercings.co.uk/


But just out of curiosity, why do you not want to have it done somewhere like Claire's that uses a piercing gun? These are fast, effective and sanitary. The people that use them are trained for babies and children.

Firstly I would NEVER do it myself. I also wouldn't really go to a place like Claire's, I have read too many posts by people that have worked at Claire's saying that they had almost no training and were given the gun to do piercing.

A tatto parlour would probably be one of the best places to go as they are properly trained and actually extremely fast and efficient, and are required by law to use DISPOSABLE sterile needles (you should see them opening a package containing the needle), and to use a professional sterilizer for any clamps or reusable items. (and to wear gloves etc...) It may take a couple seconds longer to pierce with a needle, but someone who is experienced will still be extremely quick, and a needle piercing will cause far less trauma and swelling in the ear lobe than forcing a BLUNT stud through the ear at gun-force.

However would rather go to a place that has been recommended (Saffron thanks for the tip, will check it out) as you never know with so many dodgy places in london.


????'s Mrs - as for your questions, my baby is 4wks as of today. I am not British and it's common in my culture to have girl's ears pierced. Actually this is generally done by a trained nurse soon after the baby is born and it is the tradition that the godparents give gold earrings as a present.

When I moved to UK 9 years ago I found it really weird that most women over here only get their ears pierced later on. Whatever one grows up with is the norm.

In my own experience it is a lot easier to get it done at such young age, it heals quicker and never closes compared to piercing in later life that in most cases closes up if you spend a long time without earrings.

The earlobe is super soft in a baby and will hurt less than an injection.


Saying all of this I would like to add that back home I have never seen babies wearing hoop earrings etc.. and it is normally a small stud, I had very cute pearl studs as a baby :-)

If someone has his/her ears pierced later in life, and the holes close, he/she didn't let the piercing heal long enough. A completely and properly healed piercing will never close. It is a scar in the tissue. However, if you leave the jewellery out for a long time, the hole will tighten. This would be true even if the ears were pierced in infancy, but you later removed the earrings in adulthood.


I had my first set of ear piercing done when I was 5 year old. This was in the States, so maybe the training and requirements are different? The studs used in the piercing gun were not blunt. The actually had a special needled tip which was covered by the backing of the earring to protect it from scratching once in place. And, no, it really wasn't all that painful to have done, but I do remember it being sore for a while afterwards.


I had a second set of ear piercing done when I was 19 years old. It was not b/c the first had closed. It was b/c I wanted a second set. This was done with a needle in a tattoo/piercing shop. It does take a little longer. It wasn't any more/less painful than the first.


Kapaxiana, that's a little disturbing, what you say about people at Claire's not being trained. It's no wonder you don't want to have them done there! As for the cultural difference, I have come across this too. I was raised in the the States, and it's much more common for girls to have their ears pierced there in childhood, e.g. between maybe 4 and 12 years old. I was surprised to find that many of my British girl friends didn't have their ears pierced until they were in their late teens. In contrast, my father-in-law's carer from (west?) Africa thought my baby was a boy b/c her ears weren't pierced! We're not having Little Saff's ears pierced until she is old enough to ask for it herself, but at the same time, I'm not against other people doing it to their baby girls (or boys).


Hope you find somewhere nice and have a good experience. Please let us know where you end up going and how it all works out! xx

The idea that Claire's staff are not trained in piercing is just silly. They are.

Many, after their initial training continue to practise on other members of staff.


There's no real advantage or disadvantage over which method, needle or gun, is best just individual choice. At such a young age wee bubba wont remember the experience later in life anyway.

Claire's were amazing with my five year old - they used two 'trained' staff to pierce both ears with needle guns at the same time which was brilliant. A few weeks later, I went back to take a family friend. There was only one member of staff who was 'trained' so she could only do one ear at a time out. I was told the other member of staff on shift had not yet completed her training. So I guess they do take this very seriously.


With saying that, Claire's will not pierce the ears of babies under four months.


Hope this helps.

TBH I dont know anyone who h?s been to Claire's, my opinion is based on what I have read online especially the ones from pp saying they worked at Claire's and had almost no training etc.. I would probably be alright if I was talking about a 5 y.o but just don't feel right taking a baby to have it done at Claire's..

Thank you for your replies, I almost didn't post because it can be a 'hot' subject... Some pp just don't understand and fair enough I get it.. We have decided to wait until october and have it done back home, she will be 4 months then and I will feel more secure having it done by someone who does it all the time..

Having had piercings in the past with both a gun and a needle I would definitely go for the needle option again (if I decide to revisit my past love of piercing, but I think I'm a bit middle aged now).


Sounds like a good decision to get it done when you're back in your home country, if it's a common cultural thing to have done I too would feel more secure having it done there.


Good luck!

I'm with Pickle.


Having had my ears pierced with a gun in Claire's when I was about 14 and then again in later life (because they closed over when I didn't wear earrings for a while) along with a bunch of other piercings, at a proper piercing place, please please please, if you're going to get pierced at any age, don't get it done with a gun.


A clean, sterile, very sharp needle used by a professional doesn't hurt for long, and creates a clean wound which heals easily and quickly, and the choice of fitting (usually a closed ball hoop) promotes healing. With a gun, a blunt stud is fired through the tissue and tears it, creating a bigger lump of scar tissue, and it is much more painful and slower to heal, particularly because the butterfly commonly used to hold the stud in place doesn't allow air to the wound. Yes, it may be a bit more expensive, but I think it's worth the extra cost, especially where children are concerned.


I got all of my needle piercings done at a place in Camden, and they were fantastic, but I have a feeling that for insurance reasons, you won't find any piercing places in London who will work on such a small baby, so your only option may be to have it done in your home country.

It's very common in the asian community to pierce the ears of baby girls. So, you may have some luck looking in areas that have a large asian population e.g. East Ham, Southall, Wembley. I have no personal experience so can't offer any recommendations but perhaps pharamcies in these areas may provide such services to a high standard (I would hope).
  • 8 months later...
I found a lady in Surrey that does it, shes a medical tattooist and has a very sterile environment. She uses a gun but a speacial gun that is the same as piercing with a needle, so its very quick, she explains and shows you the different guns and why she brings her piercing supplies from America for babies. She also uses numbing cream so it doesnt hurt. Also, this is probably besides the point but because she comes from a culture that has ear piercings at birth, she is happy to do this, she told me that her own ears were done at the hospital on the day she was born. Shes in Harley St as well but gets very booked up there (and charges double for the same service). I paid ?25 plus ?3.50 for the solution but it was worth it to have a professional who clearly knew what she was doing. The numbing cream alone made it worth it! Have a look at their website. www.dermaeraze.co.uk

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...