Should we cut our infant's hair?

Question

I've heard it more than once that one shouldn't cut baby's hair in the first year. The explanation when I ask why seems flimsy to me; along the lines of the hair structure not being settled yet.

My understanding is that hair (and nails) is more or less dead material; it shouldn't make any difference whether the hair is trimmed to a shorter length or not, as long as the hair roots aren't damaged.

Morah mentioned in her answer to a related question that not cutting can be based on religious beliefs, but that doesn't apply here. Even so, I'd like to understand whether the statement is true or just an old wives' tale.

Answer 1

It is an old wives tale, there's no reason not to cut an infant's hair. As you say it is inert, cutting it makes no difference to hair being grown. I don't think it is a question that comes up often because infants generally have so little of it in the first place that cutting it is unnecessary.