# to circumcise or not to circumcise?



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

Ever since we found out we are having a boy, I've been kicking the question of whether or not to circumcise around in my head. I lean towards not doing it, but am still thinking. My partner doesn't have a strong feeling and is willing to leave the decision up to me. What are your thoughts on this issue, and why?


----------



## lalemma (Apr 21, 2009)

You are going to get a very specific kind of reply by asking this question on MDC.

If we have a boy, we aren't circumcising. But not because I necessarily buy into the various theories that circumcision is the absolute worst thing I could ever do to a child, bar none.

I'm not going to have a baby circumcised because I don't feel comfortable making choices about permanently modifying someone else's body long before they have the ability to decide for themselves, and - unlike various other medical interventions - there's no statistically significant value to it.

But, and this is where I differ from a lot of MDC people, if my son came to me at 17 and said he wanted to be circumcised, I'd feel like that was his decision to make and not automatically debilitating and crushing and going to ruin his life forever.


----------



## mysticmomma (Feb 8, 2005)

NOT.

Please visit the Case against Circumcision.


----------



## ithappened (Sep 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lalemma* 

I'm not going to have a baby circumcised because I don't feel comfortable making choices about permanently modifying someone else's...

But, and this is where I differ from a lot of MDC people, if my son came to me at 17 and said he wanted to be circumcised, I'd feel like that was his decision to make and not automatically debilitating and crushing and going to ruin his life forever.









:







:


----------



## MamaMonica (Sep 22, 2002)

Moved to TCAC. Circumcision discussions aren't hosted in the DDCs, please see the forum guidelines if you have questions about where to post.


----------



## leila1213 (Sep 15, 2006)

I'm not going to have it done if this baby's a boy.

Why _would_ you have it done?


----------



## kawa kamuri (Apr 19, 2006)

absolutely do not do it


----------



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

Sorry about posting in the wrong place--must have missed this while skimming through the guidelines.


----------



## earthmama369 (Jul 29, 2005)

What would be the benefit in putting my newborn son through cosmetic surgery and having an open wound in his diaper until it heals? Knowing that circumcision impairs later sexual function by removing healthy, functioning tissue and greatly increases the chances of him experiencing impotency later in life, and that while it's a small chance, there are baby boys who have died from blood loss and infection due to circumcision, I just don't see the benefit of putting him through unnecessary surgery.

My son is intact and we have experienced no problems with leaving him intact, which isn't surprising, I suppose, given that we left our daughter and experienced no problems with her, either. It's the normal, natural state of being.


----------



## knucklehead (Mar 12, 2008)

First of all, thank you for questioning circumcision instead of just blindly going along like so many do.

I have one question for you. If you had a baby girl would you allow her to be strapped down and have someone slice off her clitoral hood after she is born? If the answer is "NO" than don't do it to your boy. The foreskin is a NORMAL, functioning, sensitive, part of your boy's penis. Please don't alter his genitals. They're his.

Please read through this forum, there is a wealth of information and answers here.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

You could always leave the body modification decision up to the person who's body it is...


----------



## Ericka1999 (Aug 4, 2009)

Well I don't have a son but I have a 8yr old nephew that has gotten circumzied when he was a newborn.My brother in law and my sister had decided to have her son cirumsized not for religious reasons but for hygene reasons.


----------



## mysticmomma (Feb 8, 2005)

hygeine?


----------



## l_olive (Jan 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ericka1999* 
Well I don't have a son but I have a 8yr old nephew that has gotten circumzied when he was a newborn.My brother in law and my sister had decided to have her son cirumsized not for religious reasons but for hygene reasons.

Then, I'm sorry to say, your sister and her husband were sadly uninformed. There is nothing unhygienic about an intact penis.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *l_olive* 
Then, I'm sorry to say, your sister and her husband were sadly uninformed. There is nothing unhygienic about an intact penis.

and...an open bloody wound in a diaper certainly isn't anywhere near hygienic! Not to mention all the infections that are lurking in a hospital, just looking for an open wound.


----------



## BamaDude (Aug 17, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fyrestorm* 
You could always leave the body modification decision up to the person who's body it is...

Exactly. As an adult I wouldn't think of leaving a decision as inconsequential and easily-changed as what clothes I'm going to wear up to either of my parents, yet they made a decision to permanently alter the appearance and function of my genitals when I was just a few days old without a thought as to whether this alteration was something I'd want for myself once I became an adult. Then as now it was "my body", but I never got a chance to make "MY choice".


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Beep - Perhaps you can give us a list of reasons that you are considering doing this to your son and we can help dispel those myths for you.


----------



## texmati (Oct 19, 2004)

Circumcision is not just unnecessary, but it does impair function. It actually harms the baby. Please don't do it to your son.


----------



## Fellow Traveler (Jan 8, 2008)

Welcome to the forum beep, how about we turn the question around. What reasons do you believe exist that support circumcision?


----------



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

The big reasons I have come across for circumcision are:

- decreased risk of penile cancer
- decreased risk of getting HIV (this child is likely to spend some of his life in developing countries where the risk is higher than in the US or Europe)
- decreased risk of childhood UTIs
- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me

Thoughts, anyone?

P.S. For those who did not see my original post, this is not a "talk me out of it" situation--I am leaning against doing it, but trying to gather all information.


----------



## Minarai (Jul 26, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
The big reasons I have come across for circumcision are:

- decreased risk of penile cancer
- decreased risk of getting HIV (this child is likely to spend some of his life in developing countries where the risk is higher than in the US or Europe)
- decreased risk of childhood UTIs
- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me

Thoughts, anyone?

P.S. For those who did not see my original post, this is not a "talk me out of it" situation--I am leaning against doing it, but trying to gather all information.

Well then, get ready for the deluge.


----------



## nini02 (Jun 28, 2007)

http://www.cps.ca/caringforkids/preg...rcumcision.htm

Quote:

Risks and benefits of circumcision

Problems from the surgery are usually minor. Although serious complications are rare, they do occur. Newborn circumcision has been associated with surgical mistakes, such as having too much skin removed.

Of every 1,000 boys who are circumcised:

* 20 to 30 will have a surgical complication, such as too much bleeding or infection in the area.
* 2 to 3 will have a more serious complication that needs more treatment. Examples include having too much skin removed or more serious bleeding.
As you can see, the real difference in UTI and cancer rates are very small, not really worth it IMO.

Also please note that a circ'ed boy is just as likely to need to have to be re-circumcised as an intact boy is to need circumcision later in life.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

If you would like some links, just let me know

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
The big reasons I have come across for circumcision are:

- decreased risk of penile cancer

_There is less than a 1% chance of this to start with. The American Cancer Society does not recommend circumcision as a preventative. Your son is more likely to get breast cancer than penile cancer. He can still get penile cancer on the scar line. (that's where it seems to be appearing on circumcised men)_

- decreased risk of getting HIV (this child is likely to spend some of his life in developing countries where the risk is higher than in the US or Europe)

_The HIV studies were stopped because they were extremely flawed. They found an increase in woman getting HIV from cut men, the men who were cut were given information of safe sex practices, the intact men were not. They also didn't take into account healing time for the cut men when the numbers were gathered. It also makes no sense whatsoever when you look at the fact that the US has one of the highest circumcision rates as well as one of the highest HIV transmission rates and....Cut men are less sensitive and more likely to practice risky sex acts._

- decreased risk of childhood UTIs

_This study is also flawed...it compared intact premies to cut full term infants. That's apples to apples and it was done specifically to come to the conclusion that cutting was better (they were in search of a new disease to cure with it since cancer and masterbation had already been debunked)
- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me_

Thoughts, anyone?

P.S. For those who did not see my original post, this is not a "talk me out of it" situation--I am leaning against doing it, but trying to gather all information.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Another complication from circumcision that has not been mentioned is Meatal Stenosis. It is almost unheard of in intact men. It is also not regularly recognized as a circ complication because it generally doesn't happen until later in life. (My Dh was diagnosed and had to have surgery at 40. No one ever told him it was because he was cut.

Also note that most Viagra and other ED treatments have their highest sales volume in cutting countries...also all those penos grow products are sold in mostly cutting countries...connection? Circumcision is penole reduction surgery.

oh...cut men can smell pretty bad too...everyone needs to wash. I'm gonna bet most Vaginas don't always smell like roses either...but we just wash them...no cutting involved.


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

Beep, on the cleanliness issue, is your dh using soap? From speaking to a few men on this issue, I understand that soap is an irritant to mucousal tissue and shouldn't be used under the foreskin. I have heard that using soap can cause irritation which can increase secretions as it's the body's way of minimizing the reaction from soap. I have always heard that all that is needed is to retract, rinse and replace the foreskin. Maybe we'll get some input on men on this issue.


----------



## FernG (Feb 14, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that ... as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me

While your clitorus was being stimulated manually, has it every gotten dried out? This has happened occasionally to me. My clitoris is mucosal because I am not circumcised and have my clitoral hood, or female foreskin. When my foreskin is retracted and my clitoris gets dried out, I feel less sensation. I do still feel sensation, but it can be less comfortable and is less rich in feeling, and I can get a little chaffed. This is what I imagine the circumcised male glans feels. By changing your sons glans from mucosal, to permanently dried out, you are making a huge sexual decision for him.


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

Please watch this video done by Doctors Opposing Circumcision.

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcisi...o/prepuce.html


----------



## bubbamummy (Feb 25, 2009)

Never ever in a million years would I circ' any of my children. Im from England where its VERY rare. Infact, I didnt know anyone who was before DH









When I 1st saw DH's penis (he is American and IS circ'ed) I thought there was something wrong with it







he wishes he wasnt done now-so that was a huge deciding factor for him.

I said if he insised, I would have left him. It was THAT inportant to me, there was no way I would do that, ever. He is now an intactivist like me







he spreads the word about the un-truths so commonly believed in this country.


----------



## SleeplessMommy (Jul 16, 2005)

My husband is also intact (not circumcised). I don't think intact men always understand how much is lost by circing - they are only familiar with the "equipment" they have and have not looked closely at other "equipment". There are two function problems with circumcision. First, a HUGE number of the sexual nerve endings on the penis are on the foreskin. This does not mean "relations" with a circumcised man last longer (they don't) but that the intact man has a deeper, more total feeling during relations. Men circumcized as adults talk about going from color to black-and-white after the operation. Next, when the foreskin is removed the head of the penis will dry out (keratinize), lessening the feeling of the head. Your partner/husband could test out this feeling by taping the foreskin back for about 12 months.







Also, with the foreskin taped back, how would your husband mastrubate? This is a problem for many circed men and their partners.









Many circumcised men have reported increased pleasure from "restoration". With restoration, they stretch the skin of the shaft until the head is fully covered. After a year or two, the head of the penis is more sensitive and no longer dry... but they can never replace the huge number of lost nerve endings.

Our son is intact, we are very happy with our decision. When he grows up, we will advise the use of condoms - same advice any young adult circumcised or intact.







If our next baby is a boy, of course he will be intact also.


----------



## ursaminor (Mar 28, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
The big reasons I have come across for circumcision are:

- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me


In regards to cleanliness, rinsing under the foreskin is a quick motion of the hand for most men and requires no more time then a circumcised man would need to clean his penis. Also, it is pretty normal for adult male and female genitals, circumcised or not, to have an odor. Some strong odors can be an indication of an infection, but men and women have varying degrees of normal genital odor which varies from person to person.


----------



## Fellow Traveler (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, we're here to give you information.







And of course as a previous poster said get ready for the deluge









Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
The big reasons I have come across for circumcision are:

- decreased risk of penile cancer

So with respect to this you should read what the American Cancer Society has to say here.

Quote:

In the past, circumcision has been suggested as a way to prevent penile cancer. This suggestion was based on studies that reported much lower penile cancer rates among circumcised men than among uncircumcised men. However, most researchers now believe those studies were flawed because they failed to consider other risk factors, such as smoking, personal hygiene, and the number of sexual partners.

Most public health researchers believe that the risk of penile cancer is low among uncircumcised men without known risk factors living in the United States. Most experts agree that circumcision should not be recommended as a way to prevent penile cancer.
Second, penile cancer is the rarest cancer among men further, we now have an effective vaccine which can be an option if you and he choose it more than a decade from now.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
- decreased risk of getting HIV (this child is likely to spend some of his life in developing countries where the risk is higher than in the US or Europe)

I think under those conditions, I would instead be especially vigilant about safe sex and condom education. I am sure you will be but it's still worth mentioning and not to say that being in the US or Europe would require less education. Personally, I don't believe the link is as solid or large as is expressed in the personal media. If you want a detailed explanation, I'll try and provided it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
- decreased risk of childhood UTIs

In fact, the decrease in UTIs is relatively small considering that the odds of contracting a UTI are rare in boys. You can read a bit about it and see a chart that describes this potential benefit here: http://www.circumstitions.com/Utis.html#cause

I think you should also keep in mind how easily a UTI can be treated with antibiotic.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me

Thoughts, anyone?

Now this is a surprise, as an intact guy myself, I can't understand the difficulty he describes. I shower once a day, or when I am backpacking not for the duration of the trip, and usually armpits and feet soles go first in the 'smell' department. I can't think of a time when my foreskin smelled even when going days without a shower. Others that I've spoken to about it, it doesn't seem to be a problem. I also consider the foreskin a significant contributor to my sexual experience [no elaboration].

Having said that I think that it shows how important an individual's assessment is on this issue. Your son, given the opportunity, may prefer it as nature intended. By leaving him intact, you give him the option. Just like your husband has the option. Circumcision isn't a now or never proposition.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
P.S. For those who did not see my original post, this is not a "talk me out of it" situation--I am leaning against doing it, but trying to gather all information.

We are happy to provide you with all the information you need so if you want to discuss any point further please ask.


----------



## eepster (Sep 20, 2006)

_- decreased risk of penile cancer
_

Penile cancer is so very rare that the studies do not contain sufficient sample sizes. Also, this is a very treatable form of cancer. Sweden, a country where circumcision is virtually unheard of, has a lower rate than the US where circumcision is common.
_- decreased risk of getting HIV (this child is likely to spend some of his life in developing countries where the risk is higher than in the US or Europe)
_

If you look at the actual #s from these studies and methods used, they are far from impressive. The part of the studies that bothers me the most is that while the circumcised group had painful surgery on their penises that prevented them from engaging in any sexual activity for the first few months of the study, the control group had no placebo and enjoyed normal sexual activity from day one of a brief 18 month study.

However, even if one takes the studies at face value, your DS will not be having heterosexual intercourse (the only form of transmission that the studdy claims to reduce) till he is a teenager. By the time he is a teenager, a vaccine might exist, the epidemic may be under control, or they may have discovered that circumcision does't work. If by the time your DS is a teen the studies have been backed up with real results, then he can always choose to have it done then.
_- decreased risk of childhood UTIs
_

There are again questions about the accuracy of this, but putting it aside, it is not a good reason to circumcise.

The chance of an uncircumcised boy getting a UTI is 1%, the chance of immediate surgical complication (such as hemorrhage {most common}, infection, accidentally amputating the glans {head of the penis}, death, etc) is 2%. This does not include long term complications/side effects such as meatal stenosis, skin bridges, hidden penis, etc. When you consider that a UTI is treatable with antibiotics, does it seem worth taking the greater risk of surgery to prevent it?
_- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me_
Then maybe dad should look into getting circumcised himself. If he makes a horrified expression and crosses his legs when this is suggested, then he obviously doesn't really think it's worth it. He probably is over doing the hygiene, and he can't know if sex is better if he hasn't tried it.

As someone who has changed diapers of many circumcised boys and intact, trust me, the "it's cleaner" statement is really crazy.


----------



## MittensKittens (Oct 26, 2008)

I have an intact baby boy, and I want to say that I don't see how that means you somehow have to do a lot to keep it clean and prevent it from being smelly. All you need to do is just wash your boy normally, and he will be fine! Same as you would with a daughter, or with yourself


----------



## nd_deadhead (Sep 22, 2005)

Hi Beep, congratulations on your pregnancy! As others have said, I'm proud of you for taking the time to figure out whether or not circumcision is a good idea, instead of blindly following the crowd (since the majority of baby boys are still circumcised in the US).

Others have addressed your questions well, so I'll throw out a different perspective: You spend 9 long months nurturing the baby inside you. During that time you worry and wonder if he's going to be OK, if there's going to be anything wrong with him, if you'll be able to carry him to term, how you and DH will manage if he has to be in the ICU, or, heaven forbid, if he needs surgery right away when he's born because of some congenital defect.

But everything goes beautifully, and you give birth to a normal, healthy, perfect baby boy! He has 10 fingers and toes, the cutest little nose, adorable soft ears, and the sweetest little butt cheeks you ever saw. You marvel at how wonderful and perfect he is.

He also has a foreskin. Can you honestly see youself oohing and aahing over his cute little toes, then glancing at his foreksin and saying "Yuck! THAT thing has to go!" Does it really make sense to be blessed with a perfect, normal, healthy baby, and sign him up for an operation that he doesn't need when he's only a day or two old? When you look at it that way, doesn't it sound just plain silly?

The foreskin is like any other body part. If my son breaks his finger, we'll get it treated - but we aren't going to put casts on all his fingers "just in case". If he gets an ear infection - or a foreskin infection - we'll treat those too, but with antibiotics, not amputation.

Others have mentioned the risks of the operation - it's important to remember that circumcision is SURGERY, and comes with all the risks of any other operation - bleeding, infection, slip of the knife. And since babies can't tell us exactly what they are feeling, even if pain relief is used during the operation (you'd be amazed at the percentage of babies circumcised with no pain relif AT ALL!), it's difficult to medicate for pain control during the week-long healing process. It's going to hurt like mad every time he pees. But because he's brand new, it's hard for you to know if he's crying because he's hungry, or cold, or tired, or overstimulated, or in pain. Your first instinct is not going to be to dose him up with Tylenol.

I didn't read all the responses, so I don't know if anyone mentioned how the trauma of circumcsion can interfere with breastfeeding. When people are dead set on having it done, we try to encourage them to wait a few weeks, to ensure that a good nursing relationship is established first.

Remember, once a baby is circumcised, it can't ever, ever be undone. But an intact man can get himself circumcised at any time during his life - with full pain relief and less risk.

Best wishes to you on a comfortable pregnancy, and fel free to come back with any other questions you might have!

Ann


----------



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

Thanks very much, all of you, for the clearly laid out information. You have been very helpful.


----------



## SleeplessMommy (Jul 16, 2005)

Hi Beep,

We are in the same DDC!

Maybe I already said enough already, but I have one more thought - some women research circumcision, then have it done anyway because of pressure from a partner or relative. When we read about circ, the pain caused by surgery is just a word, and does not really sink in. Then the new Mom gets her baby back, obviously in significant pain - instantly, Mom recognizes that her baby has been hurt and has a reaction only a new mother can understand. The hurt is so much more real than it was on paper. Many Moms who have circed regret it deeply for the rest of their lives.

It has happened that the Mom was there during the procedure and rescues the baby just as the separation of the foreskin from the glans is started. That was not "research" which changed the Mom's mind, but the protective mother instinct.

There are Moms who have circed and don't regret it. Almost universally, they are married to circed men and have never seen or touched an intact penis before - they have no idea what is being lost by the procedure or that it will hurt. After the circ, their babies go to the nursery for more formula, and they think nothing of it. You have seen an intact penis, you know better.

Just FYI, USA rate is 55% and dropping right now. Close to zero in some parts of the West. When our sons grow up their partners will have a choice of intact men and circed men. Where both types of men are commonly available, intact is usually the preferred choice


----------



## SunShineSally (Jan 18, 2005)

My fiance is Circed and is upset that he was. He has issues sexually _because_ he was circed. My ds was circed with out my consent







he was supposed to be intact he had many issues as a infant because of this he was unable to get urine to pass, (I do not know the tecnical term) his hole would close and I would need to open it for him to pass urine. Also his hole is less than half the size it is supposed to be. At the age of one and a half the doctor was unable to use a premie cath on him







: this time my fiance and I will not allow the baby out of our sight so we know he will be safe from a circ! those are my personal reasons now why I am against circ. My fiance is totally against circ now that he knows alot of his issues are because of circ. He is very proud and happy that we are protecting this child from the issues Ds and him have had









Before Ds my reasons where it is not my skin to cut off, the skin is there for a reason, I personally would not want to be circed, why shouldn't I protect my child boy or girl?

Congratulations on your little boy they are great fun and so loving!


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SunShineSally* 
My fiance is Circed and is upset that he was. He has issues sexually _because_ he was circed. My ds was circed with out my consent







he was supposed to be intact he had many issues as a infant because of this he was unable to get urine to pass, (I do not know the tecnical term) his hole would close and I would need to open it for him to pass urine. Also his hole is less than half the size it is supposed to be. At the age of one and a half the doctor was unable to use a premie cath on him







:


That is Meatal Stenosis..My DH has it.


----------



## milimama (Nov 28, 2005)

I don't get as passionate about others about this issue so I decided to put in my 2 cents.

I feel there are worse things then circumcising and feel the population on forums such as this spend a lot of time arguing one side of those issues, see alienating women who vaccinate and circumcise. There are WAY worse things one can do to a child. When I think of some of the childcare choices, nutritional choices and overall child rearing practices of Americans I can't help but think our kids are going to be completely dependent on material possessions having been fed, rocked and entertained by them their whole lives.

Anywho, I did not circ my twin boys. My best friend told me that hearing her son be circed was the worst sound she'd ever heard. Then I read a book called Having Twins by Elizabeth Noble and not circing made more sense. The argument from people whose opinions I don't care about is that my boys might feel out of place. Well, they're twins so they have eachother! Not sure why they'd run around naked much anyway...

When the doc came in and asked if I wanted it done I asked him what he thought (my hubby was in Iraq at the time so no other men around). He said his twins weren't circed and he didn't see the need. Having an Army doc say that sealed the deal (I probably wouldn't have considered it anyway) and they still have cute little elephant trunks!

Consider why you want to do it. Is it to make others comfortable? Is it to stop people from talking? Is it because it seems other people are doing it?

Honestly, I don't really see any other reason to circ a little boy. He came with it, it might as well stay! Plus they're so little and their brains are developing. The stress hormones released during instances of pain can really harm them. That's why you shouldn't let babies cry it out. You want him to spend the first few days bonding with you, not having some skin ripped off. You want him to trust you and see you as a source of comfort. 2 cents don't go far nowadays, but there are mine!


----------



## MCatLvrMom2A&X (Nov 18, 2004)

Everyone has done a great job with explaining things with links. I want to add the links I have as well on the issues you mentioned.

UTI myth http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/UTI/
http://www.nocirc.org/statements/breastfeeding.php

Quote:

In fact, UTI's are so rare in any case that, using Wiswell's data, 50 to 100 healthy boys would have to be circumcised in order to prevent a UTI from developing in only one patient. (Using more recent data from a better-controlled study, the number of unnecessary operations needed to prevent one hospital admission for UTI would jump to 195.
The above study also used intact premature infants compared to full term circed infants. Premature infants have a high chance of UTI so doing it that way invalidated the data.

FORESKINS: Seek Elsewhere for Infants' Urinary Tract Infections
http://www.cirp.org/news/1997.12.22_PhysiciansWeekly/

UTI Neonatal circumcision revisited
http://www.cps.ca/english/statements...ION%20OF%20UTI

The incidence of Geniturinary abnormalities in circumcised and uncircumcised presenting with an initial urinary tract infection by 6 months of age
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/UTI/mueller/

- Girls have a much greater risk of UTIs.

Cancer Society:http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/co...evented_35.asp

Quote:

In the past, circumcision has been suggested as a way to prevent penile cancer. This suggestion was based on studies that reported much lower penile cancer rates among circumcised men than among uncircumcised men. However, most researchers now believe those studies were flawed because they failed to consider other factors that are now known to affect penile cancer risk.
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/cancer/

Quote:

Gellis (1978) said there are more deaths from circumcision than from cancer of the penis.8
Boczko et al . found numerous reports of penile cancer in circumcised men, thus conclusively disproving Wolbarst's false claims of protection from penile cancer by circumcision.9
In "Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy," Edward Wallerstein writes14: "If infant circumcision reduces penile cancer we could expect to see proportionately less penile cancer in circumcising nations as compared to non-circumcising ones. No such difference is found."

Quote:

******* established quite clearly that there was little evidence to support a relationship between lack of circumcision and penile cancer, cervical cancer, or cancer of the prostate in 1970 but he was unable to identify the causative agent at that time,6 while Leitch did the same in Australia.
Circumcision and AIDS/HIV
http://www.circumstitions.com/HIV.html
http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/
http://www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab003362.html
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcisi...Statement.html

Comparison of North America to other non-circ countries HIV status
http://www.avert.org/america.htm
http://www.avert.org/worldstats.htm

I think it is great that you are researching this ahead of time. The bottom line we like to use around here is his body his choice. It can always be done later but undoing even with restoration is not easy and sometimes impossible.


----------



## SunShineSally (Jan 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fyrestorm* 
That is Meatal Stenosis..My DH has it.


I didn't know how to spell it







thanks, I also didn't know if everyone would know what that means because if Ds didn't have it I would not know what it meant.


----------



## jenP (Aug 22, 2002)

My perspective is, circumcision is not a decision I, as a parent, need to think about AT ALL. It is not a decision that _I_ need to make. Because there is nothing wrong with the penis, no treatment is necessary, therefore as a parent I do not have to make any decisions on any course of treatment.
To clarify: yes, parents do indeed have to act as proxy for the child until the child is old enough to make his own decisions. So, since the child _has_ to sleep somewhere, I have to decide where he will sleep. Since the child _has_ to eat, I have to decide what to feed him. Since the law requires children _must_ be educated, I have to decide what form that education will take. If my child has an illness or an injury or develops a disease, I have to do research and decide which course of treatment will be best for him. But in the case of routine infant circumcision, parents are mistaken in thinking they have to "make a decision." They no more have to make a decision for the child on circumcision than they have to "decide" whether or not to get the baby a tattoo or trim off his earlobes. (How many expectant parents spend much time "deciding" on _those_?)
For instance, when my daughter was 1 she developed early childhood caries. She was in pain and I _had_ to make a decision on how to treat her. There were a number of ways we could have gone for treatment: temporary fillings, pulpotomy, crowns, etc. In the end and after much research we made the agonizing decision to have the affected teeth pulled. Now when my son came along, he has had no problems with his teeth. Therefore, I have had to make no dental decisions for him. We brush his teeth and take him for checkups, but since he has no decay I don't need to decide whether to drill or whether to extract. Likewise, there is nothing wrong with his penis so I have had to make no penis decisions for him, so of course we have left it the way it was when he was born.
I hope that is helpful to you.
Congratulations on your baby boy!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eepster* 

_- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly_
Then maybe dad should look into getting circumcised himself. If he makes a horrified expression and crosses his legs when this is suggested, then he obviously doesn't really think it's worth it.









:







:
If dad does not think it worth having himself circumcised for "cleanliness" then how could he make that choice for his baby?

Jen


----------



## KMK_Mama (Jan 29, 2006)

My son is intact. I would never circumcise. It's not my penis, therefore not my choice. Plus, it impairs function, and what guy (or girl) wants that?!?!?


----------



## SunShineSally (Jan 18, 2005)

If dad does not think it worth having himself circumcised for "cleanliness" then how could he make that choice for his baby?

Jen[/quote]

beautifully said









I would look at it like if you would not do that to yourself why do so to a newborn baby so brand new to the world and life outside the womb!

Just like the saying.......Do unto others as, you would do unto yourself.


----------



## fwlady (May 11, 2009)

FWIW, my circed son







*I was young and didn't know better* got several UTIs, rather my intact son has NEVER had one. And, they were/are both bed wetters. So, as I do think that bedwetting could have contributed, it was first son that had UTIs.

My best friend's DH was circed, and had a botched job. I know that when my baby had to have a procedure done, there was a baby boy in there having reconstruction on his penis. Sad.









It really saddens me. Moreso, because I am constantly reminded how I didn't know better with my oldest, and they didn't do anesthetic back then.









I babysat another friend's baby, who chose to have her son done, as her DH and older son were done. When I changed his diaper, he had no penis. He was really chubby, and it sank in (the ironic part of this was that she had made it very clear to me on one of our first visits how well endowed her husband was







). My circ'ed husband (who used to be very pro-circ) looked at me horrified, as I am changing him on the floor. I was taken aback (just as much as I was when I changed first son for the first time, never having seen a uncirced penis before ). I have seen boys in the nursery be changed, that have been circed, after I know that both of them were HBed. Weird. I think one would have to go out of their way to find a dr willing to do a circ after a HB.

I know that many insurances won't pay for a cosmetic surgery anymore. I pray that this barbaric practice will fade someday. I know it really hit me HARD when I saw a medicine man in front of a naked little girl, ready to do a female circ. I was totally APPALLED!! How could ANYONE circ a girl!? It was then that my mind was made up. Kymberli


----------



## Seie (Jun 9, 2005)

I live in Europe where hardly anyone at all circs.
I simply DO NOT GET It. What is the point. If all the myths about hygiene, UTIs etc were true - we should have dirty men all over. They arent. They are just normal. I have never known a boy who had a UTI - never - not once have I met a man who had one, a mother whos son had one or - well I just never heard of it. And we have pretty low HIV rates compared to the states.
Of all the men I have been intimate with only two were circ'ed - and both of them had problems. One had a very tight circ that was done when he was 6 (no pain meds). He said it was the single most painful thing he had ever experienced. He couldnt wear pants for a month afterwards.

Imagine putting a newborn baby through that - a baby who pees and poops and needs the open wound cleaned several times a day. WHY? None of the circ'ed men I have been with were comfortable wearing a condom. While intact men I have been with may not have exactly enjoyed having to use a condom - only the two circ'ed men were down right reluctant to use it.
Also - being used to intact males when I came across a circ'ed one - well it just didnt function all that well. THere was no foreskin to glide back and forth - it just didn't work like it was supposed to.

To the OP - what are your thoughts on the things we have shared here? I know this is in its nature an anticirc forum - but does that make you discount the opinions and experiences here? Or do you actually consider them?

Please try to imagine the absolute worst case scenario if you dont circ? (looking different, having to clean under foreskin, getting a (treatable) UTI)
And imagine the worst case scenario if you do (infection, amputation or death)

If your child grows up and wants to be circ'ed later in life - he can just do it. He can look at the statistics and the reseach and make a decision to circ or not circ.
If he later looks you in the eyes and asks you "Mom - why did you remove a part of my penis - I can never have it back now" What will you tell him? If he comes up with all the arguments we have mentioned here - then can you still defend having it done to him?

Please please listen to the wise ladies here. We may be against circ - but not all have been against it from the get go. Many ladies here have children that are circ'ed. They have educated themselfes the hard way. They base their opinion on fact, knowledge and compassion. I assume you read pro-circ debates elsewhere? If so - what is their motivation to circ? Do they believe they protect their babies? Have they researched the background of the studies they keep referring to? Do they believe its "better looking"? Do they base their opinion on prejudice or knowledge? Please please ask yourself those questions - think carefully about them before you choose to permanently alter your babys genitals.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fwlady* 

It really saddens me. Moreso, because I am constantly reminded how I didn't know better with my oldest, and they didn't do anesthetic back then.











They still don't in most cases now.


----------



## MCatLvrMom2A&X (Nov 18, 2004)

: even when they do they usually start the removal before it takes effect


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MCatLvrMom2A&X* 







: even when they do they usually start the removal before it takes effect









One can also presume that getting a needle filled with burning lydocane injected into your penis feels nothing like being licked by kittens.

Then there is also all the recover pain and open wound with urine on it pain that babies get no relief from at all...Just moms that wonder why on earth they won't breastfeed and why the baby ism so 'fussy'


----------



## orangefoot (Oct 8, 2004)

I'm in the UK and my sons are not circumcised. They are the norm here and circumcision is not something that is even mentioned at birth here.

Penises are formed in the womb with foreskins as an integral part of their growth. There is no reason why a baby boy on the outside needs his foreskins any less than when he was in the womb. If a foreskin isn't necessary then males wouldn't have them at all.

Don't do it.


----------



## BugMacGee (Aug 18, 2006)

Standard of care is to use lido. How that is practiced, I don't know. But lido HURTS when it's injected and it wears off PDQ.

We have a pretty low circ rate in my neck of the woods. But for those families that DO choose, I always warn them beforehand that baby will be fussy that day and will often not eat terribly well. "Imagine skinning your finger, then having it dipped in pee frequently. You'd be fussy too" And that we have to observe them for bleeding and infection afterward. SOmetimes they say "Infection???" Uh, yeah. It's an open wound exposed to urine and feces.

Anyway, the foreskin is not an *error* to be corrected. Especially not on a helpless infant. The potential risks far outweigh any "benefits" a circ might provide.


----------



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

Seie said:


> To the OP - what are your thoughts on the things we have shared here? I know this is in its nature an anticirc forum - but does that make you discount the opinions and experiences here? Or do you actually consider them?
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...


----------



## tutucrazy (Dec 30, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
The big reasons I have come across for circumcision are:

- decreased risk of penile cancer

Penile cancer is the rarest form of cancer it is more rare than male breast cancer. If you wouldn't remove your son's breast to avoid breast cancer why would you remove his foreskin. Btw, anytime you remove a part of the body you eliminate the risk of that particular body part getting cancer. Removing the foreskin only prevents cancer of the foreskin, not the penis. Again penile cancer is RARE!

Quote:

- decreased risk of getting HIV (this child is likely to spend some of his life in developing countries where the risk is higher than in the US or Europe)
The Uganda study is highly debatable. It was done with the goal of proving circ did indeed prevent transmission. More importantly, even if you buy into that study, 60% is not enough protection to warrant not using condoms. Condoms are the single best protection against HIV. Studies show circed men are less likely to use condoms, increasing his risk of STDs. A circed man with a condom is no more protected than an intact man with a condom. Finally, US where most men are circed has the highest rate of STD transmission of any developed country. That should tell you enough about the benefit of circumcision against STDs and HIV.

Quote:

- decreased risk of childhood UTIs
Those studies done in the 80s were very poorly carried out. They compared intact premature babies with circumcised full-term babies. Premature infants have a higher chance of UTI b/c their kidney function is not full developed. Also those invalid studies only show a slight decrease in risk for the first year of life only. During these studies the parents of the intact boys were told to retract the boys for "cleaning" We now know this tears the foreskin, which is fused to the glans, and introduces infection, causing UTI and other problems. Later studies show that with proper care an intact boy is LESS likely to get a UTI b/c the foreskin protects the urethral opening from feces and other bacteria. Here is a link about that (about halfway down it discusses the protective function of the foreskin against UTI): http://www.nocirc.org/statements/breastfeeding.php IF you truly want to prevent UTI, breastfeed your baby. This is the single best way to reduce the risk of UTI. By the way, baby girls are 4-6 times more likely to get UTI than intact boys. We use antibiotics to treat UTI, not amputation of genital tissue.

Quote:

- dad, who is not circumcised, feels that it is a lot of effort to keep his penis clean and not smelly as well as that the foreskin sometimes decreases sexual sensation when the hood slips up during intercourse; he leans towards circumcision but doesn't feel very strongly and will leave the ultimate decision up to me
The foreskin actually increases sensation since it consists of over 20,000 nerves, muscular bands, blood-flow, and a specialized ridge band of nerves. The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis. As it rolls over the glans (head) it provides stimulation to the ridge-band and the glans. A circumcised man, especially if he was circed at birth, will develop layers of skin over his glans to do what the foreskin was intended to do. This puts the blood-flow further from the surface and causes a drying out of the glans which are meant to be an internal organ. Dad must have some other issue that is happening to cause him to feel less sensation. This is not foreskin related. The gliding of the foreskin should be a good sensation. I suspect he might have some more complex problem with his penis b/c the movement of the foreskin should feel wonderful. This gliding mechanism is one of the great wonders of the foreskin. If circumcised is your hubby's preference, that is fine. But remember that his personal sexual preference should not be inflicted upon your son.

Hope this helps. I will be happy to provide any more information if you need it. I hope you decide to give your son the choice over the function and appearance of his most private area!

If you do leave him intact, you will want to read these so you can protect him from harm:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=129378
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=575627
http://www.mothering.com/discussions...893&highlight=


----------



## trmpetplaya (May 30, 2005)

http://www.cirp.org has a huge library of studies (with anti-circumcision commentary in a different color, but the studies really do speak for themselves) if you want a place to find many studies in one place









I'm due in November and if this baby's a boy he will remain intact. Even if your husband does choose to be circumcised himself, it really doesn't matter about "matching" (if you're at all concerned about that - a lot of people seem to be). My dh is intact and my FIL is circumcised and it was never an issue at all. My dh is actually very glad that they don't "match." They went camping a lot as a family and had a hot tub that they used sans clothing so dh did see his father's penis a fair amount as a child.

Best wishes to you and thank you for looking into this issue more!


----------



## nd_deadhead (Sep 22, 2005)

Hi Beep - I just thought I'd chime in again. My twin boys were born 15 years ago (Ack!), before I had access to the Internet, and I had no idea that infant circumcision was controversial. DH and I chose to leave our babies intact based on gut instinct rather than research. Luckily our family doctor was supportive of our decision - I don't know what we would have done if our trusted doctor had tried to talk us into circumcising our babies.

Here were our reasons:
1. That's got to HURT! We didn't want to cause our babies any unnecessary pain.
2. Baby boys are born with a foreskin, so it must be there for a reason (even if we had no idea at the time what the reasons were).
3. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
4. Even though DH is circumcised, he didn't have any problems with the idea that his sons' wouldn't "match" him (good thing, too, since they look just like me).

After the babies were born, I found a circumcision debate board. In those days, there were a lot more people on such boards who argued in favor of circumcision. I actively sought out reasons TO have it done to my babies - after all, I wanted what was best for them, and they were still little enough I figured it wasn't too late. The more I researched, read journal articles, and talked to knowledgable people on both sides of the debate, the more clearly I could see that the medical advantages to circumcision were very minor, and could be achieved without surgery, and that the risks and harms were much greater than I thought. I learned how the operation is performed - how the foreskin has to be first torn away from the glans before it can be cut off - and how that creates an additional wound. I learned about complications of the operation, ranging from bleeding, infection, and adhesions to meatal stenosis, amputation of part of the glans, and worse. I talked to a woman whose DH's circumcision was so tight that he experienced terrible pain every time he had an erection - they were barely able to have sex, and were lucky to conceive a baby.

But even so, I still felt very strongly that it was up to the parents what they wanted to do with their own son.

Then I saw a headline in our local paper about a baby in Ohio that died as a result of circumcision complicaitons. His name was Dustin Evans. I was absolutely appalled - it had NEVER occurred to me that a baby could DIE as a result of having such a "simple" operation! That single event flung me off the fence and into the anti-circumcision camp. Since then I have comtinued to read research articles, discuss the issue with parents, and debate, and I have not yet heard one single valid reason to circumcise an infant. No medical organization in the world recommends infant circumcision on the basis of medical benefits (because the risks are at least as great as any benefit), which means it boils down to cosmetic surgery. I strongly believe that no one has the right to force cosmetic surgery on someone else - particularly when the body part in question is not damaged or deformed in any way, and is covered by clothing almost all the time. The foreskin is not a birth defect.


----------



## snowgirl (Aug 2, 2007)

Please leave your son intact. Then if you do, make sure NO ONE retracts his foreskin!!! I can not stress this enough, it is extremely painful. Synchae(sp?) is the adhesion under the foreskin. Synchae is the same thing that keeps your fingernails on your fingers. So, would you want someone to rip your fingernails off?

Also, do you believe in episotomies? I am guessing not. So, if you do not want to be cut, why would you want to cut your son?

Sorry for spellings...in a rush, but had to post.


----------



## leila1213 (Sep 15, 2006)

Beep, thanks for taking the time to read and research here. Since you say you are leaning towards not having it done, I am wondering what your reasons would be for leaving your baby intact? Would you mind sharing them with us?


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

beep, one of the aspects that i haven't seen discussed to a great extent in the questions you have posed or the answers people have given is the structure, function, and purpose of the foreskin.

the debate is often framed as if the pros and cons of circumcision are disease prevention/hygiene on one side and the short-term risks of the procedure itself on the other (pain, bleeding, scarring, infection, meatal stenosis, adhesions, buried penis, lower pain threshold, death, etc.).

very rarely do people stop to consider what exactly the foreskin is and what it does, and how the penis is altered in structure and function when it is circumcised. loss of the foreskin is the complication that occurs in circumcision 100% of the time. yet very few people focus on the long-term effects on sexuality and sexual functioning of the loss of the foreskin.

although your husband is intact, he (like many intact men) may be only vaguely aware of the foreskin's structure and function.

to put it in perspective, one of the main reasons most westerners are horrified by female circumcision is that we are aware of the importance of the female prepuce and clitoris (i.e. the female foreskin and clitoris) to full female sexual functioning. that is why westerners do not accept any justification (religious, cultural, health, etc.) for female circumcision. to put it in personal terms, it's hard to imagine you researching circumcision (removal of the clitoral hood) for yourself or your daughter, precisely because you are presumably aware of the benefits of fully intact, functioning genitals.

and yet the male foreskin is much, much larger in terms of area-- and has more nerve endings -- than the female foreskin. so why do people not consider its loss when considering the pros and cons of circumcision?

i commend these studies to your attention (all peer-reviewed and published in the British Journal of Urology):

http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/sorrells_2007/

http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/cold-taylor/

http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/taylor/

This page explains the ridged band based on the research of Taylor et al. (a page I highly recommend your dh read before he makes any decision to get circed):

http://research.cirp.org

This page summarizes some of the sexual problems that may occur as a result of circumcision:

http://www.cirp.org/library/sex_function/

Finally, I'll end this post with one more thing:

Circumcision is not a "parenting" decision. It is a decision parents make for children, but it has nothing to do with "parenting."


----------



## Seie (Jun 9, 2005)

Been thinking about this thread - and thought I would ad a little.

Circumcision is a great source of income for many doctors. Please take into consideration that they often have a very personal and not so beautiful motives to carry out routine infant circumcisions. They make money from every single one they do. A lot of money. So if a doctor recommends you have it done to your son - consider what his personal interest in it would be.

About that particular aspect of circ - someone recently posted a link to a nurse who told about her experiences with circ. I found that very informative:
Nurse about circumcision

Also ask him if he is circ'ed himself. Most cases he is. Circ'ed men are often hestitant to question their own circumcision because for one they never had a choice. They have never known any different - so in other words they are not aware what they are missing out on. For a circ'ed man to admit, that when circ'ed he lost valuable tissue is not easy - then he would have to admit that his own penis is not functioning the way it was supposed to. And how many men want to acknowledge that their penis is not perfect?
Otherwise - if he is intact - it would be appropriate to ask why he never got circ'ed himself if he truely believes that any benefit outweighs the risks/sideeffects.

Also - whether you are into the "intelligent design" or evolution theories - then circ'ing doesn't make sense.
Through thousands and thousands of years men with foreskin have been the most likely to survive and reproduce. If the foreskin wasn't necessary we wouldnt have it.
From an intelligent design perspective - then if we were intelligently designed - then there would be a purpose with foreskin too - or the design wouldn't be intelligent.
Getting all philosophical here - but - well IMO it just doesn't make sense to remove it.


----------



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *leila1213* 
Beep, thanks for taking the time to read and research here. Since you say you are leaning towards not having it done, I am wondering what your reasons would be for leaving your baby intact? Would you mind sharing them with us?

Basically it would be mostly along the lines of not doing unneeded surgery with its inherent risks, not causing the baby pain, and a general feeling that in general "if it's not broke don't fix it".


----------



## babygrant (Mar 10, 2005)

Please watch a video of a baby being circumcised. One with sound. Not the ones with elevator music to drain out the baby crying.


----------



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

Because of my profession, I have seen several babies circumcised in person--and have also seen many other procedures done on babies and children in medical settings. I am very clear that all surgery has risks and that these should be taken seriously, that boys find circumcisions painful, and that good anesthesia (upon which I would insist if I were to choose circumcision) can help mitigate but not entirely prevent this pain. I also have seen babies and children find many other types of procedures unpleasant and painful, often (but not always) with life-saving or life-improving consequences. I have observed and trust in the resilience of little children, while of course also passionately not wanting my son or any other baby to suffer for poor reasons. So for me this decision is about determining whether there is any good enough reason to circumcise--i.e. would/could it be life-saving or life-improving--that might make it worth the risks and pain for my son. That is why I am gathering information now, and why I am so grateful for all of the insights and evidence that have been offered here. However, for me, watching videos of circumcision does not make the decision clearer--I am sure that some others feel differently.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Well, since that is your criteria, I would say the fact that no medical organization in the world recommends Routine Infant Circumcision, should seal the deal for you.


----------



## PuppyFluffer (Mar 18, 2002)

Beep, it's so interesting to hear your perspective on the pain. Seeing anyone in pain is usually emotionally stressful for a person but when you see painful things which bring about lifesaving events, you learn to temper the emotional reaction with the real fact that the end result is likely necessary.

The pain is a convincing component for many.

Did you look at the Doctor's Opposing Circumcision video on the functions of the foreskin?

For me, what ever your belief in the origins of life, to think that there would be a fault in the reproductive system of every male born is just not logical. The instinct to survive and procreate, the sheer will to survive....that it comes with a foreskin is pretty compelling to me that it's necessary.

Also, think of the cultures that are known for their skilled male lovers...the Latins, the French, the Italians....ALL intact cultures. Concidence? I think not.


----------



## MCatLvrMom2A&X (Nov 18, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fyrestorm* 
Well, since that is your criteria, I would say the fact that no medical organization in the world recommends Routine Infant Circumcision, should seal the deal for you.









: even the AAP does not recommend it although the language isnt strong.

Here is a link that will take you to all the statments. http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/

Australia: "There are no medical indications for routine male circumcision."

Canada: "Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely (i.e.,in the absence of medical indication) performed."

Finland: "Considers that circumcision of boys that violates the personal integrity of the boys is not acceptable unless it is done for medical reasons to treat an illness." (found here http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/finland2003/)

New Zealand: "There are no medical indications for routine male circumcision."

United Kingdom: "The medical benefits previously claimed, however, have not been convincingly proven, and it is now widely accepted, including by the BMA, that this surgical procedure has medical and psychological risks."

USA: (AAFP) "The current (2002) statement also emphasizes lack of therapeutic benefit and likens neonatal circumcision to a "cosmetic" procedure and expresses ethical concerns about non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision"
(AMA) "The statement calls for the re-training of American physicians and improved information to parents in hopes of reducing the unacceptably high rate of non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision."
(ACOG)"The most recent guidelines classify neonatal circumcision as "elective", not "routine." Circumcision of infants should be performed only "at the request of the parents."
(AAP) "the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child."

Hope that helps some.


----------



## Blu Razzberri (Sep 27, 2006)

First and foremost: GOOD FOR YOU! You've come here with an open mind to learning about this, which is a major step in the right direction, on any parenting decision.









I circumcised my first, learned the facts, and regretted it. I deeply regretted often that nobody put anti-circ information into my hands; and equally, that I didn't find anything besides passive information against circumcision when I went looking for it (I did not have regular internet access then). Over the last few years, I've heard over and over from other mothers that they didn't understand why information wasn't readily available for them, and like myself, circ'd their first before knowing better. So, I put together an email covering many aspects of circumcision (including the purpose of the foreskin), complete with source links, links to more information and a video. Through a thread I posted over a year ago, I've sent this to literally hundreds of mothers here by request. PM me your email address and I'll forward you a copy too. (This goes for anyone who'd like a copy)

There's only one key piece of information missing in my email, but I haven't gotten the time to edit it in yet. That's the care of an uncircumcised boy, which is so unfamiliar to us as a society, that there are still doctors here that don't know how to properly care for an intact male. This is what you need to know: do NOT retract the foreskin (it's like ripping the nail away from the nail bed). It hurts, and can cause complications. The boy will retract it on his own when it's ready. Also, it can occasionally take until the boy is 18 to fully retract. Simply wipe off the baby's penis, as you would wipe off your fingers. One more thing I'd like to mention is to look into and understand phimosis. It's widely misunderstood, and a major reason why older boys are circumcised. Understand that tight foreskin is rarely a problem, and in most cases can be solved non-surgically. Consider removal of the foreskin the same as the removal of an arm -- only in extreme cases.

Make sure to protect medical persons from retracting the foreskin too. DO NOT ASSUME THEY KNOW BETTER...assume the opposite. What I did during well baby exams or checkups, was to put my hands over the diaper snaps and look the person in the face and say "you know not to retract the foreskin for ANY reason, right?". I got good responses, but if there was anything that looked like opposition or that there was a chance it would be done, I would have packed up and left. Don't let them tell you they just need to see if the foreskin retracts....it's not necessary.

I think that about covers it. My email is a long one, and it's cram-packed with useful information to help you understand the business of circumcision, and why it leaves a trail of helpless victims in it's wake for the purpose of profits.


----------



## Blu Razzberri (Sep 27, 2006)

I didn't read the PP's before responding, but wanted to reply to this...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
...good anesthesia (upon which I would insist if I were to choose circumcision)...


The anesthetic that's used isn't safe for mucous membranes, nor is it approved for use on infants. (That information is also in my email). Also, that's like saying "I'll just put some Orajel on the person's gums before drilling their tooth"...the anesthetic is topical and doesn't cover much more ground that the skins surface...which won't help as they tear the foreskin off the glans in order to make the dorsal slit, then clamp the wound they just made, then cut the skin off.

Basically, there's just absolutely no purpose for cutting off perfectly healthy tissue. Heck, they're so desperate to keep the profit coming, that they have this whole business of circumcision preventing AIDS garbage in the news now. Start by understanding the purpose of the foreskin, it's a good place for you to start.

Oh, and your son can always have it done later in life if he so chooses, but if you do it now, the decision cannot be undone. It's his body and he should have the right to decide for himself.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
So for me this decision is about determining whether there is any good enough reason to circumcise--i.e. would/could it be life-saving or life-improving--that might make it worth the risks and pain for my son.

I don't understand this. Even if it could be life improving in some way (I'm honestly not sure how it could be), there's no way to know ahead of time that it will be. A circ can be done at any age, so there's no reason to do it to a newborn, when the foreskin has to be forcibly separated, as well as cut off. As others have pointed out, once it's done, it can't be undone.

I can't see any way in which a third party - even a loving parent - can decide whether the possible life improving(?) aspects of a circ are worth the risks and pain for the baby. The male in question is the only one who can possibly do that particular risk/benefit analysis. If your son wants to be circumcised later in life, he can always have it done at that time. I just can't see any way a boy's life could be improved by being circumcised _as an infant_. If, for some reason, they feel their lives would be improved by losing the foreskin, they can always do that later. It's a less major procedure when the foreskin has separated, anyway.

I'm really not trying to be insulting or patronizing, and I hope I'm not coming across that way. I just don't understand infant circumcision at all. It's not very common around here...think the rate is about 10%. I've known a lot of intact boys, some of whom are now teenagers and adults, and none of them has ever had any kind of problem at all. As far as I can tell, almost all the problems intact boys/men have with their foreskins in the US are directly attributable to the violent abuse their doctors subject their genitals to, because they don't know what they're doing.


----------



## an_aurora (Jun 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Blu Razzberri* 
The anesthetic that's used isn't safe for mucous membranes, nor is it approved for use on infants. (That information is also in my email). Also, that's like saying "I'll just put some Orajel on the person's gums before drilling their tooth"...the anesthetic is topical and doesn't cover much more ground that the skins surface...

That is an interesting analogy, since all of the doctors I have witnessed performing circumcisions have used Lidocaine injected into the base of the penis.


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *an_aurora*
That is an interesting analogy, since all of the doctors I have witnessed performing circumcisions have used Lidocaine injected into the base of the penis.

I believe she's talking in that paragraph about EMLA, and she is correct in that it is not approved for use in circs. Many doctors will use EMLA exclusively, or use it before injecting lidocaine so that the shots don't hurt.

I personally know a parent who had both her boys circed with only EMLA used as pain relief, and insists that it was effective and they didn't cry (she was there).

At bottom, though, I think it's a bit nit-picky to focus on whether some doctors use lidocaine (better than EMLA alone but still very painful without using EMLA ahead of time). There is no uniform standard of anesthesia for circ, and there are many babies who get no pain relief at all. Not to mention almost all babies get no effective pain relief afterwards during the healing time.

Still, IMO, even if you do a completely pain-free circ (probably not possible, but for the sake of argument) -- it's still wrong to circ babies. It's an elective surgery, and it violates their human right to physical integrity and autonomy.


----------



## an_aurora (Jun 2, 2006)

Right, I'm not arguing for circ at all. I'm very against it. The babies that I have seen circed with the lidocaine do experience pain, and the treatment for that pain is sugar water.

ETA: I have never seen anything other than Lidocaine used.


----------



## homeschoolingmama (Jun 15, 2007)

I always knew that I wouldn't do it. Mostly because of the pain.
Now that I have researched there are many reasons why we would never do it.
I believe that there are SO MANY myths to sort through when it comes to circumcision. It makes more sense to not do it because if you do he doesn't have a choice anymore. He can't undo it to the point before it was done. If you don't circ, he can decide for himself what he wants.








Feel free to check out my blog www.circumcisionwhataripoff.blogspot.com
I have two boys with no problems at all. We wash them just like any other body part.


----------



## Mary-Beth (Nov 20, 2001)

My son is intact. No regrets. I don't retract him or have any special cleaning procedure. No infections or problems.

You've got a lot of info. here.

I've worked with children in hospitals and seen a lot of painful procedures. For me this is different because it is a cosmetic procedure, not life-saving.


----------



## Quirky (Jun 18, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *an_aurora*
Right, I'm not arguing for circ at all. I'm very against it. The babies that I have seen circed with the lidocaine do experience pain, and the treatment for that pain is sugar water.

ETA: I have never seen anything other than Lidocaine used.

Thanks for the clarification!









I know that the pain argument is an effective argument for many people. I usually don't like to rely on it personally just because I know parents who will go ahead and circ anyway, but will be on top of the pain relief issue. And I personally know parents (good, loving, truthful parents who circed older kids without knowing better and left younger ones intact) who went with their babies for the circ and did not observe the horrible scenes like we see in the videos.

It is possible to get a baby decent pain relief for circ, and to ensure a more humane experience. So over-emphasizing the pain and relying on the Internet videos is, IMO, not a sufficient argument because there are rebuttals to it. Personally I find the risks of circumcision and the loss of the foreskin, plus the human rights of the child that are violated, to be far more compelling arguments.


----------



## lawmama1984 (Mar 17, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Quirky* 
Personally I find the risks of circumcision and the loss of the foreskin, plus the human rights of the child that are violated, to be far more compelling arguments.

These are my main issues with circumcision as well. The pain is also a factor (not only the pain experienced during the procedure, but afterwards while a wound is healing in the diaper) for me, but I think the human rights issues as well as the risks involved are very compelling.

Too many times when pain is discussed, parents have been assured by doctors and others that adequate pain relief is given and there are countless stories of babies who "didn't even cry" (obviously not taking into account the likelihood of the baby being in shock). There is no denying the fact that circumcision is a violation of human rights and a risk to the health of a newborn.


----------



## SunShineSally (Jan 18, 2005)

Have you figured out what you are going to do yet?


----------



## calngavinsmom (Feb 19, 2003)

Why don't you just leave it up to your son? A circumcision can be done at any time in his life and since most of the supposed "benefits" are related to an adult male, not a baby, there really is no sound reason to so it to a baby.

Also, a circumcision can never be undone. So if you do circ your son, what if he isn't happy about your choice? At least if he is left intact, he has a choice.

Food for thought.


----------



## kittywitty (Jul 5, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fyrestorm* 
That is Meatal Stenosis..My DH has it.

So does my son.









How could anyone know about this, as only one small part of all the problems caused by circumcision and consider "hygiene" a reason to circ?


----------



## phrogger (Oct 16, 2006)

My 12 year old son said to me while I was pg with my newest son (2 months old), "MOM, step away from his penis, it is HIS, not yours, you can't decide what should happen to it, that is REALLY messed up if you do". My oldest two boys are intact but my step son is circ so dh and I were debating what to do with the new baby. My oldest son said it perfectly.

I was never worried about the pain so much. I did use that with my DH as a reasoning to not do it and made him watch a video of it being done, that freaked him out. The pain though, to me, isn't really a consideration. Pain meds can be used etc. My issue has always been, I would NEVER want someone to remove parts of my body for no reason, why would I ever do that to my child. We are looking into getting my son's tongue clipped, I am sure that is painful, BUT it will serve a purpose if there are speech issues due to being tongue tied. There are no medical purposes to cut off an infant boys penis. And just because it is called foreskin doesn't mean it isn't still his penis.


----------



## SunShineSally (Jan 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kittywitty* 
So does my son.









How could anyone know about this, as only one small part of all the problems caused by circumcision and consider "hygiene" a reason to circ?









I cannot imagine that also It is so sad to see your child go through that







Ds had his first issue at about 1







I think that it is a HUGE problem one that you never really recover from with out an operation.


----------



## jenP (Aug 22, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
So for me this decision is about determining whether there is any good enough reason to circumcise--i.e. would/could it be life-saving or life-improving--that might make it worth the risks and pain for my son.

That is very rational, and very easier to answer. For a healthy baby, the ONLY "benefit" to circumcision is that it could reduce the risk of UTI from 1% to 0.1% for the first year of life only (after that UTI is equal for circ vs. uncirc boys.) However, the risk of serious lifelong complications from the procedure itself far outweigh a slightly lowered risk of UTI for one year of life.

Any other alleged benefits of circumcision apply to adult males only so it would be up to your son as a young adult to decide if he wants to be circumcised for those reasons; you would only want to do it to a _baby_ if there are clear benefits for him WHILE he is young. Otherwise it can be done later at his own discretion.

HTH

Jen


----------



## Papai (Apr 9, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phrogger* 
My 12 year old son said to me while I was pg with my newest son (2 months old), "MOM, step away from his penis, it is HIS, not yours, you can't decide what should happen to it, that is REALLY messed up if you do". My oldest two boys are intact but my step son is circ so dh and I were debating what to do with the new baby. My oldest son said it perfectly.

I was never worried about the pain so much. I did use that with my DH as a reasoning to not do it and made him watch a video of it being done, that freaked him out. The pain though, to me, isn't really a consideration. Pain meds can be used etc. My issue has always been, I would NEVER want someone to remove parts of my body for no reason, why would I ever do that to my child. We are looking into getting my son's tongue clipped, I am sure that is painful, BUT it will serve a purpose if there are speech issues due to being tongue tied. There are no medical purposes to cut off an infant boys penis. And just because it is called foreskin doesn't mean it isn't still his penis.

There's no comparison between the surgery to fix a tounge tie and circumcising your son.

Having the tounge be tied is a defect, the foreskin is not a birth defect. Therefore, getting surgery to fix a defect isn't on the same level as performing surgery on a healthy, functioning part of the body.


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jenP* 
That is very rational, and very easier to answer. For a healthy baby, the ONLY "benefit" to circumcision is that it could reduce the risk of UTI from 1% to 0.1% for the first year of life only (after that UTI is equal for circ vs. uncirc boys.) However, the risk of serious lifelong complications from the procedure itself far outweigh a slightly lowered risk of UTI for one year of life.

This is not actually factual. The study that this information comes from was comparing intact premies to circumcised full term infants. This would skew the results in so many ways that it becomes laughable. Lets start with the fact that premies very likely have less developed UT systems and end with the fact that they are much more likely to have had to be cathed (which greatly increases the likelyhood of a UTI)

They were comparing apples to oranges and the whole study should be discounted in it's entirety.

From the AAP's own policy statement:
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org...rics;103/3/686

Quote:

Few of the studies that have evaluated the association between UTI in male infants and circumcision status have looked at potential confounders (such as prematurity, breastfeeding, and method of urine collection) in a rigorous way. For example, because premature infants appear to be at increased risk for UTI,75-77 the inclusion of hospitalized premature infants in a study population may act as a confounder by suggesting an increased risk of UTI in uncircumcised infants.


----------



## jenP (Aug 22, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Fyrestorm* 
From the AAP's own policy statement:
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org...rics;103/3/686

Very true, and thank you for that quote, I had not seen that particular one before. Also, the studies were flawed because at the time they were done, forced retraction and vigorous cleaning with soap at every diaper change was the norm. That alone could account for increased rates of infection!

I only mentioned the "benefit" of decreased risk of UTI to demonstrate that EVEN IF you ignore the ethics of surgery on a healthy baby, and EVEN IF you take as absolute fact all of the supposed "benefits" of circumcision, those benefits STILL don't outweigh the risks.

Jen


----------



## Fyrestorm (Feb 14, 2006)

Also, I think it's something like 110 circumcisions need to take place to prevent 1 UTI (this is based on the numbers from those flawed studies) So even if it were true, what ever happened to ABX?

Girls are MUCH more likely to get a UTI and I don't see anyone suggesting genital cutting...the just prescribe ABX!

OT- JenP- Are you the Jen from the Genital integrity board on best births?


----------



## robertandenith (Apr 1, 2008)

nobody has the right to cut you or to remove part of your body without consent! Don't you think we owe our sons the same respect and right of genital integrity?

CIRCUMCISION DECISION Hosted by Dr. Dean Edell


----------



## robertandenith (Apr 1, 2008)

This video will tell you better:





She said, paraphrasing: "It is a crime to cut a man. If you walk up to a man and cut him, you've done something wrong. Consensual cutting is out of the evaluation. Except: Life saving in the event of an emergency if the man is incapable of consent. By saving his life you are securing his right (right to live). Let's change the statement: It is a crime to cut a baby, though we are obligated to act in case of an emergency."

Is Infant Circumcision an emergency? NO.

I blogged about it here
http://enithhernandez.blogspot.com/2...-of-child.html

We cannot remove part of your body w/o consent when it is perfectly functional, normal and healthy, or can I?


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Hi, posts have been removed that were in violation of the forum's guidelines or quoted a post that was removed. Please remember that we do not host the advocation of routine infant medical circumcision. PM me with any questions. Thanks!


----------



## beep (Aug 18, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SunShineSally* 
Have you figured out what you are going to do yet?

I'm still leaning against it, but just sitting with my tentative decision and slowly making my way through some medical research papers. There's time still, since the baby isn't due until December.

Thanks to all of you here for your inputs and for following up with me.


----------



## SunShineSally (Jan 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beep* 
I'm still leaning against it, but just sitting with my tentative decision and slowly making my way through some medical research papers. There's time still, since the baby isn't due until December.

Thanks to all of you here for your inputs and for following up with me.


Let us know when you figure it out! I am due at the end of November and lurk in the December DDC!


----------



## hakunangovi (Feb 15, 2002)

First, kudos to you for having the good sense to investigate this bizarre custom. Previous posters have offered a lot of information which will allow you to realise that the reasons most often given in support of circumcising an infant are pure myth.

Ask yourself what other body part you would be willing to have amputated from your son for prophylactic reasons? What about your daughter?? When framed in this context, the notion of circumcising of a newborn baby suddenly becomes totaly rediculous.

Then ask yourself, that if you did consent to have his foreskin removed, what would you say to him when, some years later, he confronts you, demanding an explanation why you did it. I asked my mother twice. I got the same answer both times, and I realised that she was the victim of some very erroneous advice. I really wish she had used a bit more common sense, but she believed what information she had. You, in contrast, will not have that excuse. Since the advent of the internet information is readily available to almost everyone.

Finaly, as others have pointed out, is this a decision that any parent can make, in good faith, on behalf of their child? Since there is no immediate health risk, the answer has to be a resounding NO. It is his penis - it has to be his choice.


----------



## phrogger (Oct 16, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Papai* 
There's no comparison between the surgery to fix a tounge tie and circumcising your son.

Having the tounge be tied is a defect, the foreskin is not a birth defect. Therefore, getting surgery to fix a defect isn't on the same level as performing surgery on a healthy, functioning part of the body.

That was my point. The pain could very well be the same, so pain on my son is not the issue surrounding my not circumcising. I kept my sons intact because it their body and there is no reason what so ever to do it. If we clip his tongue, it will be because there is a legit reason as it would be causing problems with his eatting or speech.


----------

