Circumcision

[BelindaL]

I realise that this might be a bit of a contraversial (spelling?) subject but I thought this might be a good place to bring it up.

DH & I don't know if we are having a boy or a girl but last night were talking about if we have a boy do we get him circumcised? I asked my midwife for some information about it and she did not sound too impressed and reluctantly gave me some to read.

Apparently there is only 1 doctor in Brisbane that does it and it costs about $400 and there is a very long waiting list. DH was circumcised and would like his son to look the same as him..... I just don't know? Need some input please :confused:

What do you think???

[tickle]

You've obviously missed a few of the threads that have been active lately so here's a few links:
http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?t=12765
http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?t=5347
http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?t=6692

There is a lot of great info in there!
Good luck with your decision.:)

[the_queen]

There's a circumcision section here somewhere (if I could link to it I would, but not that techno-savvy). There's quite a few threads there with lots of different opinions. Pretty much all of them end up getting locked, because it is a very controversial topic, and one that most people feel strongly about, either way.

[Kaileysmum]

I know that not many dr's will do it anymore. There is none at our hospital.

[hillbaby5]

belinda I sent you a PM

[Ana Gram]

I suggest you have a read of the threads previously posted and PM the people who's ideas match yours. That way you can find our their experience one on one and will probably get more helpful info to suit your situation.

[moonblossom]

Oh please, please find the other threats, we so don't wanna go over this again LOL.

P.S. they are very informative and will cover everything you would want to know.

cheers

[Caitlin's Mum]

Hi Belinda, I've also sent you a PM.

[TheFirstJoel]

BelindaL, very few boys are done nowadays, mainly because it is unnecessary, but there are a whole pile of other reasons why it isn't done.

Check out the thread "Infections etc" (http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?t=6692) for some useful information.

There are no real reasons out there for getting it done (are you going to remove your sons tounsils if your husband has had his removed as well? What about if he lost a hand in a car accident or something?)


Good luck with your pregnancy :cool:

[zactyl]

DH was circumcised and would like his son to look the same as him..... I just don't know?


His son isn't going to look the same as him, he'll be small, red and wrinkly, and might even have different colour hair and eyes! :eek:
This is not a good reason to have your son circumcised. My dad was, my brother and I were not, we saw my dad naked in the shower, in our backyard pool, it was never ever an issue for me that I was "different" to him.

Hope this helps your decision :)

[jarrahsmumma]

I must admit, I'd be ashamed to tell my son I had him cut to look like his poor dad. I'd rathher tell him that he is whole and looks different as I thought he was better with what he was born with, and didn't want to mess with his body... *ducks and runs*

[Mister Noodle]

Right, I'm going to talk anatomy, and express strong opinions. If this bothers you, avert your gaze.

As a male, I'd like to point out that I'd rather lose a finger or two than part of my genitals.

And no, I'm not talking about pain. Pain is temporarly. Having part of your genitals missing is forever. It entirely changes way the penis functions. The all-important frictionless gliding mechanism is destroyed, along with an alarming percentage of nerve endings, and the glans becomes progressively keratinised over the years.

Hm. There's a question: how many people here know about the gliding mechanism? An astounding number of people assume the foreskin is just a single-layer fringe of skin, and that couldn't be further from the truth.

Time for my famous jacket analogy.

Put on a very thin jacket with the sleeves too long, extending a hand-length beyond your fingertips. Now fold the sleeve inwards on itself, and glue the end of the cuff to your wrist, so your fingertips are just barely peeking out.

Congratulations, your arm is now a fully-functioning scale model of an intact penis. Your hand is the glans, your arm is the shaft, your sleeve is the foreskin.

The sleeve can now be pushed forwards and back, (imagine you want to look at your watch - just hold the sleeve and "shoot your cuffs") revealing and concealing your hand, with no friction whatsoever - the inner lining slides over itself, not over your palm.

Of course, with the flesh and blood version, it's the inner surface of skin, even smoother than silk - pinch the skin on your elbow and rub it between your fingers for a demo.

You'd need a *whole lot* of Astroglide to compete with that, and you'd still never win. The foreskin *rolls* over the glans - it doesn't slide at all.

Back on track:

As well as the drastic functional changes, the appearance and character of the penis is dramatically altered.

How could this not have an effect on sexual identity? It would sure as hell have an effect on mine. I'd liken it to having your female childrens' nipples surgically removed, or their labia trimmed back and electrolysed to leave a neat, hairless, featureless slit. Sure, it still works, but not the same way, and it's not how real humans look.

Sorry, but humans have hairy wrinkly bits. That's part of what we are, and frankly it's something that I think we should celebrate. To take that away without adult consent (except when direly medically necessary, as with all surgery) is just plain wrong, in my book.

There's a surprising incidence of frenulum breve and phimosis, but except in the tiny minority of cases, this is entirely deal-withable with regimens of stretching and occasionally steroid creams. A very few cases (a couple of percent of actual reported problems) need surgical intervention - and the vast majority of those can be treated with far less radical techniques. Google image search for "frenuloplasty" (warning! graphic! seriously!) for examples.

Even if your child turns out to be in the astoundingly tiny minority that might eventually require circumcision, there's no medical benefit to doing it before the problem becomes apparent (and is proven intractable).

There is absolutely no issue with hygiene, if there is no underlying phimosis or frenulum breve. Washing under the foreskin is exactly the same amount of effort as, say, washing under a breast. A swipe with a soapy hand in the shower is all it takes. A couple of seconds seconds, max.

And if it doesn't reach the stage of being a medical issue, I think they have the right to decide for themselves about their on bodies. Why not wait until they're old enough to decide for themselves? The opportunity never goes away - you're never too old to get it done.

[Ana Gram]

Err people, the original poster has not come back to this thread so I really think all this trying to convince her not to do it is really a waste of time.

[zactyl]

She asked for our thoughts. I responded to the "Like his dad" argument as an uncircumcised son with a circumcised dad, a viewpoint I haven't yet seen in any of the circ threads, and which I though was relevant.
Mister Noodle presented a valuable post, again with information that I haven't seen in any of the other circ threads.
I don't think you can write someone off as a one off poster just because they haven't replied within a few days.

[cosmic]

And because they are not posting doesn't mean that they (and others with the same question) aren't reading.

[JanetF]

*standing ovation for Mr Noodle* :yelclap: Obviously a well chosen username :)

[cosmic]

LMAO Janet! :laughing: Apt username indeed! :)

[mrsbutterflygirl]

Personally both my husband and I are for it. and my doctor here in Toowoomba does it... so you could always travel to do it.

We are Christians and being a command from God to have every boy done we feel there must be pretty good reasons to have it done... so yeah i'm all for it.... but it really is a personal choice and you should not let anyone make it for you... especially someone in the medical profession (they often dont have the best advice i have found in the past) :)

[WeThree]

Mrs Butterfly, I am a Christian as well, I am not a Jew ;)

[misskittyfantastico]

I too am a Christian...mustn't have recieved the memo:rolleyes:

[CandyJane]

We are Christians and being a command from God to have every boy done we feel there must be pretty good reasons to have it done... Can you please point me in the direction to find out where God commanded this?

[Ana Gram]

I think it might depend on which version of the bible you are reading

[WeThree]

It also depends on how literally you take the Old Testament, as Christians there are many things that God required of his people that because of Jesus, are no longer required, many of them were simply common sense, others were to cleanse of sins etc, anyway, i think any more talk of this should probably take place over in the Christian Families thread or something.
As you were everyone :D

[Mister Noodle]

Perhaps it's in one of these:

Psalm 137:9
Numbers 31:17
Deuteronomy 2:34
Deuteronomy 28:53
I Samuel 15:3
2 Kings 8:12
2 Kings 15:16
Isaiah 13:16
Isaiah 13:18
Lamentations 2:20
Ezekiel 9:6
Hosea 9:14
Hosea 13:16
Luke 23:29

[zactyl]

Hi BelindaL,
I found some more info that might help with your decision, this time from a legal viewpoint, specific to Queensland:

From the XY Website (http://www.xyonline.net/Cut.shtml)

Circumcision is now recognised as an important human rights and legal issue. In December 1993, the Queensland Law Reform Commission tabled a research paper on the subject. Among the many profound statements made by the Commission were the following:

"The circumcision procedure is invasive, irreversible and major. It involves the removal of an otherwise healthy organ part. It has serious attendant risks. On a strict interpretation of the assault provisions of the Queensland Criminal Code, routine circumcision of a male infant could be regarded as a criminal act. Further, consent by parents to the procedure being performed may be invalid in light of the common law's restrictions on the ability of parents to consent to the non-therapeutic treatment of children." One would think this provision of the Criminal Code would also extend to other States and Territories in Australia. There have been suggestions in media circles recently that anyone who had a surgery performed on them as a minor for non-therapeutic reasons, can legally sue for damages, provided they proceed with litigation action from their 18th birthday until they reach the age of 24.

And there's a transcript of a Catalyst episode on the medical pros and cons of Circumcision ("This story is a balanced coverage of the debate about the medical pros and cons of circumcision.") on the ABC website. (http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s586954.htm)

[mrsbutterflygirl]

Can you please point me in the direction to find out where God commanded this?


Sure thing... in Genesis 17: 10 it says "This is the convenant that you and your decendants must keep: Each male among you must be circumcised" (NLT version) or in the king James version it says "This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. "

The NIV version says " This is my covenant with you and your decendants after you , the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised."

to put these verses into context it is when Abraham is 99 years old and God appears to him and says 'I will establish my covenant between me and you'



Just to clarify what i said earlier... I believe God commanded abraham and his people to be circumcised, however now that Jesus has died for us... i don't believe we have to carry out this law anymore... but i also think hey if God commanded his people to do it back then.... it was because he had great reason... so why not do it today.... God isn't going to say to me I was wrong for doing it when he commanded so many to do it... but i must say he wouldn't say i was wrong for not doing it either...

so that is mine and my hubby's view on it... we dont force it on anyone it's just something we both agree on.... hope this helps alittle :D

[andrewJ]

Can we assume then, that you would also avoid wearing clothes of mixed fibres?
and that you would stone to death your son, if he cursed you?

Kill people who try to convert you? Deuteronomy 13:6-10

13:6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
13:7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;
13:8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:
13:9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.
13:10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die;


Kill people of other religions? DEUTERONOMY 17

17:2 If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant,
17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard [of it], and enquired diligently, and, behold, [it be] true, [and] the thing certain, [that] such abomination is wrought in Israel:
17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, [even] that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.



I could go on all day.

It's fine if you accept the old testament literally. I just find it hard to believe that anyone actually does.

[draught]

This thread is descending into a slanging match again - if it continues we will close the thread. So please - back on topic - the original poster asked for input on whether to circumcise or not. Attacking other's peoples basis for circumcision is not helpful, providing information is.

[Mister Noodle]

But the entire basis for objection to infant circumcision is that people DO force it on others - namely their own children, who lack the ability to understand or refuse.

[hillbaby5]

The person who posted this quote has made her decision and I'n pretty positive she's not coming back to this thread
enough is enough this topic has been done to death!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This thread is descending into a slanging match again - if it continues we will close the thread. So please - back on topic - the original poster asked for input on whether to circumcise or not. Attacking other's peoples basis for circumcision is not helpful, providing information is.

[Sarie]

Regardless of whether you are for or against, if you are agressive in you manner you will only get people offside. State your case and try not to make it personal. Remember treat others as you wish to be treated yourself.
:hugs:
Sarie

[tickle]

I believe a moderator (Draught) has already been here and warned that if this doesn't get back on topic then the thread will be closed. People aren't happy with threads being closed, yet people continue to post in a way that will get it closed after being warned?:confused:
We are happy for healthy discussion on the topic, as long as it stays on topic.:thumbsup:

[moonblossom]

As people have the freedom of expression, then so do the moderators have the freedom to close a thread.

Frankly I don't see anything wrong with whats being said, sometimes I have to wonder who the adults are here. FREEDOM of speech is part of our democracy.

All I can say is if you don't like whats being expressed, then don't look. SIMPLE.

[draught]

My two cents worth on the topic - I enjoyed reading Mr Noodle's contribution to the topic - a fresh perspective and some new thoughts. If we can keep bringing in new thoughts and perspectives without criticising other's decisions, the debate stays healthy and enlightening. So - any one else with a new way of looking at the issue?

[Ana Gram]

I don't think anyone is going to bring anything new to the table and the original poster is not coming back to the thread, I wonder why :rolleyes:

Perhaps the best course of action would be thread closure before it heads south.

[hillbaby5]

Freedom of speech is great as long as your not attacking the other persons opinion .


As people have the freedom of expression, then so do the moderators have the freedom to close a thread.

Frankly I don't see anything wrong with whats being said, sometimes I have to wonder who the adults are here. FREEDOM of speech is part of our democracy.

All I can say is if you don't like whats being expressed, then don't look. SIMPLE.

[moonblossom]

True Hillbilly, but wasn't it mutual in this thread? And sometimes one person takes it as attacking when really its just a counter belief.

Sometimes it's hard to distinguish between being attacked, and some other person voicing their opinion. Yeah sure ANY debate can get heated, but we are not children anymore who cannot TAKE another's opinion.

anyway just my opinion LOLI will ONCE MORE back out of a thread, before I offend anyone else..

[mrsbutterflygirl]

I just have to say I hope no one thought I was attacking anyone... I was jsut expressing what I think and believe on the topic and I sooooo didn't meant to offend anybody.... Sorry if i did.

Thanks
Hannah

[Barry]

I've been away a little while so I just thought I'd scratch down a few notes on the topics discussed;

1. Jesus was circumcised.
2. The bible did state to circumcise, you know, the bible.
3. The bible isn't meant to be taken literally.
4. It's your choice whether or not you take heed of what the bible says.
5. It's a parents choice whether or not they circumcise and they should not be told they've made the wrong decision no matter what choice they have made.
6. The foreskin has been proven to be inconclusively beneficial or detremental to glan-stimulation during sexual activity.
7. Numerous medical associations now support or are neutral on circumcision, including those who previously were against circumcision, and not just in backwards third world countries. Australia authorities (ie medical associations) have advised they have notable proof that circumcision is not detremental and is beneficial in some regards so that it should be the parents choice as to if they do it or not.
8. There's no need to attack others to get your point across.
9. Freedom of speech is great and all, but this is private property and the owner sets down the rules, if they say jump you say how high or leave. It's the price you pay for using their property.

:detective:

[Refresh]

NOt wanting to enter into this debate or argue with you Barry:), but the Bible doesnt actually say to circumcise...unless you disregard the New testament. Jesus was circumsised because that was obviously before he died and was resurrected bringing the new convenant:) Believing on Jesus' name is now required rather than circumcision ...not that I am against circumcision, I think each to their own as long as its done for good reasons.... just dont believe that it is required of Christians.

[cosmic]

7. Numerous medical associations now support or are neutral on circumcision, including those who previously were against circumcision, and not just in backwards third world countries. Australia authorities (ie medical associations) have advised they have notable proof that circumcision is not detremental and is beneficial in some regards so that it should be the parents choice as to if they do it or not.

Barry, I'm all for people posting their opinions/beliefs but this statement that you continually make is really very misleading. I have previously posted the exact text from the Royal Australasian College of Physicians position statement on circumcision, which states very clearly that the benefits of circumcision do not outweigh the costs and therefore they do not support the routine circumcision of infants. No it's not illegal so therefore YES it is the parent's choice, but in parents choosing that option they are clearly not heeding the advice of the medical profession. And here it is again for anyone who missed it last time...



* Urinary tract infections affect 1%-2% of boys, and may be about 5 times less frequent in circumcised boys, whilst circumcision has a complication rate of 1% to 5%. On current evidence routine neonatal circumcision cannot be supported as a public health measure on this basis.
* Whilst there is some evidence, particularly from sub-Saharan Africa, that male circumcision reduces the risk of acquisition of HIV, evidence is conflicting and would not justify an argument in favour of universal neonatal circumcision in countries with a low prevalence of HIV.
* Penile cancer is a rare disease with an incidence of around 1 per 100,000 in developed countries. Even though the evidence suggests neonatal circumcision may reduce the risk 10-fold, the rarity of the condition and its other recognised predispositions are such that universal circumcision is not justified on these grounds alone.

The complication rate of neonatal circumcision is reported to be around 1% to 5% and includes local infection, bleeding and damage to the penis. Serious complications such as bleeding, septicaemia and meningitis may occasionally cause death.
The possibility that routine circumcision may contravene human rights has been raised because circumcision is performed on a minor and is without proven medical benefit. Whether these legal concerns are valid will be known only if the matter is determined in a court of law.
*****
Review of the literature in relation to risks and benefits shows there is no evidence of benefit outweighing harm for circumcision as a routine procedure in the neonate.

[Barry]

Barry, I'm all for people posting their opinions/beliefs but this statement that you continually make is really very misleading. I have previously posted the exact text from the Royal Australasian College of Physicians position statement on circumcision, which states very clearly that the benefits of circumcision do not outweigh the costs and therefore they do not support the routine circumcision of infants. No it's not illegal so therefore YES it is the parent's choice, but in parents choosing that option they are clearly not heeding the advice of the medical profession. And here it is again for anyone who missed it last time...

Are you actually aware of what that means in medicolegaleze?

It means right now RACP has found ample benefits which don't outweigh the historical evidence of side effects and surgical complications.

ie. There are proven benefits and there are historical side effects and surgical complications.

ie. Circumcision can be beneficial if one chooses a qualified and skilled surgeon.

So uhm, tell me again how this means circumcision is harmful and me stating numerous organisations are now neutral on the issue or positive is wrong?

How am I misleading people? If anyone is misleading it's your selective quoting which leaves out the advice of the RACP between the lines you've cut which states: "In all cases where parents request a circumcision for their child the medical attendant is obliged to provide accurate information on the risks and benefits of the procedure. Up-to-date, unbiased written material summarising the evidence should be widely available to parents."

It's also arguably misleading in such a thread to say RACP does not support circumcision as it implies they do support not circumcising. There position is that they do not support either circumcision or not circumcising. Or in medicolegaleze, "there is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision".

See, that, no omg circumcision is evil, it's provide unbiased advice.

[Barry]

...unless you disregard the New testament.

Ahh thanks for the clarification, I must admit it's been a little while since I picked up the Holy Book. :hugs:

[cosmic]

Well all I can say to that is that any of us asking for advice from the medical profession are pretty stuffed then aren't we? Given that what they are saying is apparently not what they are actually saying and it's really up to us to interpret what they are saying and basically make up our own mind. :rolleyes:

THERE IS NO MEDICAL INDICATION FOR ROUTINE NEONATAL CIRCUMCISION.

Silly me.. how did I manage to misinterpret that?

[Barry]

Well all I can say to that is that any of us asking for advice from the medical profession are pretty stuffed then aren't we? Given that what they are saying is apparently not what they are actually saying and it's really up to us to interpret what they are saying and basically make up our own mind. :rolleyes:

THERE IS NO MEDICAL INDICATION FOR ROUTINE NEONATAL CIRCUMCISION.

Silly me.. how did I manage to misinterpret that?

This is not the medical profession per se. This is an organisation, they have liability for the public statements they make, hence why they have gone from stating parents should not circumcise period to parents should be provided the unbiased advice and that right now there is ample benefits and there have in the past been complications.

You're not reading your own quotes.

There is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision means that your child will not be worse off for not being circumcised and will not be overwhelmingly advantaged for being circumcised.

RACP is blazingly neutral on the issue right now yet you quote them as being anti-circ. It's things like this which make anti-circ people seem fanatical and weakens the case if there ever were real data to support the position.

Can we keep the debate to established facts? Rather than attempting to distort a neutral position into that of a factional position.

[Chickadee]

Or in medicolegaleze, "there is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision".
I'm no doctor, but I would translate that as saying there is no medical reason for routine neonatal circumcision. ie, the exact opposite of how you interpret it. Going now to try to look up a medical dictionary...

[Barry]

I'm no doctor, but I would translate that as saying there is no medical reason for routine neonatal circumcision. ie, the exact opposite of how you interpret it. Going now to try to look up a medical dictionary...

See above, it's not a doctor's statement.

[Chickadee]

From http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/indication

in·di·ca·tion (nd-kshn)
n.
1. Something that points to or suggests the proper treatment of a disease, as that demanded by its cause or symptoms.
2. Something indicated as necessary or expedient, as in the administration of a drug.
3. The degree indicated by a measuring instrument.

Well obviously definition 3 doesn't apply.

[Barry]

From
2. Something indicated as necessary or expedient, as in the administration of a drug.



This is the definition that applies.

[Chickadee]

See above, it's not a doctor's statement.
Did I say it was a doctor's statement? No. I was qualifying my interpretation to clarify that I had no medical background because you referred to it as medicolegaleze.

Cool off everyone, this thread is very close to being closed. Go take a walk or break or something.

[Barry]

I was merely indicating I've made a comment you may not have read.

[draught]

Barry
Without entering into the debate of whether circumscion is right or wrong I can say that your logic is flawed. That statement means that there is no reason to perform circumcision routinely - which is not a pro-circumsicion argument.

[Chickadee]

Noted Barry. But whether it was a doctors statement or not had nothing to do with what I posted.

As I said, this thread is going nowhere fast and the last page of posts, huge quotes and arguments is not going to help anybody make a decision.

[draught]

9. Freedom of speech is great and all, but this is private property and the owner sets down the rules, if they say jump you say how high or leave. It's the price you pay for using their property.



Quite correct in one respect - this is a forum with rules - set by the administrators and enforced by the moderators. So if the moderators decide that you aren't playing nicely the thread will be closed.

[Barry]

Barry
Without entering into the debate of whether circumscion is right or wrong I can say that your logic is flawed. That statement means that there is no reason to perform circumcision routinely - which is not a pro-circumsicion argument.

I believe I've clearly stated that they are not pro-circumcision. RACP is completely neutral on the issue of circumcision only providing the medical research which states there is no reason to, or not to circumcise your child.

It's not a case of it being a pro-circumcision argument, it's a case of dispelling the beliefs some hold that all modern/western world medical associations are stedfast against circumcision.

So I believe that my logic is infact correct, and I know a phone call to the RACP will clarify they will not advise you to, or not to circumcise your child but merely provide you with the unbiased information on the topic, or a source to find such.

[Barry]

Noted Barry. But whether it was a doctors statement or not had nothing to do with what I posted.


Perhaps it is my grammar in that statement has led you to the wrong meaning, I was trying to say that it's not a statement directed solely at doctors - apologises for the confusion.

[Barry]

So if the moderators decide that you aren't playing nicely the thread will be closed.

Indeed, however I believe I am being quite polite and only posting factual material which may aid in the decision making process as well as replying to those talking to me.

Feel free to correct me if I am mistaken.

[jim]

Personally both my husband and I are for it. and my doctor here in Toowoomba does it... so you could always travel to do it.

We are Christians and being a command from God to have every boy done we feel there must be pretty good reasons to have it done... so yeah i'm all for it.... but it really is a personal choice and you should not let anyone make it for you... especially someone in the medical profession (they often dont have the best advice i have found in the past) :)
This is wrong.

Christians are not governed by the old testament, only the new.

Christians in fact believe that you seperate yourself FURTHER from god if you are circumcised. The christian bible speaks against doing it.

[jim]

Perhaps it is my grammar in that statement has led you to the wrong meaning, I was trying to say that it's not a statement directed solely at doctors - apologises for the confusion.
Barry, you're correct, it wasn't a doctor who said that there is no medical basis to routinely circumcise.. it was a GROUP of doctors (Group's actually), from various organisations who oversee various facets of the medical system, from the AMA to various paedeatric bodies etc :thumbsup:

The fact remains, and always shall remain.. that there is no reason to circumcise a child who has a normal penis with nothing wrong with it.

[Clarebear]

The NIV version says " This is my covenant with you and your decendants after you , the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised."

Does it say anywhere in the bible that the 'male' is to be circumcised as a baby without his consent??

[becca74]

Even if your child turns out to be in the astoundingly tiny minority that might eventually require circumcision, there's no medical benefit to doing it before the problem becomes apparent (and is proven intractable).

.

speaking from experience as one who wanted to wait and see if my sons developed phimosis or not, as I was totally anti-circ (even though I have a history in my family - my father, 2 of his 4 brothers, and 2 of my brothers had it), I REGRET and experience deep :( GUILT:( for not taking the warnings and having my boys done as newborns. Comparing the experience of witnessing a Jewish Bris (this baby cried for the cold clamp, but didnt cry for the cut - and immediately went to his mother for a contented breast feed and promptly fell asleep, all in a matter of about 15 minutes!) and having to go through the same procedure with a 5 and 3 year old (3 hours of torturous screaming after coming round from the general - though as soon as they got home they were jumping about as though nothing had happened), it is much easier, if there is a medical indication in your family, to get it over and done with when they are newborns.....It was horrid to watch them go through the infections and then to have to put them through the procedure at an older age......

[Clarebear]

if there is a medical indication in your family, to get it over and done with when they are newborns.....It was horrid to watch them go through the infections and then to have to put them through the procedure at an older age......

Shouldn't all alternative methods be researched, discussed at length and tried first??? As with any medical procedure on our children.

Rebecca, if you don't mind could you tell us more about the actual 'type' of Phimosis in your family, as it is quite a vague term nowadays.


"True" phimosis—better termed "preputial stenosis," because "phimosis" has so many different definitions it now is devoid of any useful meaning—occurs in less than 2% of intact males. The incidence of preputial stenosis in circumcised men is actually similar.

Of these 2%, 85–95% will respond to topical steroids. Of those who fail this, at least 75% will respond to stretching under local anesthesia, either manually or with a balloon. The arithmetic is simple: At the very most 7 boys in 10,000 may need surgery for preputial stenosis. No wonder the Canadian Paediatric Society calls circumcision an "obsolete" procedure!

There are several alternatives to radical circumcision which preserve the function of the prepuce and result in less morbidity (pain, bleeding, complications). The best article to check out is the 1994 piece by Cuckow et al. After all, why would you want to lose all of those Meissner corpuscles, the same nerve complexes which provide fine touch to the fingertips?

[reAllytee]

Why is it those who circumcise have to repeatedly explain themselves.
Clarebear if you go back through you will find becca74 has explained herself repeatedly in many circ threads.
Lets not keep going in circles.

[Clarebear]

Allyoo, if you read my question very carefully you will see it has actually not been directly an swered as yet. The term Phimosis is used to many varying degrees nowadays. I am asking becca for the only reason that I think it would be great for everyone to know more and be better educated. Who better to ask then someone who has first hand experience?


Why is it those who circumcise have to repeatedly explain themselves.

I never said whether I have had my boys circ'd or not, are you assuming I haven't? Maybe, just maybe, I am trying to find out as much information as possible before making my decision??? Please don't assume everyone asking questions are doing it to make trouble or cause controversy. There are many mums out here who truly want to know more! If we don't ask how will we know?

[xkwzit]

Shouldn't all alternative methods be researched, discussed at length and tried first??? As with any medical procedure on our children.


Hi Clare I think you'll find that Becca did try other things first, before her sons had problems she was (and prob still is) against routine circ. (Becca, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong). Check these out:

http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?p=288910#post288910
http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?p=238441#post238441
http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/showthread.php?p=230074#post230074

There are more, but these are most helpful to you. You could also do a search on "phimosis" to see who else may have posted on it.

Cheers

[becca74]

Shouldn't all alternative methods be researched, discussed at length and tried first??? As with any medical procedure on our children.

Rebecca, if you don't mind could you tell us more about the actual 'type' of Phimosis in your family, as it is quite a vague term nowadays.

Clarebear, I find the idea of a dr giving my son a local and then having my son witness him handling his penis and stretching over a few sessions akin to my son being sexually abused. It is an experience I dont want him to have to go through, especially since it isnt guaranteed to work!

My sons are fixed now, they are not mutilated, there are millions of men around the world who look identical to them and and have absolutely no complaints. My boys are very happy, and they still have the same relationship with their willies as they did before.....(they are very typical boys!)

As I've said before. My husband got himself circ'd before them, as he felt so guilty that they would have to be done!! He has no complaints, the only side effect being that things are more sensitive now (if that can actually be considered a complaint - not!!).

No one is forcing you personally to circ your sons. If you had a son with phimosis and you wanted for him to witness a couple of sessions of a dr playing with his penis to stretch it - you go for it girl, but sorry, I dont have the stomach for that kind of psycological scarring. I would rather my sons go through something that I can tell them is a common procedure and reassure them that they have an identical looking penis to millions of other men around the planet - better still have it done when they are newborn so they wont have to remember! (And I have asked many Jewish men if they are permantly emotionally scarred from their circs as newborns and they all look at me strangely and say 'you are joking arent you - dont be so ridiculous!!')

With phimosis, you are damned if you do and damned if you dont. Until you have walked a mile in my shoes and all.....you know the rest.....

[becca74]

Hi Clare I think you'll find that Becca did try other things first, before her sons had problems she was (and prob still is) against routine circ. (Becca, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong). Check these out:



Yes, if my sons did not have phimosis, I wouldnt have had the circs done, as I would have seen it as totally unnecessary. I used to be quite vocally anti-circ, considering I had a strong family history of phimosis and I STILL risked not having my boys done, and I did put it off for a few years till I knew what the right decision would be. I was first warned by a dr that Jakob should be done when he was 3, and I still wanted to see if he would grow out of it. by the age of 5, the impression I got from drs was how could I be so cruel and irresponsible to let my son suffer like he was. His little brother was starting to show the identical signs as Jak did at the same age.

Having gone through what we did, I would now never judge anyone for their decision to circ their sons, for whatever personal reasons they have (even non-medical).....since I am now a living walking example of 'judge not lest ye be judged'......

ps, I also was vegetarian for many years before I got pregnant! I have changed alot over the years - friends who knew me before I had my sons would wonder where the opinionated Rebecca went ;) Ahhhhh...it's funny how having kids can change you in so many ways.....

[Clarebear]

Rebecca thank-you so much for replying, I was/am very interested in your experience. I do understand how 'touchy' this topic of discussion is and how some other posters can get quite deffensive.
I certainly did not come to stir, only to find out more from 'real' people, and not just bits of info from the net that, from what I have read can have so called medical evidence to prove both sides.
It can be very hard to find factual information that is not biased to one side. Even medical journals from libraries have 'medical support' for what is right, what is wrong, what can or can't be done.

I have researched Phimosis and searched through several forums, which is exactly why I asked Rebecca to speak more about it, as the information I could find was extremely vague and used several definitions of the term Phimosis.

It would be nice for anyone who replies to posts like this to think first that someone asking questions actually wants to learn more and speak with people who have been in certaain situations.

I have never stated whether I agree or disagree with circ, as it has nothing to do with why I posted, yet somehow I feel judged just for asking questions that have helped me and other people reading.

Rebecca, again, thank-you for replying, I really do appreciate it.

[reAllytee]

Sorry Clarebear i apologise for my harshness ... Bad morning after a sleepless child screaming nite & ive been rather snappy :o
I guess that because as you said & we all know that it is a touchy subject that most do judge us & repeatedly feel the need to ask why we would do it.
I apologise i took you as one just as i have snapped at a few people over time on this subject its just not necessary but i will never understand why people cant understand that like other topics this one has differing views.

[becca74]

Rebecca thank-you so much for replying, I was/am very interested in your experience. I do understand how 'touchy' this topic of discussion is and how some other posters can get quite deffensive.
I certainly did not come to stir, only to find out more from 'real' people, and not just bits of info from the net that, from what I have read can have so called medical evidence to prove both sides.
It can be very hard to find factual information that is not biased to one side. Even medical journals from libraries have 'medical support' for what is right, what is wrong, what can or can't be done.

I have researched Phimosis and searched through several forums, which is exactly why I asked Rebecca to speak more about it, as the information I could find was extremely vague and used several definitions of the term Phimosis.

It would be nice for anyone who replies to posts like this to think first that someone asking questions actually wants to learn more and speak with people who have been in certaain situations.

I have never stated whether I agree or disagree with circ, as it has nothing to do with why I posted, yet somehow I feel judged just for asking questions that have helped me and other people reading.

Rebecca, again, thank-you for replying, I really do appreciate it.

As Allyoo said, we come across such passionate hatred from people who think we've made a wrong decision, that we are already jumping to our defense....I suppose I used to be one of the culprit militant types on the subject, and then had to face the reality of it head on, and was forced to make a real confrontation of the issue and to make a real decision on the matter, and it really wasnt easy!

As you said, there is so much conflicting info out there, it is usually only emotion that people use to fight their corner in the debate over this.

I mean, I have heard some really ridiculous things, like it makes men more violent.....which to me doesnt make sense because you have a nation of uncirc'd men commit one of the most hideous acts of genocide in the history of the world against circ'd men (ie, what the Germans did to the Jews). So that argument holds no ground with me......and my sons were just as rambunctious before and after their circ's so me-thinks it's more down to personality than the medical procedure that has been done to them.....

Another one, is that it is deemed to make the man's bits less sensitive.....well, I can talk from the experience of being with a man who got himself circ'd about 18 months ago.......that is a total load of nonsense!

And these are emotional issues being used to debate this argument.

I spent alot of time asking circ'd men....including my brothers who had been done (and interestingly my brother that didnt have phimosis actually chose to get his done just because he wanted to, at age 16!) and all 3 have had no complaints whatsoever!

so this is why I always think we should leave this topic in the mans realm (like I think issues around childbirth choices should remain in the womens realm). If you cant stomach having it done to your son....i say loudly DONT DO IT!......but if you want to, or you agree with your hubby if he wants to have it done......I really think it is not the big deal that it is made out to be......

[TwoBoysOnly]

Hi have just read through this whole thread and would like to put my little advice/story in. I have two sons now 5 and 3 both of whom I did not get circumcised at birth even though whilst pregnant we both had decided we would but when it came tothe crunch we just couldn't do it, put them through this unncecessary 'pain' and 'tortute' when their little tiny penisis looked just fine to us. However, at the age of 3 1/2 my eldest started to get little bits of redness around the tip of his penis that would come and go, he never complained and so I thought nothing of it until one day just after he turned 4 his undies were stuck onto his penis, there was a huge infection, I took him to the hospital where he was put on topical steroid cream and oral antibiotics and booked in for a circumcision due to recurrent ballinitis. We then decided to get our younger son done at the same time so he wouldn't be the odd one out as DP is done also. If I had known the trauma and pain they would go through following the anesthetic and recovery period where they refused to move off the lounge where they lay naked for the next three days, I would have got them done as soon as they were born. I am a very a la natural midwife, but after this experience I would have got them done as babies despite what I felt or was told by doctors when I was pregnant.:ecomcity:

[Mister Noodle]

I personally find it odd that people assume that it's the pain aspect that's important wrt routine circumcision.

There's anaesthetics, after all.

The point is having important bits of your genitals missing. I'm honestly at a loss to understand how people can't see the significance of this.

The coresponding structure in females is the clitoral hood; you really wouldn't want that removed, leaving everything thus exposed to turn to leather against your underwear.

The foreskin also provides a great deal of mobility - I'd imagine the equivalent would be having your labia trimmed back until nothing moves.

It's major plastic surgery on their genitals, and I haven't met a single intact guy who wished he had had it done. I just can't imagine how anyone could do so to their own child except as the last resort in the face of pretty desperate medical problems.

[Mister Noodle]

Becca: the deal with the sensitivity is this:

Though the glans is exposed where it previously wasn't, and thus starts off a lot more sensitive, over the years the glans will keratinise (grow a skin-like surface) with wear, and the sensitivity will decrease significantly.

Stick your tongue out over your bottom lip, and yeah, you'll feel every little air current. But leave it that way for ten years, and it'll be another story altogether.

Same deal. Also, though the intensity of sensation may increase for a while, the total number of nerve endings, and thus the depth of sensation will decrease.

[becca74]

Hi have just read through this whole thread and would like to put my little advice/story in. I have two sons now 5 and 3 both of whom I did not get circumcised at birth even though whilst pregnant we both had decided we would but when it came tothe crunch we just couldn't do it, put them through this unncecessary 'pain' and 'tortute' when their little tiny penisis looked just fine to us. However, at the age of 3 1/2 my eldest started to get little bits of redness around the tip of his penis that would come and go, he never complained and so I thought nothing of it until one day just after he turned 4 his undies were stuck onto his penis, there was a huge infection, I took him to the hospital where he was put on topical steroid cream and oral antibiotics and booked in for a circumcision due to recurrent ballinitis. We then decided to get our younger son done at the same time so he wouldn't be the odd one out as DP is done also. If I had known the trauma and pain they would go through following the anesthetic and recovery period where they refused to move off the lounge where they lay naked for the next three days, I would have got them done as soon as they were born. I am a very a la natural midwife, but after this experience I would have got them done as babies despite what I felt or was told by doctors when I was pregnant.:ecomcity:

WOW, this is exactly what we went through!

[becca74]

Becca: the deal with the sensitivity is this:

Though the glans is exposed where it previously wasn't, and thus starts off a lot more sensitive, over the years the glans will keratinise (grow a skin-like surface) with wear, and the sensitivity will decrease significantly.

Stick your tongue out over your bottom lip, and yeah, you'll feel every little air current. But leave it that way for ten years, and it'll be another story altogether.

Same deal. Also, though the intensity of sensation may increase for a while, the total number of nerve endings, and thus the depth of sensation will decrease.

Mr Noodle,

My gorgeous husband (who I sleep with on a regular basis, funnily enough) and my brother (whom I have never slept with, obviously!!!!!!), Both are men who had elective circs (my hubby aged 41 - nearly 2 years ago, my brother aged 16 - over 12 years ago), and can equally declare to the world that they had no decreased sensitivity whatsoever, and in my husbands case, he experiences MORE sensitivity.....(his exact phrasing is that he feels like he did as a teenage boy having his first sexual encounters!)

There are thousands of men who elect to circ themselves. They enjoy the change, their partner's enjoy the change. So unless you have personally experienced both sides of the coin, I really dont know how you could actually be an authority on this??? I think I will firstly trust the judgements of those who have seen both sides, to be honest.....

Just like I dont trust men's (and women who have never had children's) opinions on the experience childbirth, I would really only trust the opinions about circumcision from someone who has had real life experience of this......

No offence, I am sure you are a very educated person......but in the same way I dont trust male OB's with childbirth issues, and even though they have been to university and got phd's on the subject, I STILL believe they know diddly squat about the normal experience of childbirth.

It is like this, I could watch a thousand people eat an apple - but If I have never eaten an apple myself in my life, what the hell do I know about it??? ;)

[Mister Noodle]

Well, by that logic, I'm automatically more qualified to judge than you: I have a penis.

[becca74]

Well, by that logic, I'm automatically more qualified to judge than you: I have a penis.

And I live with a man who has an elected circ'd penis......so I think I will take his opinion before yours.......:thumbsup:

Just like I would ask a woman who has given birth, what childbirth feels like, before I'd ask a woman who has never given birth.....that is my logic....