View Full Version : Circumcision Court Fight
Thought a few parties may be interested in having a read of this.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-0606150233jun15,1,6522496.story?coll=chi-newslocalchicago-hed
A young boy, aged 8, was booked in for circumcision by his Mother & step-father, however the ex-husband is now suing to prevent it based on old rehashed anti-circumcision garbage in contradiction to the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The poor boy has apparently been documented to suffer from phimosis & balanitis and was recommended to be circumcised by his doctor to decrease the suffering and trauma from repeat bouts of balanitis.
It's appalling.
mum2littleman
28-06-2006, 23:06
i think if that poor child is in pain get him done why should he have to put up wit pain that will only continue all because his father will not let him have it done why would u want ur own child to be hurting?:no: i think thats really wrong!
i think if that poor child is in pain get him done why should he have to put up wit pain that will only continue all because his father will not let him have it done why would u want ur own child to be hurting?:no: i think thats really wrong!
Yep, that's the problem with the whole 'circumcision is bad' message and constant furore - it causes confusion and problems like this when people get caught up in what they think is doing the right thing because that's all they've heard.
It's just a shame that there is sides rather than just the plain truth.
Llewellyn pointed out that the boy's medical chart in his pediatrician's office does not document recurrent balanitis or other abnormalities.
And that's the point.
If there was a serious medical need for the circumcision, if there had been recurring bouts of pain and discomfort, the father would have noticed and they would have been medically noted.
The doctor that testified was not the boy's pediatrician and so his testimony is, in effect, useless. Of COURSE its better for a child with a recurring and painful condition to get that condition treated in the best possible manner. The question is whether that child in particular has that condition or whether the mother is indeed trying to get the child circumcised for religious reasons against the wishes of the biological father.
Thought a few parties may be interested in having a read of this.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-0606150233jun15,1,6522496.story?coll=chi-newslocalchicago-hed
A young boy, aged 8, was booked in for circumcision by his Mother & step-father, however the ex-husband is now suing to prevent it based on old rehashed anti-circumcision garbage in contradiction to the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The poor boy has apparently been documented to suffer from phimosis & balanitis and was recommended to be circumcised by his doctor to decrease the suffering and trauma from repeat bouts of balanitis.
It's appalling.
Actually, the AAP doesn't recommend circumcision as a routine procedure, which seems to be what this is all about. Sounds like the balanitis is just being used as an excuse. Looking at the situation objectively, surely it would be better to address the easily treatable problem with creams and antibiotics rather than resort to surgery?
Goosie22
29-06-2006, 07:06
Yes, removal of a girls vulva isnt recommended for recurrent puritis or UTIs is it.
If there was a serious medical need for the circumcision, if there had been recurring bouts of pain and discomfort, the father would have noticed and they would have been medically noted.
The father who doesn't live with the family, hasn't seen the boy in a substantial amount of time and doesn't pay child support and up until now has taken little to no interest in the boy?
Actually, the AAP doesn't recommend circumcision as a routine procedure, which seems to be what this is all about. Sounds like the balanitis is just being used as an excuse. Looking at the situation objectively, surely it would be better to address the easily treatable problem with creams and antibiotics rather than resort to surgery?
I didn't say they recommended it.
I stated "old rehashed anti-circumcision garbage in contradiction to the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics".
The AAP until 1999 recommended circumcision, thereafter they've stated there is no medical reason to either circumcise or not circumcise and therefore it is at the parents discretion, this however is read by anti-circumcision activists to mean that circumcision is "bad" which is incorrect.
Yes, removal of a girls vulva isnt recommended for recurrent puritis or UTIs is it.
Nor is a nuclear bomb recommended for removing fleas from your cat. The relevance of this statement would be what exactly? You're comparing apples to oranges.
The father who doesn't live with the family, hasn't seen the boy in a substantial amount of time and doesn't pay child support and up until now has taken little to no interest in the boy?
Whether this is the case or not, the chronic nature of the condition, as advocated by the mother's lawyer, would have been medically recorded more than once.
Whether this is the case or not, the chronic nature of the condition, as advocated by the mother's lawyer, would have been medically recorded more than once.
That's some pretty flawwed logic. I'm assuming you're a parent by you being on bubhub, therefore have you ever once not taken your child to the doctor because you knew what the problem was and that there was nothing that they could do about it or you knew what to do about it? She's been prescribed medication that did nothing much and after the condition has continued for a substantial amount of time has sought remedy via surgery after further consultation with a doctor.
Yet the husband is trying to stop it on the flawed premise that it's going to do lifelong damage to the boy and somehow ruin is sex life, facts all disproved yet conveniently constantly rehashed as scaremongering by the activists who only pay attention to one side of the debate.
When my son is grumpy with teething, having sloppy flu like poos we don't rush to the doctor because we know it's teething, therefore by your reasoning as the the medical records stated we've only been to the baby clinic once then my son should have only have one tooth, no?
The logic on your part seems pretty flawed to me.
If antibiotics or whatever measure the doctor prescribed were not working, I would go back and get some other prescribed measure. I would not just leave it for years and years and then seek surgical solutions.
With teething, you know what the cause is, you know there is an end in sight and that's why you don't rush your children to see doctors with each bout of sloppiness. If it was a recurring bowel infection causing causing such sloppiness, you can be very sure I'd be running to the doctors with each incident.
If antibiotics or whatever measure the doctor prescribed were not working, I would go back and get some other prescribed measure. I would not just leave it for years and years and then seek surgical solutions.
You're not really thinking of it correctly.
This isn't something that you can pop a few panadol for and if that doesn't work pop some x for and then you're right. It's a problem that circumcision is very good at fixing. Especially considering one can't have phimosis without a foreskin to not retract and once said foreskin is removed aeration rapidly increases leading to a rapid decrease in the risk of balanitis. Until such time your essentially only treating symptoms rather than the cause as balanitis has many causes some of which include lack of hygiene and environmental factors. In one off cases of balanitis it's often a case that yes antibiotics or pain relief or anti-infammatories will be prescribed however in reoccuring cases circumcision is the best way to resolve the problem, that's why in yesteryear people believed in routine circumcision as it prevented near guaranteed problems in the future however as world hygiene has increased the need for routine circumcision is no longer there, it's purely an option now rather than a need in most scenarios.
And I can tell you as someone suffering from chronic pain that treating symptoms is no solution, people with conditions such as rapid repeat balanitis are put through a living hell by so called do-gooders who prevent them from having their foreskin removed.
I can see you have some very strong emotions regarding this issue Barry, and I'm just wondering why it upsets you so much?
My interest in this is that I care about children, and it pains me that they are being permanently scarred for no good reason.
Mamaduke
29-06-2006, 12:32
Everyone does what they think is best for their child.
Barry, you've obviously got some very strong views on the whole circumcision debate...views you are entitled to, and if you're at peace with the decision you and your partner made in regards to your son then that's all that matters.
We didn't choose to circumcise our boys because basically, I just couldn't put them through something that, to me, was unnecessary - but I would never ever judge or tell another parent what they should/shouldn't do in regards to their child.
I think we need to just respect everyone's decisions and take into account that those decisions (whether they are for/against circumcision) are made with the best intentions.
We all love our boys and just want whats best for them...:thumbsup:
I can see you have some very strong emotions regarding this issue Barry, and I'm just wondering why it upsets you so much?
My interest in this is that I care about children, and it pains me that they are being permanently scarred for no good reason.
I have little to no emotion on the issue actually. I have an issue with people that spread fear, uncertainty and doubt on any topic. This just so happens to be one of those topics.
Hi All
Just wanted to congratulate everyone on keeping this debate civil. It is great to see an exchange of views and experiences that is staying friendly.
Please keep it nice so that we can keep this thread on this controversial topic open. Thanks.
Everyone does what they think is best for their child.
Exactly, and that becomes a problem when people are mislead into thinking things which aren't quite factual or true.
I think we need to just respect everyone's decisions
I couldn't agree more, which is why I have stated what I have previously.
catwoman
29-06-2006, 13:10
You're not really thinking of it correctly.
This isn't something that you can pop a few panadol for and if that doesn't work pop some x for and then you're right. It's a problem that circumcision is very good at fixing. Especially considering one can't have phimosis without a foreskin to not retract and once said foreskin is removed aeration rapidly increases leading to a rapid decrease in the risk of balanitis. Until such time your essentially only treating symptoms rather than the cause as balanitis has many causes some of which include lack of hygiene and environmental factors. In one off cases of balanitis it's often a case that yes antibiotics or pain relief or anti-infammatories will be prescribed however in reoccuring cases circumcision is the best way to resolve the problem,.
And I can tell you as someone suffering from chronic pain that treating symptoms is no solution, people with conditions such as rapid repeat balanitis are put through a living hell by so called do-gooders who prevent them from having their foreskin removed.
you mention that it is a condition caused 'through lack of hygeine and other enviromental factors'... wouldnt education on how to keep the penis hygenic be more realistic than surgery?
im new and i know im joing this discussion quite late.... but i was just wondering, a bit of soapy water and a course of antibiotics, sounds much gentler than having the fore skin removed...
you mention that it is a condition caused 'through lack of hygeine and other enviromental factors'... wouldnt education on how to keep the penis hygenic be more realistic than surgery?
It would be the perfect solution if that were the cause. But then the cause could be that it's already overcleaned in which case it'ld get worse... or that it's a muggy environment... not enough aeration...
Usually when someone rocks up the Drs they'll get given the cleaning lecture and told to supervise their child whilst they bath (unless this already occurs and the parent can say in total certainty cleaning isn't the issue) and then some form of medication (anti-b., anti-inf. et cetera).
There's a lot of possible causes that can result in the problem and there's the whole chicken and egg syndrome with balantis & phimosis in that one can cause the other and vise versa so treating one non-surgically may not cure the other and vise versa.
Nor is a nuclear bomb recommended for removing fleas from your cat. The relevance of this statement would be what exactly? You're comparing apples to oranges.
Love it! Go Barry!
Goosie22
29-06-2006, 13:42
Nor is a nuclear bomb recommended for removing fleas from your cat. The relevance of this statement would be what exactly? You're comparing apples to oranges.
So male genital region is so individual it is not comparable to the female anatomy? Urine is expelled from both our bodies around the same area, the female is at far more risk of UTIs than a male because of the way we are built our urethra is only about 1/5th the length and it encased in nice warm little pillows of flesh, and yes women make smegma too with our clitoris and clitorial hood.
Puritis is the female equivilant to phimosis/Balanitis, it is the chronic irritation of the vuvla caused by bacteria,unsanitary conditions ect and UTI is a urinary tract infection which is cause by bacteria, all of these bacteria are similar on either male or female genitals and simple hygiene is all that it take to keep what your born with in a sanitary condition.
No Apples and No Oranges in my undies last time I looked;) .
So male genital region is so individual it is not comparable to the female anatomy? Urine is expelled from both our bodies around the same area
If you want to start a entry level biology thread by all means do so, but I don't really intend to have to discuss the basic differences between male and female anatomy here, as such I'm not going to as I would assume that most people already know such and would find the information redundant. Therefore I will only state the obvious that removal of the foreskin is not equal to removal of the vulva nor is male circumcision similiar to female circumcision in any meaningful way.
simple hygiene is all that it take to keep what your born with in a sanitary condition.
Sanitary - yes, healthy - no , the male can suffer from factors outside of hygiene which I've previously mentioned, balantis isn't a simple case of dirty penis. Yes, in the past (1800-1960/70) it was the primary cause however now with the increase in world hygiene it has become apparent that it is not the sole cause. So by your logic those who are hygienic and have the condition should, what; suck it up and not be entitled to a normal pain free life?
Goosie22
29-06-2006, 14:09
No take antibiotics, clear it up and make the necessary changes to their lifestyle to ensure that their chronic condition is well cared for and hopefully prevent any recurrent bouts. If I have a vascular recurrent ulcer on my lower leg, I am not going to opt for amputation just because its too hard to elevate my leg take my ABs and change my dressings. For the record I was not comparing Female Genital Mutilation with male Circumision I was compairing the same problem (irritation of a sensitive area by bacteria present due to consistant poor hygiene) in a different gender, the different treatment options or outlook.
I dont have any knowledge of this childs medical history, or his family dynamics, but I know if some other guy tried to cut off part of my DH sons penis, then he would be pretty darn ticked off as well.
I'm just curious as to why all anti circ's feel they have to compare this to every other ailment imaginable.
I'm just curious as to why all anti circ's feel they have to compare this to every other ailment imaginable.
Sarie, I think goosie was only comparing it to one ailment, and just pointing out the similarities and the various ways it can be easily treated without resorting to the loss of a childs foreskin. :)
Sarie, I think goosie was only comparing it to one ailment, and just pointing out the similarities and the various ways it can be easily treated without resorting to the loss of a childs foreskin. :)
But it's the same everytime this topic comes up.
No take antibiotics, clear it up and make the necessary changes to their lifestyle to ensure that their chronic condition is well cared for and hopefully prevent any recurrent bouts. If I have a vascular recurrent ulcer on my lower leg, I am not going to opt for amputation just because its too hard to elevate my leg take my ABs and change my dressings.
So being that we've already discussed it a) can be resistant to meds, and b) still can occuring despite lifestyle changes, and c) can often have multipe causes, where's that leave you? Circumcision!
A vascular ulcer is not the same as balantis. At all. But next time you see someone with cancer of the vulva you may want to try to explain to them that removing the vulva isn't required and they can probably treat it with chemo/radio and drugs, but by the time you'll finish saying hello they'll already be on the op table.
Surgery is a valid solution to some problems and people need to realise this and not make invalid arguments to spread uncertainty.
the_queen
29-06-2006, 14:23
I dont have any knowledge of this childs medical history, or his family dynamics, but I know if some other guy tried to cut off part of my DH sons penis, then he would be pretty darn ticked off as well.
Great point Coops - I think this story is more about the family dynamics, than about the circumcision debate. Why can't the mother and the father come up with a solution to their child's problem without resorting to legal action?
I dont have any knowledge of this childs medical history, or his family dynamics, but I know if some other guy tried to cut off part of my DH sons penis, then he would be pretty darn ticked off as well.
Out of curiosity, if your child couldn't have children because of a penile issue in any form that could be resolved by surgery by "cut[ing] off part of my DH sons penis" would your DH doom your son by his views to not have the pleasure of having children? Or as I think would be more likely, would he'd evaluate the options and go forth knowing it's best for his child?
Great point Coops - I think this story is more about the family dynamics, than about the circumcision debate. Why can't the mother and the father come up with a solution to their child's problem without resorting to legal action?
The father is receiving financial backing from anti-circumcision groups.
This is the circumcision debate in all it's nastiness where parents choices are not respected.
Barry
Coop's post is a comment on how a non-custodial parent might feel if that decision was made w/o them. It's not a comment either for or against circ...
Barry
Coop's post is a comment on how a non-custodial parent might feel if that decision was made w/o them. It's not a comment either for or against circ...
I'm aware of what Coops comment is about I'm just enquiring as to if with the knowledge that surgery could relieve the problem would the position be the same or change. I'm not even relating it to whether it be a circumcision or not as you'll note I stated 'penile issue' it's purely about the choice.
Goosie22
29-06-2006, 15:08
I'm just curious as to why all anti circ's feel they have to compare this to every other ailment imaginable.
Because the reasons people give for removing the darn thing can be treated like every other ailment imaginable.
Barry, I have cared for women who have suffered Ca of the vulva and only in very advanced cases do the oncologists actually need to remove all the vulva, clitoris and mons (and it can be treated by Surgery/Radiation/Chemo or a combination). By the was Ca of Vulva can also be caused by people being too into clean with chemicals and powder instead of good only water and cotton undies.
Because the reasons people give for removing the darn thing can be treated like every other ailment imaginable.
If that's how your feel, but you will never understand, nor respect a procirc's reasons, so I guess we give up trying to explain them.
Because the reasons people give for removing the darn thing can be treated like every other ailment imaginable.
Barry, I have cared for women who have suffered Ca of the vulva and only in very advanced cases do the oncologists actually need to remove all the vulva, clitoris and mons (and it can be treated by Surgery/Radiation/Chemo or a combination). By the was Ca of Vulva can also be caused by people being too into clean with chemicals and powder instead of good only water and cotton undies.
Just because that's your view doesn't mean it's correct or that other people should make the same choices as you feel should be made or should be obligated to make those choices and I can tell you right now regardless of the need for the oncologist to remove the vulva or not a lot of women choose to have it removed.
There are many women out there who've been found to have breast cancer and rather than just having a single mastectomy they have a double mastectomy so that they don't have to worry in the future. Just because you think it's acceptable to risk your life and have rad or chemo theraphy rather than total removal doesn't mean other people do or should have to.
I've had to have drastic surgery in my life and had to choose door number 1 or 2 as a result I've got over 2 metres of stainless steel bolted on throughout my body which may be the only reason I'm alive right now.
Speaking of choice, and looking at it from a Human Rights viewpoint, I wonder what the boy wants? Hopefully he'll be given sufficient unbiased information to make an educated decision.
Barry, I realise you probably don't have any real life experience with foreskins, but it's quite simple to retract them and clean and dry underneath.
I had an episode of balanitis due to a tight foreskin in early puberty, and treated it by pulling back the foreskin and wiping off the gunk with toilet paper.
For reference, Balanitis Treatment (http://www.stdservices.on.net/std/balanitis/facts.htm).
Goosie22
29-06-2006, 15:35
There are many women out there who've been found to have breast cancer and rather than just having a single mastectomy they have a double mastectomy so that they don't have to worry in the future.
Unfortunately they still have to worry because Bilateral Mastectomy is not a Free pass to immunity in the Surviving BreastCancer stakes, and they have made the job of feeling for the rice size clusters of Breast Ca more difficlult due to scaring. The lymphodema from such surgery is truely horrific, so its a BAD Choice all round and not a very well informed one.
Speaking of choice, and looking at it from a Human Rights viewpoint, I wonder what the boy wants? Hopefully he'll be given sufficient unbiased information to make an educated decision.
Barry, I realise you probably don't have any real life experience with foreskins, but it's quite simple to retract them and clean and dry underneath.
I had an episode of balanitis due to a tight foreskin in early puberty, and treated it by pulling back the foreskin and wiping off the gunk with toilet paper.
For reference, Balanitis Treatment (http://www.stdservices.on.net/std/balanitis/facts.htm).
I'm unsure how you can raise the Human Rights viewpoint in the same paragraph as unbiased information as unbiased information clearly supports to choice to circumcise. But even if that weren't the case, how about the rights of the parents to raise their children as they see fit within the law of their country. Do you believe you have the right to tell a citizen of a soverign nation how they should act?
In regards to pulling back the foreskin and cleaning, that'ld be wonderful if the child didn't have phimosis, then he could, and then he'd probably be set, so long as his balanitis isn't cause by anything other than poor hygiene. This has already been raised.
Unfortunately they still have to worry because Bilateral Mastectomy is not a Free pass to immunity in the Surviving BreastCancer stakes.
So again because it's not your choice it's a bad choice? People do have a right to have surgery on their own bodies you know. Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean they're wrong.
Barry
Coop's post is a comment on how a non-custodial parent might feel if that decision was made w/o them. It's not a comment either for or against circ...
Thanks X :)
Barry, I can not speak personally for my DH, I was just simply pointing out that I can understand why the non custodial parent is upset about a decision like this being made without his consent, I imagine it would be a pretty normal reaction.
I have to ask, why the interest in all topics circ? I mean if you are comfortable in your decision for your child, why keep bringing up topics that try to justify it?
Thanks X :)
Barry, I can not speak personally for my DH, I was just simply pointing out that I can understand why the non custodial parent is upset about a decision like this being made without his consent, I imagine it would be a pretty normal reaction.
I have to ask, why the interest in all topics circ? I mean if you are comfortable in your decision for your child, why keep bringing up topics that try to justify it?
Well asides for the fact that I've already pointed out my question to you wasn't related to circumcision. My interest as I've already previously pointed out is only in that I don't like to see people bullied and mislead with fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Well respected medical institutions quite clearly state that circumcision is medicially fine and is upto a parents discretion whether or not they choose to persue it, yet there is a crowd of people who seem to think they hold medical degrees and know better than such medical institutions and feel it there need to force their beliefs of no circumcision onto everyone which is tripe.
That's my interest.
Well asides for the fact that I've already pointed out my question to you wasn't related to circumcision. My interest as I've already previously pointed out is only in that I don't like to see people bullied and mislead with fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Who was bullying who what?? :confused:
I'm unsure how you can raise the Human Rights viewpoint in the same paragraph as unbiased information as unbiased information clearly supports to choice to circumcise.
I fully support the boy's choice to be circumcised, if that's what he wants. I don't agree with it being done to him without his being fully informed and chosing to have it done.
Given that you don't like to see people bullied, maybe you could tone down some of your comments.
I think that this thread has run it's course - thanks to all for the contributions.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.