+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,695
    Thanks
    1,391
    Thanked
    7,284
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    Yes, good point. The one person I know IRL to have circ'd her son did so "so he would look like dad" so with less circ'd dads as well as better education it stands to reason there will be even less RIC.
    There are also a lot of men who are circumcised who don't get their sons done. Both my brothers are done. Between them they have 5 boys (sadly 2 passed away) but circumcising their boys because they were done was not an option. My bil is also snipped but my 2 nephews (his sons) are not.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BigRedV For This Useful Post:

    Apple iPhart6  (12-06-2015),Atropos  (11-02-2014),wigglemum  (18-10-2014)

  3. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked
    808
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigRedV View Post
    There are also a lot of men who are circumcised who don't get their sons done. Both my brothers are done. Between them they have 5 boys (sadly 2 passed away) but circumcising their boys because they were done was not an option. My bil is also snipped but my 2 nephews (his sons) are not.
    If we compare adult prevalence in the relevant age group to infant incidence, it would appear that about two-thirds of circumcised fathers did not circumcise their sons in the past decade. However, it would also appear that the infants who are circumcised are almost universally the sons of circumcised fathers.

  4. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    75
    Thanks
    33
    Thanked
    66
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Nkozi View Post
    Hi JohnC,
    I find it contradictory that circumcision is presently permitted in Australia, but then seemingly made hard (in some cases, almost impossible) for parents to access. I mean, if you're going to permit something, doesn't that imply that it should also be readily accessible, or at least not overly difficult to access?
    I suspect most younger doctors realise that the procedure conflicts with their ethical training.

    "Primum non nocere" or "first, do no harm"

    and therefore as older doctors retire, there are less doctors willing to break the Hippocratic oath

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Threekids For This Useful Post:

    abrave  (11-08-2015),JohnC  (11-02-2014)

  6. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    What about the fact that only a small number of medical professionals offer elective circ? Does that not indicate that there is a growing negative attitude towards the procedure in the medical field?

    I think there has definitely been a shift in many parents towards leaving their sons intact as information has become more available and more widely discussed.
    Hi Atropos,

    Yes, I agree that the small number of medical professionals willing to perform elective circumcisions is indicative of a negative attitude toward circumcision in the medical field. What I was actually arguing is that if circumcision is primarily declining due to a diminishing number of circumcision providers (or at least a perception that "nobody will do it anymore") then it may be the case that parental attitudes towards circumcision aren't necessarily as negative as the lower circumcision rates would nowadays suggest, since some parents will have not circumcised just because it was unavailable (or not easily accessible), rather than because they were definitively against circumcising. In other words, I'm wondering about causation: Have parents turned so strongly against circumcision that it's no longer being as readily provided, or are parents who would once havecircumcised no longer doing so because that routine provision is no longer there? Of course, a lot more parents are against circumcision than was once the case, but I do think that there's a not insignificant number of parents who, while they do not have their sons circumcised are not anti-circumcision, as such, and in fact would circumcise if the possibility seemed more accessible. I'm not suggesting that these non-circumcising but not anti-circumcision parents are in the majority, but I know of a few parents IRL who've said to me that their DS's are not circumcised, not because they are opposed to circumcision but because they couldn't find a doctor, or it was too expensive etc. I figured they couldn't be the only ones who felt that way.

  7. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by crankyoldcow View Post
    I get what you are saying, but I believe that supply and demand does come into play here. If there was a huge parental demand for routine infant circumcision then I am certain that there would be a larger (supply) of doctors willing to perform cicrumcisions. I don't have data to back it up, but in my mind the number of parents who did not have their son circumcised at birth because they could not find a doctor willing to do it would be very small.
    I am not suggesting that parental demand for infant circumcision is huge. It's just that I think that there are some parents (and I emphasise some) whose sons remain uncircumcised because of perceived or actual difficulties in getting the procedure done, rather than because they truly don't wish to do it. I don't mean to suggest that if access to circumcision were as easy as it was back when it was available in all hospitals to mothers who delivered sons, we'd see a 90% circumcision rate, or anything like that. But, I do think there'd be a noticeable increase. Just my opinion, as I can't test that scenario.

  8. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked
    808
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nkozi View Post
    I am not suggesting that parental demand for infant circumcision is huge. It's just that I think that there are some parents (and I emphasise some) whose sons remain uncircumcised because of perceived or actual difficulties in getting the procedure done, rather than because they truly don't wish to do it. I don't mean to suggest that if access to circumcision were as easy as it was back when it was available in all hospitals to mothers who delivered sons, we'd see a 90% circumcision rate, or anything like that. But, I do think there'd be a noticeable increase. Just my opinion, as I can't test that scenario.
    Consider this: the number of providers has remained constant over the past 3 years (about 240) but the number of circumcisions has fallen in each of those years. What does that tell you?

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JohnC For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (11-02-2014),beebs  (12-02-2014)

  10. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3
    Reviews
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnC View Post
    Consider this: the number of providers has remained constant over the past 3 years (about 240) but the number of circumcisions has fallen in each of those years. What does that tell you?
    I would say that the number of providers (on its own) is not necessarily what I'm talking about when I speak of parents potentially circumcising more often if the procedure was more readily available. I think that this has to take into account a number of different factors. For example, do parents who may be considering circumcision know who to ask about that? Are they confident in asking doctors, or are they concerned about negative reactions if they ask? What I'm saying is, although providers of circumcision may be available, this is not necessarily the same as parents feeling/knowing that this provision is accessible/available. If parents feel dissuaded by medical professionals in the early steps of their inquiries regarding circumcision (and I have heard of parents not even being able to fully inquire due to hostility from doctors), then they may never proceed to being aware of what is available in terms of the actual providers who are out there.

  11. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,310
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked
    808
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    @Nkozi,

    The medical establishment in Australia has had a fairly consistent position for more than 40 years: routine infant circumcision is "not necessary", "discouraged" and (most recently) "not warranted".

    Yes, like smoking tobacco, it's legal. That doesn't mean we don't use public policy instruments to discourage what is a harmful and unnecessary practice.

    No doubt if doctors changed their mind on this, the rate of RIC could well rise somewhat. But that ain't gunna happen . Meanwhile, actual demand for the procedure continues to fall under existing policy settings.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JohnC For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (12-02-2014),HappyBovinexx  (12-02-2014)

  13. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    I don't think that there are a huge number of parents wishing to circ but not doing so because a dr was hostile toward them. It's the age of information. They'd just google a dr near them that does perform RIC and go from there.
    The fact is, less parents want to circ their sons and less drs will do it. I doubt very much that a huge number of parents are desperate to circ but cannot figure out how to access a dr who will do it.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (12-02-2014),HappyBovinexx  (12-02-2014)

  15. #30
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    10,012
    Thanks
    14,124
    Thanked
    7,612
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    I obviously can't speak for anyone but myself. But I had never thought about circling, I was neither for nor against - it didn't bother me either way. But after reading up about it, I can find no reason to do it, reading articles and papers and also seeing an interview with some men from a group who wish they weren't circ'd has completely changed my view - I am now anti circa (for my kids). I don't think parents who choose to do it are bad or anything, just that at this point I can see no justification for it at all. Like why would you? This applies to religious reasons as well. There are plenty, plenty of things that lots of religions did that they no longer do because now they know better.

    I think you'd be talking about a real minority who want to do it but for whatever reason don't, I suspect the majority just don't see the point in it. I'd say there is a minority of people who think it is abuse/torture. But that most people who don't circ are somewhere in the middle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nkozi View Post
    I certainly agree that on a long-term view, the decline in infant circumcision has been dramatic. I would also suggest, however, that the 12.4% (or thereabouts) who continue to be circumcised are not a statistically insignificant demographic in itself; 12.4 % of all baby boys is quite sizeable, in my view. What I am wondering, therefore, is whether the other 70-80% of boys who would once have been circumcised are now not being circumcised because the possibility of doing so appears to have been closed-off to their parents (e.g. couldn't find a doctor, too expensive or whatever), or because even if it was very readily available in hospitals as it used to be, the parents are actually opposed to it in a deep sense. In other words, I wonder if the present rate is what it is because parents don't want their son(s) to be circumcised, or if in fact they do want to, but don't see it as a possibility that they could actually pursue...Of course, I realise that a lot more parents are now genuinely opposed to the procedure 'at heart' than used to be the case, but I also wonder if part of that long-term decline is attributable to parents simply not circumcising due to various practicalities involved, rather than not circumcising because they are against it.

    I find this distinction in motivations behind choosing not to circumcise interesting, because if there are a significant number of parents who would have circumcised if the procedure was as readily available as it once was, then it suggests that the relatively low rate of infant circumcision in Australia is not necessarily reflective of negative parental attitudes toward circumcision.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Prep numbers
    By 2BlueBirds in forum Preschools and Schools
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 19-06-2013, 23:37
  2. 12 week NT ultrasound, really bad numbers? DS 1:2
    By 2gemini2009 in forum Pregnancy Tests & Help / Support with Results
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-05-2013, 21:12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Bamboo Lulu
Super soft, fun prints & basics for baby, made from bamboo & organic cotton plus non-toxic wooden toys. • Hypoallergenic - perfect for eczema relief • Everything needed to shop for a baby shower • 10% off + FREE gift with purchase. Use code BUBHUB
sales & new stuffsee all
Pea Pods
Buy 2 Award Winning Pea Pods Reusable One Size Nappies for only $38 (in your choice of colours) and receive a FREE roll of Bamboo Liners. Don't miss out, we don't usually have discounts on the nappies, so grab this special offer!
Special Offer! Save $12
featured supporter
Pea Pods Reusable Nappies
Pea Pods are the smart choice when it comes to choosing what's best for you, your baby and the environment. Affordable and simple to use, Pea Pods keep your baby dry & happy. Visit our website to find your nearest stockist or order online.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!