Circumcision

[Haven]

I'm Jewish and an old thread on PS was the first time I was ever exposed to the debate on this topic.

That being said, I wanted to share that I've been to many, many brit milot in my life. I've never since heard a good friend wonder whether they made the right decision to circumcise their child. SO, what I'm saying is this: I think this is one of those things that you will agonize over in order to make the decision, but rest assured that once you commit to it, you will likely be able to move on with your life unfettered by fears about whether yours was the right choice.

I have no idea what we will decide when and if we have a son. As Jews, I imagine we will have a bris for our child, but these PS threads will likely be in my mind and we'll do much research before making the decision.

 

[DivaDiamond007]

There are two arguments I don't understand.

The first is the whole issue about boys not looking like their fathers. Why would a boy be looking at his father's penis in the first place?

The second is the worry about the penis not being clean enough. I come from a country where circumcision is not practiced, almost at 100%, and have never heard of little boys experiencing penile problems because of lack of cleanliness.

Little boys may not experience penile problems due to lack of cleanliness, but my RN MIL can attest that older men often do.

 

[somethingshiny]

IMO, in a healthy household a boy would see his father's penis nearly every day. A little boy will follow daddy to the bathroom to see what's going on. He asks questions and announces things about his own little member. (Look how big my penis is! when he sees an erection on himself) Potty training a boy was easy for us and I think that's because he already knew the basics from watching his dad. Although I'm vehemently against pornography, we do view our bodies as perfectly acceptable and as long as everyone is comfortable, we don't hide them. JT still walks in the bathroom when I'm showering (he has a separate bathroom he could use) I think it creates a healthy attitude about our bodies. And, although little boys are "little" compared to their dads, they still have all the same structural elements and boys can see the similarities and differences from around 3 yr old.

As far as cleanliness--JT was circed but because he was so fat, the fat pad in the genital area forced the skin back over the end of the penis. It wasn't entirely covered, but a good portion of it. I had to pull it back and clean it and dry it until he grew out of the babyfat at around 4. Yes, there was definitely some gunk in there a few times.

 

[sba771]

I was just discussing this with my MIL as we are curious what my BIL and SIL are going to do since SIL is not Jewish. I am Jewish so it is happening, but even if I weren't Jewish I would still circumcise.

When I was in college I experienced a few uncircumcised partners and to be honest, they were clean people, but they still had yeast infections there and other issues. It also made certain activities more complicated due to insufficient lubrication or excess skin. It is just not something I would ever want my future children to deal with.

 

[Circe]

Wow, am I glad my husband and I are on the same page about this: I can see it being a definite deal-breaker, regardless of which side of the divide you're on. I mean ... it's your child's body. Everybody is going to be making the serious decision they've thought through carefully, that they believe in and stand behind. Well, I hope: I have occasionally heard people making the "Just because it's icky" argument on both sides, and, frankly, those people need to take a sec to think.

I am violently against the circumcision of infants. I think if adults want to do it - for religious reasons, for aesthetic reasons, for body modification reasons - that's well and good, but no one has the right to permanently alter another person's body for less that urgent reasons. Your child needs life-preserving surgery? You, as the custodial guardian, decide. Snipping off a bit here and a piece there, piercing this or that, or providing a fetching tattoo? Nope.

I say this as a Jew. My culture has a variety of traditions that were based in practicality back in the day, acquired cultural significance to strengthen their import over the years, and continue to serve as strong signifiers, but for me, their validity kind of falls short when it hits the level of bodily harm.

And I do see it as bodily harm. Arguments have been made going back and forth on whether circumcision can prevent the spread of STDs, lower rates of everything from cancer to phimosis to masturbation, and generally improve quality of life ... but at the end of the day, arguments go back and forth. I'm really not willing to risk betting on the wrong side here when the one side is all-or-nothing, and the other possesses nuance. I DO plan to teach my kid everything necessary for his own safety, from hygiene to STD prevention: and should there ever be an issue, he can be circumcised later on (but it's not like you can put it back). I'm not planning to subject him to an preventative appendectomy or a tonsillectomy - why on earth would I cut off a portion of his anatomy that's actually serving a current purpose for a risk that's lower than it is for either of the above conditions?

The bottom line is, the foreskin serves a purpose. It protects men's genitalia: it provides lubrication and pleasure during sex; it's the way we were designed, and there's no good reason to mess with it.

 

[Circe]

And since I wrote a novel in the initial post, now to handle the remaining counterarguments ....

The only remaining reasons I've heard are the "wanting kiddo to look like daddy" issue, and the "ick/anectdotal evidence" factors.

- wanting kiddo to look like daddy ... well, we're already going to have to explain basic differences ranging from body hair on both genders to breasts on adult women to, possibly piercings or other body mods. If a baby boy ever asks about his foreskin as opposed to his father's lack, it strikes me that the simple explanation of "it's optional, and you can choose it when you're older if you want" is a lot less damaging than applying a scalpel to the portion of the body packing the most nerve endings.

- the "ick/anectdotal evidence factor." I'm looking for a nice way to say this, but ... grow up. Does this mean you're (collective "you," not singling anybody in this thread out) down with the men who encourage women to get completely useless and physically damaging plastic surgery to shrink their labia, cuts their clitorises down to size, or painfully tighten their vaginas because that's what they're used to in ****? Genitalia is meant to make you feel good, not to look cookie-cutter pretty. Oh, and as long as we're going into "this one time, I met a guy with poor hygiene ...." issue: half my partners were circumcised, half weren't. The circumcised ones were uniformly the ones who were less sensitive, prone to erectile difficulties, and just ... worse in bed. The uncircumcised ones? Enjoyed the act more and were thus a little more invested in it. YMMV.

 

[swingirl]

There are two arguments I don't understand.

The first is the whole issue about boys not looking like their fathers. Why would a boy be looking at his father's penis in the first place?

The second is the worry about the penis not being clean enough. I come from a country where circumcision is not practiced, almost at 100%, and have never heard of little boys experiencing penile problems because of lack of cleanliness.

Why wouldn't a little boy look at his father's penis? It's not gross or inappropriate for a child to see their parent in the nude.

My main question is not whether the boy would or wouldn't look at his father. I just mean there's no reason for the boy to see his father in the nude, much less to compare penises.

However, couldn't it all be explained as differences between adults and children? As someone else said, a little girl won't have breasts but should she get implants just to look like her mother? Once the boy is old enough to understand, it could be explained to him that circumcision was practiced across the board when the father was an infant, but has now fallen out of general use.

Mayerling, we're not nudists by any means (!) but DH and I are naked around our children (1 and 3) quite a bit. If they are in our bedroom while we're changing or showering, they see us naked and we don't make any attempt to hide our bodies at this point. In fact, the 3 year old points a lot at both DH's parts and mine and it actually has been a great learning experience for her. So yes, there is a lot of opportunity for a child to see a parent in the nude. And I sit in the tub (naked) with my son during bathtime.

But if you were an amputee you wouldn't worry about explaining to your son or daughter why you two are different, right? Same thing. There are differences in people's bodies, some natural and some man-made.

 

[Pandora II]

You do not retract the foreskin in young children, it is very dangerous to do this as the glans is attached to the foreskin. There is no need to clean under the foreskin in children. Trying to do so it a great way to cause bleeding, scarring and infections. The first person to retract the foreskin is its owner in late childhood/early teenage years and simple washing with soap and water is all that is needed.

Regarding jewish traditions, my understanding is that it is sufficient for a drop of blood from the site to be shed, it doesn't need to be a full circumscison - or at least that is what some of my friends have been doing.

Regarding 'looking like Daddy' - I'm all for nudity in the home. My daughter normally showers or baths with me and follows both of us to the bathroom with great interest. I don't think she will have issues because she doesn't look like me right now and I don't see why a boy would think it odd not to have a penis exactly like their fathers (I'm sure it would be a medical issue if they did!).

Personally I couldn't bear the thought of having a perfect little baby and then chopping a bit off them for no good reason (even the AAP doesn't recommend circumcision). In the same way, I won't pierce my daughter's ears. If she wants to do that when she turns 16 then that is fine but I won't do it to her.

The laws surrounding circumcision in Europe are quite interesting. In the UK it may not be legal under the Human Rights Act - a man is currently sueing the doctor who circumcised him as a child. In Finland it is illegal to circumcise without a general anaesthetic. In the Netherlands they have considered making non-medical circumcision illegal.

At the end of the day it is up to individual parents to make their choice, but I wouldn't be forced into accepting what is after all a non-reversible procedure over which your son would have no choice if you feel strongly against it.

 

[Porridge]

There are two arguments I don't understand.

The first is the whole issue about boys not looking like their fathers. Why would a boy be looking at his father's penis in the first place?

The second is the worry about the penis not being clean enough. I come from a country where circumcision is not practiced, almost at 100%, and have never heard of little boys experiencing penile problems because of lack of cleanliness.

Why wouldn't a little boy look at his father's penis? It's not gross or inappropriate for a child to see their parent in the nude.

Not gross or inappropriate at all, but why would the comparison be such a big deal? There's lots of stuff that's going to be different between kids and parents - hair, size, breasts, possibly scars or marks etc. Just explain it. I don't understand why that comparison would be a factor in getting the little boy circ'd.

 

[Logan Sapphire]

There are two arguments I don't understand.

The first is the whole issue about boys not looking like their fathers. Why would a boy be looking at his father's penis in the first place?

The second is the worry about the penis not being clean enough. I come from a country where circumcision is not practiced, almost at 100%, and have never heard of little boys experiencing penile problems because of lack of cleanliness.

Why wouldn't a little boy look at his father's penis? It's not gross or inappropriate for a child to see their parent in the nude.

My main question is not whether the boy would or wouldn't look at his father. I just mean there's no reason for the boy to see his father in the nude, much less to compare penises.

However, couldn't it all be explained as differences between adults and children? As someone else said, a little girl won't have breasts but should she get implants just to look like her mother? Once the boy is old enough to understand, it could be explained to him that circumcision was practiced across the board when the father was an infant, but has now fallen out of general use.

Mayerling, we're not nudists by any means (!) but DH and I are naked around our children (1 and 3) quite a bit. If they are in our bedroom while we're changing or showering, they see us naked and we don't make any attempt to hide our bodies at this point. In fact, the 3 year old points a lot at both DH's parts and mine and it actually has been a great learning experience for her. So yes, there is a lot of opportunity for a child to see a parent in the nude. And I sit in the tub (naked) with my son during bathtime.

But if you were an amputee you wouldn't worry about explaining to your son or daughter why you two are different, right? Same thing. There are differences in people's bodies, some natural and some man-made.

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand your point? I'm not arguing for circ'ing or against here, just to say that yes, children can see their parents naked quite regularly, which is opposite of what I think Mayerling is saying. I don't think an intact child seeing his cut father would be a big deal, based on stories I hear from parents who have children intact and cut.

 

[bee*]

If I ever have a boy I wouldn't get him circumcised. I'm in Europe as well and I do not see any reason to circumcise. As for looking like their dad, I don't see think that babies should be altered based on how their father looks. Baby girls do not resemble their mothers at birth so I don't see why it can't be explained to boys. If someone wants to get it done later in life, then it's their decision but as a child, I don't think it should be made for them.

 

[amc80]

There are two arguments I don't understand.

The first is the whole issue about boys not looking like their fathers. Why would a boy be looking at his father's penis in the first place?

The second is the worry about the penis not being clean enough. I come from a country where circumcision is not practiced, almost at 100%, and have never heard of little boys experiencing penile problems because of lack of cleanliness.

Why wouldn't a little boy look at his father's penis? It's not gross or inappropriate for a child to see their parent in the nude.

Not gross or inappropriate at all, but why would the comparison be such a big deal? There's lots of stuff that's going to be different between kids and parents - hair, size, breasts, possibly scars or marks etc. Just explain it. I don't understand why that comparison would be a factor in getting the little boy circ'd.

I never saw either of my parents naked, except for maybe a glance here or there if I walked in on one of the on accident. I don't plan on being naked around my kids, either. We just aren't naked people, ha. In fact, I didn't find out until a few years ago that my brother wasn't circumcised, and that was because I heard my mom talking to my SIL about it. My mom said the reason she didn't have it done was because he was a premie and had to have a ton of medical intervention and was in the hospital for months, and she didn't want him to have to go through any more procedures than he needed. Looking back, I remember my mom talking to one of the middle school teachers about him and how he was embarrassed to take showers in gym. At the time I didn't quite understand the conversation (I was 9 or so), but that's what they were talking about.

As for my kids, I've always said I would let my (future) husband make the decision. He is all for it.

 

[partgypsy]

To be honest if we had a boy, I was going to allow my husband to make the decision, and he was pro circumcision (for a number of reasons). However when this came up in conversation we were pretty much verbally attacked for this view.

So, you and your (future) husband decide, but whatever you do make it a PRIVATE decision because there will be people who disagree with you (no matter what you decide).

 

[partgypsy]

And since I wrote a novel in the initial post, now to handle the remaining counterarguments ....

The only remaining reasons I've heard are the "wanting kiddo to look like daddy" issue, and the "ick/anectdotal evidence" factors.

- wanting kiddo to look like daddy ... well, we're already going to have to explain basic differences ranging from body hair on both genders to breasts on adult women to, possibly piercings or other body mods. If a baby boy ever asks about his foreskin as opposed to his father's lack, it strikes me that the simple explanation of "it's optional, and you can choose it when you're older if you want" is a lot less damaging than applying a scalpel to the portion of the body packing the most nerve endings.

- the "ick/anectdotal evidence factor." I'm looking for a nice way to say this, but ... grow up. Does this mean you're (collective "you," not singling anybody in this thread out) down with the men who encourage women to get completely useless and physically damaging plastic surgery to shrink their labia, cuts their clitorises down to size, or painfully tighten their vaginas because that's what they're used to in ****? Genitalia is meant to make you feel good, not to look cookie-cutter pretty. Oh, and as long as we're going into "this one time, I met a guy with poor hygiene ...." issue: half my partners were circumcised, half weren't. The circumcised ones were uniformly the ones who were less sensitive, prone to erectile difficulties, and just ... worse in bed. The uncircumcised ones? Enjoyed the act more and were thus a little more invested in it. YMMV.

- this part is totally anecdotal. Speaking of a friend who had sex with both, she had the opposite impression. I've never noticed a "lack" of sensation in men with circumcision, personally.

 

[Circe]

And since I wrote a novel in the initial post, now to handle the remaining counterarguments ....

The only remaining reasons I've heard are the "wanting kiddo to look like daddy" issue, and the "ick/anectdotal evidence" factors.

- wanting kiddo to look like daddy ... well, we're already going to have to explain basic differences ranging from body hair on both genders to breasts on adult women to, possibly piercings or other body mods. If a baby boy ever asks about his foreskin as opposed to his father's lack, it strikes me that the simple explanation of "it's optional, and you can choose it when you're older if you want" is a lot less damaging than applying a scalpel to the portion of the body packing the most nerve endings.

- the "ick/anectdotal evidence factor." I'm looking for a nice way to say this, but ... grow up. Does this mean you're (collective "you," not singling anybody in this thread out) down with the men who encourage women to get completely useless and physically damaging plastic surgery to shrink their labia, cuts their clitorises down to size, or painfully tighten their vaginas because that's what they're used to in ****? Genitalia is meant to make you feel good, not to look cookie-cutter pretty. Oh, and as long as we're going into "this one time, I met a guy with poor hygiene ...." issue: half my partners were circumcised, half weren't. The circumcised ones were uniformly the ones who were less sensitive, prone to erectile difficulties, and just ... worse in bed. The uncircumcised ones? Enjoyed the act more and were thus a little more invested in it. YMMV.

- this part is totally anecdotal. Speaking of a friend who had sex with both, she had the opposite impression. I've never noticed a "lack" of sensation in men with circumcision, personally.

Heheh - thus illustrating the issue with anecdotal evidence! Basically, my first post was my "factual position" - the second is just taking apart what I see as poor argumentation. Definitely not expecting the fact that my anecdotal evidence contradicts other people's to sway anybody! Just putting it out there as a vote against anecdotal evidence.

 

[nfowife]

I know you think you never saw/were around your parents when naked, but I'd bet you just don't remember it- it's been shown that most adults don't remember most things before age 4 (of course you will have episodic memories of certain events and whatnot, but not everyday life memories most likely).
I have an 8m, 4y, and 6y old kids and I don't know how I could really stop them from seeing me naked. Wait until you have kids and try going to the bathroom alone with a toddler in the house or take a shower. My 6 year old sees a lot less of me now, that's natural as she gets older and realizes that nudity is something that should be private in general, but young children don't have that self-awareness at such a young age. It's innocent!

 

[partgypsy]

I don't have a boy baby so I don't have a "gun" in this fight so to speak, but to me it seems that there are both pros and cons to circumcision. Some see the pros as more compelling (and yes, cultural reasons, or not wanting to not "fit in" are valid psychosocial reasons), while some see the cons as more compelling or maybe find the act itself horrifying. Maybe I'm weird, but I just don't see male circumcision on the same level as female circ/multilation. So I instantly hate those arguments where oh if you are pro this then you are pro women cutting their boobs off. It is such an extreme comparison it really invalidates the person's argument. Maybe because I work in the medical field I accept that the body we are born with may change, whether it is a preventative appendix removal, prophalatic breast removal (I know someone who had this done for good reason), amputations, and even adult (geriatric) circumcision (yes this happens). So the fact that it is "natural" to have an appendix or wisdom teeth doesn't mean that they we MUST keep them.

Living in the "first world" from everything I've read the pros and cons are inconclusive or a wash. Yes there can be problems, but you can have surgery at that time. It comes down to cultural preferences. Believe me, this is a male-dominated world. If there was clear incontrovertible evidence that male circ has adverse effects I doubt any males would be having it done.

(Talked way too long about this subject!)

 

[TheDoctor]

My default was to have our only son circumcised at birth but his mother suggested a more sensitive approach...
Let him try wearing it off if he felt the need to be without it when he became much older.

 

[MonkeyPie]

You do not retract the foreskin in young children, it is very dangerous to do this as the glans is attached to the foreskin. There is no need to clean under the foreskin in children. Trying to do so it a great way to cause bleeding, scarring and infections. The first person to retract the foreskin is its owner in late childhood/early teenage years and simple washing with soap and water is all that is needed.

When they are old enough to do it themselves, I agree. But how exactly do you think you would get that area clean in an infant otherwise? Which part do you think it is that catches "stuff" and infection? It certainly isn't the surface. Not to mention, if it isn't pulled back, that is when tightening occurs and has to be surgically corrected. Typically not in infants, but in some cases it can begin that early.

This is one of those topics where no answer is the right answer for the people involved. You have to do what you feel is right, and this topic almost always becomes heated so I hope it stays civil.

 

[Pandora II]

Tightening often occurs as a result of infections and scar tissue forming in the area because of people forcibly retracting their babies foreskins.

I did a quick ask round my extended family and none of the mothers with sons ever retracted the foreskin to clean it - they had been told that it was unnecessary and potentially harmful.

Here's some more information for those interested - the first from the American Academy of Paediatrics:

http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/aap/

http://kidshealth.org.nz/index.php/ps_pagename/contentpage/pi_id/266

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/info-forcedretraction.html

ETA: The argument I really don't get at all is 'I left it to my husband to decide as he will know best'? I kind of thought in the 21st Century parents made joint decisions in their childrens best interests not delegate based on gender... I'm quite sure my husband wouldn't be too happy if I decided to have our daughter's ears pierced next week and he has every right to a view on the subject even if I'm the only one of the two of us who has been pierced...

 

[nfowife]

MonkeyPie, my son is circe'd but had problems with adhesions as an infant. We went to a pediatric urologist at the children's hospital here and he told us to NEVER retract the foreskin forcibly. In fact he told us so long as urine could get out (it could, in our son the hole was still visible, adhesions were on the sides) we should not try to clean it other than surface clean when giving a bath. He said that the foreskin will retract on it's own sometime before or during puberty- the child will take care of that themselves . Many pediatricians do the forcible retractions but the urologist said this is not proper care of the penis to do that and it can cause pain.
http://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/baby/bathing-skin-care/pages/Care-for-an-Uncircumcised-Penis.aspx

 

[amc80]

ETA: The argument I really don't get at all is 'I left it to my husband to decide as he will know best'? I kind of thought in the 21st Century parents made joint decisions in their childrens best interests not delegate based on gender... I'm quite sure my husband wouldn't be too happy if I decided to have our daughter's ears pierced next week and he has every right to a view on the subject even if I'm the only one of the two of us who has been pierced...

I don't have a penis, so I don't feel I'm qualified to make decisions about it. If I was very much for or against circumcision either way, I probably wouldn't have that argument. But I'm pretty neutral, so I leave the decision to the person who can relate to the situation at hand.

 

[somethingshiny]

For a woman who doesn't have a strong view one way or the other, I think it's perfectly acceptable to leave the decision up to someone who has a bit of knowledge on that front. If my DH didn't care if Lily got her ears pierced one way or the other, I'd just make that decision myself. (obviously ear piercing and circumcision are entirely different, but you get my point)

As I said, JT was circed as an infant and the skin kept pushing forward. Our dr told us to keep pushing the skin back and cleaning under the rim of the head. That rim can collect some gross stuff. Think of how many times a day a boy/man gets an erection. So, each time, it's peeking out and then pulling anything around it back in with it, whether it's sweat, underpants lint, poop from a diaper, etc. Maybe being un circed is way different from what I dealt with for JT, but we def needed to clean that little guy!

 

[megumic]

I'm wondering why some mothers defer to their husband to decide since he's the father/man/has a penis.

 

[AprilBaby]

I doubt G*D would have asked his chosen people to do something harmful so I disagree that it is a bad thing to do. The reason why I do not know, but I respect the religious reason for having it done. Each person has the right to make their own decision without being flamed for their opinion. Do what you think is right for YOUR child.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

I'm Jewish and an old thread on PS was the first time I was ever exposed to the debate on this topic.

That being said, I wanted to share that I've been to many, many brit milot in my life. I've never since heard a good friend wonder whether they made the right decision to circumcise their child. SO, what I'm saying is this: I think this is one of those things that you will agonize over in order to make the decision, but rest assured that once you commit to it, you will likely be able to move on with your life unfettered by fears about whether yours was the right choice.
I have no idea what we will decide when and if we have a son. As Jews, I imagine we will have a bris for our child, but these PS threads will likely be in my mind and we'll do much research before making the decision.

Yep, IMO, what Haven said above is pretty much true. My boys aren't circumcised and I haven't really even thought about it in a long time. There are so many other parenting decisions to make. You make that one, then move on to which diapers you're going to use!

 

[jstarfireb]

I don't have a boy baby so I don't have a "gun" in this fight so to speak, but to me it seems that there are both pros and cons to circumcision. Some see the pros as more compelling (and yes, cultural reasons, or not wanting to not "fit in" are valid psychosocial reasons), while some see the cons as more compelling or maybe find the act itself horrifying. Maybe I'm weird, but I just don't see male circumcision on the same level as female circ/multilation. So I instantly hate those arguments where oh if you are pro this then you are pro women cutting their boobs off. It is such an extreme comparison it really invalidates the person's argument. Maybe because I work in the medical field I accept that the body we are born with may change, whether it is a preventative appendix removal, prophalatic breast removal (I know someone who had this done for good reason), amputations, and even adult (geriatric) circumcision (yes this happens). So the fact that it is "natural" to have an appendix or wisdom teeth doesn't mean that they we MUST keep them.

Living in the "first world" from everything I've read the pros and cons are inconclusive or a wash. Yes there can be problems, but you can have surgery at that time. It comes down to cultural preferences. Believe me, this is a male-dominated world. If there was clear incontrovertible evidence that male circ has adverse effects I doubt any males would be having it done.

(Talked way too long about this subject!)

You took the words right out of my mouth...I agree 100% with this post. I get especially perturbed when I hear of male circumcision being compared to FGM (which I haven't heard on this thread, BTW, so...good for everyone here!). Male circumcision doesn't completely destroy a man's chance to experience sexual pleasure or make it difficult/painful to urinate, and it's not done with the aim of controlling his sexuality. Apples to oranges IMO, and I'm glad nobody has made that comparison here (and at the same time happy to get that argument off my back!).

I also agree that cultural and psychosocial reasons are valid, but less of an argument for fitting in can be made these days as circumcision rates are decreasing. So as a non-Jewish person, I'm not sure I have a cultural argument for circumcision, except for this: because of the "ick" factor, I personally would not have sex with an uncircumcised man. Paradoxically, even though it's the natural state, it seems unnatural to me because I had never seen an uncircumcised penis until med school. Everyone circ'd when/where I was growing up.

Medically, I don't think there's a really compelling argument either for or against circumcision (at least in the developed world, as others have mentioned), so it becomes a lot more of a cultural/religious/personal decision. Ultimately I think I would leave the decision to my husband, who is for circumcision. But I would definitely ask for a nerve block to be used for the procedure, and I might have it done by a pediatric urologist. Moot point since I'm not planning on having kids, but an interesting thought experiment.

 

[Laila619]

Maybe because I work in the medical field I accept that the body we are born with may change, whether it is a preventative appendix removal, prophalatic breast removal (I know someone who had this done for good reason), amputations, and even adult (geriatric) circumcision (yes this happens). So the fact that it is "natural" to have an appendix or wisdom teeth doesn't mean that they we MUST keep them.

Exactly. I'm sorry, but it's kind of odd to say "They're born with foreskin so it must be needed for a reason." There are lots of things we are born with that we change/remove/trim/improve, etc. Wisdom teeth, gallbladder, tonsils, appendix, a large nose are just a few of these things. We're meant to have hair all over our bodies but we still shave, cut, and remove it. I just don't see the "natural" argument as a good one.

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

There are two arguments I don't understand.

The first is the whole issue about boys not looking like their fathers. Why would a boy be looking at his father's penis in the first place?

The second is the worry about the penis not being clean enough. I come from a country where circumcision is not practiced, almost at 100%, and have never heard of little boys experiencing penile problems because of lack of cleanliness.

Boys might see their fathers penis in the shower, bathroom getting changed. There is nothing wrong with children seeing their parents naked, in fact I see it as a positive step towards having a healthy attitude towards their own naked bodies as they get older.

My sisters 4 year old boy was rushed to hospital the other night with a high fever, he was close to convulsions. they couldn't figure out what was wrong with him. Turns out he had an infection in the fold of his foreskin. The drs suggested getting him circumcised.

 

[kennedy]

Maybe because I work in the medical field I accept that the body we are born with may change, whether it is a preventative appendix removal, prophalatic breast removal (I know someone who had this done for good reason), amputations, and even adult (geriatric) circumcision (yes this happens). So the fact that it is "natural" to have an appendix or wisdom teeth doesn't mean that they we MUST keep them.

Exactly. I'm sorry, but it's kind of odd to say "They're born with foreskin so it must be needed for a reason." There are lots of things we are born with that we change/remove/trim/improve, etc. Wisdom teeth, gallbladder, tonsils, appendix, a large nose are just a few of these things. We're meant to have hair all over our bodies but we still shave, cut, and remove it. I just don't see the "natural" argument as a good one.

Yes, but do we remove the wisdom teeth, gallbladder, tonsils and appendix of every newborn baby as a prophylactic measure on the off chance these body parts cause problems in the future?

I think it's important to remember that the foreskin SERVES A PURPOSE -- it's not just some random extra piece of skin. So, yes, bodies sometimes have to be altered by surgery, but before I allowed a scalpel near the most sensitive part of my 2 or 3 day old newborn baby's body, I would make absolute certain there was a sound medical reason to do so. And, in the case of circumcision, there isn't.