Circumcision Decision

[Sparks*]

What you read are not necesserly facts but intepratations of studies. Studies can be interpreted in multitude of ways. This is why they don't ever say anything conclusive about circ. So, I can disprove any of your studies. My point is that this decision should not be made because of what "research studies suggest". It is a purely ethical and human rights issue.

Research studies suggest that there are some good medical why your son should be circumcised. These include:

Circumcision lowers your son’s chances of getting a urinary tract infection (UTI) in the first year of life..

Circ may cause UTI
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...t=AbstractPlus


Overall, urinary tract infections (UTI) occur at about the same rate in male and female infants during the first six months of life. Regardless of circumcision status, infants who present with their first UTI at 6 months (or less) are likely to have an underlying genitouninary abnormality. In children with a normal underlying anatomy, a study found as many circumcised infants with a UTI as those who retained their foreskin.8 The appropriate treatment for UTI, in males as well as females, is antibiotics, not prophylactic excision of the prepuce. According to the AAP, “Urinary tract infections are usually not life threatening and are easily treated in most cases.” Breastfeeding provides some measure of protection against UTI during the first six months of life.

Although a rare condition, cancer of the penis is essentially eliminated in circumcised males...

Penile Cancer on circumcision scar
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...t_uids=3944860
http://www.ajsp.com/pt/re/ajsp/abstr...195629!8091!-1


"The American Cancer Society does not consider routine circumcision to be a valid or effective measure to prevent such cancers... Penile cancer is an extremely rare condition, affecting one in 200,000 men... Perpetuating the mistaken belief that circumcision prevents cancer is inappropriate.''
The American Medical Association, in a July 2000 report, states, “… because this disease [penile cancer] is rare and occurs later in life, the use of circumcision as a preventive practice is not justified.”

Research shows that males who are circumcised have a slightly lower risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)....

No link found with circumcision and prevention of STDs.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...?dopt=Abstract
http://highwire.stanford.edu/cgi/medline/pmid;16925903
http://www.cirp.org/library/general/dave1/


Some studies show that circumcision has a slight preventive effect for AIDS and some STDs; however, other studies show an insignificant or opposite effect, especially for chlamydia. The bottom line: sexual practices have a much greater effect on the chance of becoming infected than circumcision status. If someone acts on the misconception that circumcision alone will protect them, they are taking unwise chances.


This Penn & Teller video is supposedly the best: http://video.yahoo.com/watch/620449

Circumcision eliminates foreskin infection that occur at the peak ages of 3 to 5 years....

Infection
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...ubmed_RVDocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...ubmed_RVDocSum

Circumcision prevents phimosis, a narrow opening that makes it impossible to retract the foreskin at a later age....

True phimosis is not common. Circumcision gives your son a 10% chance at having meatal stenosis...a narrow opening of the urethra that makes it hard for him to urinate, and will most likely need surgical correction.

Genital hygiene, which is particularly important in unsanitary conditions, may be easier after circumcision. ....

Since you live where you have access to the internet, your child will have access to clean water and soap, and will be smart enough to wash his penis.

As parents, you have to make many decisions for your children. You said that you should let your son decide, it is his penis. But look at everything that you choose for your children. Their food, their bathing routines, their clothes, their everything. Babies are incapable. A circumcision is much riskier later in life, choosing whether or not to have it done should be before or shortly after he is born.

But none of these are comparable since do not permanently remove a healthy body part. Things like bathing, feeding, etc are essential for survival and keeping somebody happy and healthy. Circumcision does not fit that bill. I'm sure if we would cut off all those folds of the labia, you could also make a girl less susceptible to some infections. Would you circumcise your daughter then? What would you do if your son wanted to be uncircumcised later in life? Foreskin restoration surgery is much more dangerous than a later circumcision. Also, Circumcision is not riskier later in life. For example, many Muslims go through the procedure in childhood or early teen years. Don't know from where your assertion came out of? Its more costly later, that's it. Frankly, the doctor has a bigger area to work with; so it's better to do it later in life.

[nathaliehanna]

I stated on my first post that my husband was not circumcised, and for whatever reason could not keep himself clean, thus he got an infection that required him to receive the procedure. He was 6 years old and remembers nothing of it. He is very thankful to of had the procedure. Now, I have done my research, but there are many pros and cons of both..most of which cannot be proven on either side. As far as female products go, those are not for babies, toddlers, or even young children. They are for women. I really do feel as though circumcision would be the best solution to all of this, but I am trying to weigh out my decision. Your posts are appreciated.

Jenn, what was the real reason behind your DH's circumcision? I ask because an infection is not reason to cut off a foreskin. How many other body parts are doctors happy to remove just because of an infection?

There are several reasons infection may have happened with your DH.

The first is because back then, nurses taught parents of intact sons to forcibly retract them early on. That is a problem because, when a baby boy is born, his penis is not done developing yet. The foreskin is fused to the head of the penis, and forceful retraction literally "skins" the head of the penis - tears that skin off it, leaving it bleeding, raw and susceptible to any number of infections or problems.

So constant retraction to clean can actually CAUSE infections - that's why it is no longer done. Doctors (those in the know) realize that this causes more harm than good, and is painful for the baby or child. If you ever have a doctor telling you to retract and clean your infant/toddler son's penis - RUN from him FAST. He is obviously ignorant on the care of the intact penis.

Also, what about yeast infections? Was your DH using lots of soap or soaking in bubble baths? Because, like a girl, those too can cause yeast infections in the intact. The foreskin is mucous membrane - you don't need (and shouldn't use) soap to clean it any more than you'd use soap in your vaginal opening.

Then there is also the separation process. When the foreskin naturally starts to separate from glans at around 3 to 5 years old - sometimes as late as puberty - the foreskin can look infected (it can get red, irritated, swollen, and secrete a bit of smegma. Smegma is the exact same white stuff girls get in their genitals). Doctors often misdiagnose this as an infection.

Anyway, point is - your DH may have been "mistreated" or taught improper care of himself, or may just have been going through the normal separation process. He may never know the reason. But the fact is that with any other body part, infected body parts gets treatment, not removal. If a girl's genitals are infected in any way, shape or form, you'd better believe she's going to have it cultured and receive antibiotics or anti-fungal treatments. Never would anyone consider cutting off pieces of her.

And just as a side note, in non-circumcising countries (only 15% of the world's population are circ'd), the actual rate of ever really needing a medical circumcision are less than .5%. And those reasons are almost always due to: frostbite, gangrene or cancer.

[nathaliehanna]

I'm not even interested in the cosmetic side of the procedure, I am interested in the health aspect. When a boy hits 6 or so and decides that he doesn't want you in the room when he is taking his bath, how will you know that he is cleaning himself properly. And when you spoke of antibiotics, did you not read the part when I said that my husband "HAD" to get the procedure because it was infected. Not a UTI that can be treated with medication, he had to at the age of 6..and yet he is still in support of it.

Boys don't even need to begin retracting to rinse until they hit puberty.

Until then, just a regular shower or bath is all they need.

And Jenn, why do we moms not have confidence that our 13 year old boys can retract, rinse and replace? How hard is that? Girls are much more complicated, but we trust them.

British, Australian and Canadian boys are able to keep themselves clean - Please, let's give the American boys more credit.

[nathaliehanna]

I've just now finally read through the entire thread, thus the several posts one after the other!

Anyway, I realize that your main concern is with health reasons. First of all, I applaud you for that, because so many like to hide behind the "health" thing but really just do this to their sons because they think it looks better, etc...in other words, purely for cosmetic reasons. I'm glad that you are seriously concerned about health issues.

That said, Jenn, the only REAL thing that *might* or *might not* be a health concern for your baby son is the UTI thing. It's been proven, it's been disproven, it's been touted as the most important thing, it's been called the least important. No matter which way you look at it though, it's still only 1% likely to happen to an intact boy. But it's not like you'd be without a way to make him better. Antibiotics. That simple.

Phimosis, Cancer, STDs (America has one of the highest rates of STDs and the most circ'd men), and all those other things that are touted as *possible* health benefits are not proven and really only concern the adult your son will become. At that point, he can, armed with probably more recent and exacting studies, check out the pros and cons of keeping his foreskin or removing his foreskin. It's that easy - the decision can be his, and he can "own" that decision as he "owns" that body part.

But what about health concerns if your son is circumcised?
He has a 10-25% of getting meatal stenosis and needing further surgery to reopen the urethra (constant abrasion against clothing can cause it to scar up and ulcerate).
He can contract MRSA in the hospital through his open wound - this is becoming more and more common.
He can have too much skin removed and suffer painful, tight erections his whole life - men with this problem tell of how the skin around the head of their penis can even tear and bleed. And if it's too tight and there is not enough skin to accomodate an erection, the penis will "borrow" skin from the scrotal area - pulling hair onto the shaft (makes for painful sex for the woman).
He can have "too little" skin removed, and the foreskin will try to reattach to the glans. This is becoming a VERY common problem among circ'd boys, and most doctors, against the advice of the AAP, will tell parents to forcibly rip apart these adhesions - causing the boy pain, additional scarring, and opening him up to infections again.
He can suffer a botched circumcision and be left with a mangled mess.
He can lose bits and pieces of his glans - sometimes when the foreskin is stripped off the head, it can pull out pieces of glans, leaving a pock-marked head in the boy.
He can suffer from future erectile dysfunction (very common in circ'd men).
He can bleed to death, as some boys have.

I encourage you to read this article about proper intact care, and how circumcision is almost never the "cure" to any number of issues: (Aaagh! I can't find it now, but I will and post again....)

I hope my posts have helped somewhat. I was honestly in the same boat you are now and wanted to circ my two sons, as did my DH. But the more we looked into it, the more we just couldn't justify it, and finally decided that if boys were meant to have foreskins, they'd be born with them.

[nathaliehanna]

Aha, Jenn! Here it is:
http://www.mothering.com/articles/ne...uncircson.html

"I often receive calls from distraught parents who say that a doctor insists that their little boy needs to be circumcised because there is something wrong. When they bring their son into my office, I almost always find that there's nothing wrong with the child's penis....In all my years of practice, I've never had a patient who had to be circumcised for medical reasons."

"When a doctor advises that your son be circumcised, it's usually because he or she is unfamiliar with the intact penis...Doctors can be psychologically challenged by the sight of an intact boy. They may see problems with the penis that do not really exist. ...Probably, the only problem you will encounter with the foreskin of your intact boy is that someone will think that he has a problem. The foreskin is a perfectly normal part of the human body, and it has very definite purposes, as do all body parts, even if we do not readily recognize them. There's no need to worry..."

etc., etc....

[steve]

"(Jenn_629) I have done research upon research.. and honestly, there are pros and cons to boty. A lot of which, cannot be proven on either side. "

As it stands today, no medical group in the world recommends routine circumcision. Many of the countries that previously believed circumcision had some medical benefits, no longer do so. The majority of countries in the World , continue in their belief that routine circumcision has no medical benefit.
The only “studies” that show benefits are those produced by groups that are trying to sell the idea of circumcision ( and so their info is tainted from the start, and should be avoided) Plenty of medical groups in the world, and only those funded by Pro-circ groups produce info supporting circumcision (quack-science)

[mary84]

i had my son circumcised, if i ever have another boy, i'd do it again. it is cleaner and when i was in nursing, our instructor told us that uncircumcised children and adults have a higher rate of harboring and passing on bacteria and std's. thats really all i gotta say for once. oh and you wont be mutilating him.

[mary84]

i am reading thru more and more posts. i didn't even think about the decision they asked if you have a boy do you want to have him circumcised or no. i didnt even have to think about it i said yes. what is the big friggin deal people. it is not mutilating the body it is foreskin, yes it is attached. who gives a damn, your kid wont. they arent going to remember the pain. my son didnt even cry. he slept thru the whole thing. god i hate this site, i think i am going to cancel my account here. everything is a damn debate. get him circumcised trust me it looks better, it is a hell of a lot easier to keep clean, they have less chance of infection and make sure to use the vaseline on the gauze and the diaper so no little fibers get stuck on it. trust me that is a lot simpler than dealing with a yeast infection, ladies if you ever had one it sucks and why put a baby thru a yeast infecion really. you are not torturing them, it isn't like it is an experimental procedure it is done thousands of times a day, no one has ever died from a circumcision. it is no big deal at all like i said i didnt even question or think about my decision. my son is 4 now and guess what he doesn't care, i don't think he even thinks about his penis he is too busy being a kid and playing. the only thing he knows is that his pee comes from that part thats all case closed

[nathaliehanna]

it is not mutilating the body it is foreskin, yes it is attached. who gives a damn, your kid wont.

If men don't care, then why are so many trying to restore their foreskin? They are upset the choice was taken from them.

get him circumcised trust me it looks better

Why do you care how attractive your son's penis is? It's not for you. GROSS.

it is a hell of a lot easier to keep clean

This myth needs to die. A study in Britain actually proved the exact opposite - that circ'd penis are dirtier.

why put a baby thru a yeast infecion really.

Most babies never get them. You know girl babies get them, too, right? So are you gonna cut off her labia to prevent it? Or just watch how long she sits in bubble baths and refrain from using soap on her girlie bits? Pretty easy solution - hell of a lot less invasive than cutting pieces off her.

it is done thousands of times a day

For the most part, ONLY in America. Not in Canada, not in Britain, not in Australia, not in Germany, not in Sweden, etc....only American boys are born with "dirty" foreskins. Only American boys are too lazy to clean themselves when they hit puberty.

no one has ever died from a circumcision.

Not true. Babies have died from heart failure during circs and from hemorrhage after circs. The deaths are real and documented.

case closed

Maybe for you, but others may still be on the fence.

[mary84]

Why are cowboys uncircumcised...so they have a place to put their chewing tobacco on thier lunch break....lol lighten up. i dont care what my son's penis looks like, but when he gets married she might. What do you think about same sex marriage? i am all for it.