Top ten reasons not to circumcise your son

[Winter]

So, if you KNEW that your family had a history of it happening with other members, you would not spare your child the pain later in life? To me, that makes no sense at all.

By "happening", I mean not being able to retract as an adult and circumcision being necessary for hygenic purposes.
When Dave first consulted our doc, she was saying it was highly unlikely it would be required, but as soon as she saw, she referred him to a specialist immediately.

I was not targeting anyone specifically about the judgements, it just seems opinions are voiced here by many without necessarily having experiences to back them up.

Also, before all this went down with my hubby, we didn't know about the family history with this and we were anti circ too. When we decided to have it done for our son, we researched and went with Dr.Pollock, who uses the mogen clamp method and the surgery literally took 5 seconds. http://www.circumcisionvancouver.com/

[Everywhere]

Originally Posted by Winter So, if you KNEW that your family had a history of it happening with other members, you would not spare your child the pain later in life? To me, that makes no sense at all.

You think it makes no sense that I didn't have my babies' tonsils removed just because it happened with so many other members in my family?

That's just not the way that we do things in medicine. We don't amputate parts just because they "might have a problem later on". Especially when said body part has benefits, and the procedure itself includes serious risks.

Please don't think I'm attacking your personal reason for your decision. I'm just saying that medically speaking, it's not sound logic, that's all.

Let me ask you a hypothetical question, that I mentioned earlier. Say that almost every woman in your family developed breast cancer, and had to endure the terrible physical and emotional pain of a mastectomy (which in my opinion is worse than getting circed)
Would you make the decision to have your girl baby's breast buds surgically removed, to prevent this from happening down the road?
And in that situation, it's not only a matter of preventing pain, but also saving her life! But, I have a feeling you still wouldn't do it..... ?

I feel very bad for you that you had to make this decision. Especially, if you were as you claimed, anti-circ before. However, I don't get why if you really were anti-circ before, that you would think this thread to be judgmental? It's more about educating on the disadvantages of circumcision and the benefits of leaving intact, not about attacking people for their decisions.
Also, you said earlier that the reasons listed in the first post are not true...I went back and read through them and they are all true, that I know of. Which ones are you saying are false? You said that you were anti-circ, so I guess I'm just confused.


I just did some looking up about what you said about your husband. So it sounds like he had phimosis? Did you know that there are other ways to treat this other than circ? There are several medicated creams that can be used to make the foreskin loosen and release. And if that doesn't work, there are also several, more minor surgical procedures that can fix the phimosis but without removing the foreskin.
It all depends on how much the particular doctor knows about it. Sometimes you have to search and get second opinions before you find the right one. I mean, it literally took me a few minutes of looking just now to find out those other treatments.
Also, it looks like phimosis is VERY rare, so circumcising all baby boys to protect against that is poor logic. It may "run in a family" but you don't ever know for sure that it's going to happen.

But again, I am not trying to attack your decision. Especially since in your case, there were some other factors to consider rather than just a normal situation. I think that most of the people in this thread are not against circumcision AT ALL, just when it's done "routinely" to a baby boy. I don't think any of them would be against it if a man grows up and wants it done at that time, or if it actually does become medically necessary as a baby.
In your situation, it's not exactly "routine" (However, it's still not the the standard of practice in medicine to amputate things that are currently healthy, we always try everything we can to save the tissue, and we definitely don't amputate it when it's perfectly healthy)

But I'm sorry again if I have hurt your feelings in any way, especially since it sounds like it was a hard decision for you to make. My intentions really are sincere (to inform about the disadvantages of ROUTINE infant circumcision)

[MyFourStars]

Originally Posted by XtraOrdinary I have a question. For those who are vehemently opposed to circs, are you also opposed to ear piercings of babies and little girls?

My first post on this thread but I have to say that YES, I am both opposed to circs AND the piercing of innocent baby's ears to "pretty them up".

[Winter]

Originally Posted by Everywhere You think it makes no sense that I didn't have my babies' tonsils removed just because it happened with so many other members in my family? That's just not the way that we do things in medicine. We don't amputate parts just because they "might have a problem later on". Especially when said body part has benefits, and the procedure itself includes serious risks. I never said that. I think your comparison is being manipulated to make a point. What I meant was that it makes no sense to me to NOT spare a child of future pain when there is a great possibility of it happening and it has shown itself in family history. You took my comment out of context. Please don't think I'm attacking your personal reason for your decision. I'm just saying that medically speaking, it's not sound logic, that's all. Let me ask you a hypothetical question, that I mentioned earlier. Say that almost every woman in your family developed breast cancer, and had to endure the terrible physical and emotional pain of a mastectomy (which in my opinion is worse than getting circed) Would you make the decision to have your girl baby's breast buds surgically removed, to prevent this from happening down the road? And in that situation, it's not only a matter of preventing pain, but also saving her life! But, I have a feeling you still wouldn't do it..... ? That is completely ridiculous to even suggest. I think your argument is out of line. Circumcision has been done for thousands of years and we had a perfectly sound reason to do it. There have even been medical studies shown to prove that circumcision has benefits of reducing STDs in some individuals. I can attest that I have not had another YI since DH was circed, so I believe that there is truth to that theory. OF COURSE condoms, abstinence should be used, but infection cannot be harboured in a foreskin if it is not there in the first place. I feel very bad for you that you had to make this decision. Especially, if you were as you claimed, anti-circ before. However, I don't get why if you really were anti-circ before, that you would think this thread to be judgmental? It's more about educating on the disadvantages of circumcision and the benefits of leaving intact, not about attacking people for their decisions. Also, you said earlier that the reasons listed in the first post are not true...I went back and read through them and they are all true, that I know of. Which ones are you saying are false? You said that you were anti-circ, so I guess I'm just confused. We were anti-circ before, for our own choice, not for everyone else. I just think it is crazy that people get up on the soap box and profess their views using bold statements like the one you used about cutting out little girl's breast buds as a comparison, because it really is a sensationalized comparison, and not even feasible. I just did some looking up about what you said about your husband. So it sounds like he had phimosis? Did you know that there are other ways to treat this other than circ? There are several medicated creams that can be used to make the foreskin loosen and release. And if that doesn't work, there are also several, more minor surgical procedures that can fix the phimosis but without removing the foreskin. It all depends on how much the particular doctor knows about it. Sometimes you have to search and get second opinions before you find the right one. I mean, it literally took me a few minutes of looking just now to find out those other treatments. Also, it looks like phimosis is VERY rare, so circumcising all baby boys to protect against that is poor logic. It may "run in a family" but you don't ever know for sure that it's going to happen. We were told about it, and DH didn't want to have that. He didn't think it would look right, so he opted for the alternative of circumcision. And in his side of the family, it is not rare. But again, I am not trying to attack your decision. Especially since in your case, there were some other factors to consider rather than just a normal situation. I think that most of the people in this thread are not against circumcision AT ALL, just when it's done "routinely" to a baby boy. I don't think any of them would be against it if a man grows up and wants it done at that time, or if it actually does become medically necessary as a baby. In your situation, it's not exactly "routine" (However, it's still not the the standard of practice in medicine to amputate things that are currently healthy, we always try everything we can to save the tissue, and we definitely don't amputate it when it's perfectly healthy) But I'm sorry again if I have hurt your feelings in any way, especially since it sounds like it was a hard decision for you to make. My intentions really are sincere (to inform about the disadvantages of ROUTINE infant circumcision

#4 is arguable
#5 is an opinion
#7 depends on the practitioner
#8 would be illegal and is an unfounded, bogus claim
#9 was not intended for gospel interpretation
#10 is untrue. You can have a child's large ears "pinned" and claim that for pshycological reasons that you are having it done to protect your child.

Please excuse me if I have made a mess of your quote. I am not sure if I specifically addressed individual points properly, so I color coded my responses to reply in dark red. This is really irritating, so I am not going to post in any more of this thread. I really dislike it when people manipulate facts and use unrealistic comparisons to get their points across. To an uneducated person, it could mean the difference between making an informed decision or a biased decision with a child's health in mind. When I originally posted, it was in response to the threads here as a whole, not to target anyone and get in an argument. My point is that circumcision is a personal choice and people should not be judged for their choices they make in the best interest of their children. Period. I don't have all day to debate and I'm just done with this.

[Everywhere]

Originally Posted by Winter I don't have all day to debate and I'm just done with this.

that's fine, truce then! sorry to cause so much frustration with my perspective

[DommysMommy]

Originally Posted by Winter I am just going to say my bit and then I cannot believe the righteous judgements and harsh words of some people's posts! Many of the "reasons" listed in the first post are inaccurate or opinions. Have any of you ever seen a man who had to have a circumcision for medical reasons!? It looks like a swollen, painful, bloody broken hockey stick! The healing time was longer than 6 weeks! He still hates the difference in skin coloration! THAT is more barbaric than strapping a baby down for a few seconds and having the procedure done. YES it is incredibly disturbing, but infants heal way faster than a full grown man does, and this is why you PAY for a local anesthetic and swaddle your child's legs to ease the pain. Tylenol can help too. I would rather have that then know that he will more than likely have to have the procedure done as an adult. (The problem runs in the family.) To each their own!

Maybe for your situation, that's how it was. But my dad was a victim of a botched circ and had to have it fixed as a young adult. And guess what? NOT TRAUMATIZING! You know why? Because an adult UNDERSTANDS. Tell a baby that's crying from fear and pain that it'll go away and see how far that gets you.

[DommysMommy]

Originally Posted by Winter So, if you KNEW that your family had a history of it happening with other members, you would not spare your child the pain later in life? To me, that makes no sense at all. By "happening", I mean not being able to retract as an adult and circumcision being necessary for hygenic purposes. When Dave first consulted our doc, she was saying it was highly unlikely it would be required, but as soon as she saw, she referred him to a specialist immediately. I was not targeting anyone specifically about the judgements, it just seems opinions are voiced here by many without necessarily having experiences to back them up. Also, before all this went down with my hubby, we didn't know about the family history with this and we were anti circ too. When we decided to have it done for our son, we researched and went with Dr.Pollock, who uses the mogen clamp method and the surgery literally took 5 seconds. http://www.circumcisionvancouver.com/

So if you knew that your daughter might have problems with her ovaries or the like, should you get her a hystorectomy just to be safe? Doubtful.

[THBVsMama]

Originally Posted by XtraOrdinary I have a question. For those who are vehemently opposed to circs, are you also opposed to ear piercings of babies and little girls?

Yes, I am, but I also don't like to compare the two since one is way more extreme.

[Pat899]

Originally Posted by Winter I am just going to say my bit and then I cannot believe the righteous judgements and harsh words of some people's posts! Many of the "reasons" listed in the first post are inaccurate or opinions. Have any of you ever seen a man who had to have a circumcision for medical reasons!? It looks like a swollen, painful, bloody broken hockey stick! The healing time was longer than 6 weeks! He still hates the difference in skin coloration! THAT is more barbaric than strapping a baby down for a few seconds and having the procedure done. YES it is incredibly disturbing, but infants heal way faster than a full grown man does, and this is why you PAY for a local anesthetic and swaddle your child's legs to ease the pain. Tylenol can help too. I would rather have that then know that he will more than likely have to have the procedure done as an adult. (The problem runs in the family.) To each their own!

That just makes me want to cry. Tylenol is in no way sufficent to ease the pain of a circ.

[XtraOrdinary]

Originally Posted by THBVsMama Yes, I am, but I also don't like to compare the two since one is way more extreme.

I compare the two for the choice argument. Boys should choose so shouldnt girls also choose?