to circ or not to circ

[Momma2theJs]

And the argument that an intact penis is harder to clean, etc is just funny to me. That men would rather cut it off than clean it says something about the male of the species. haha

[lynn97]

Originally Posted by Green Decals I disagree with you here - there simply is no safe way to do it - even with the most highly trained mohel or urologist, and the "safest" methods, and meticulous aftercare, the risk infection, bleeding, amputation, etc is still there. As for older boys/men "having to have it done because of health problems" - most of those are unnecessary, caused by improper care - that is, it wasn't simply left alone. Sadly, despite plummeting circ rates, many doctors still tell parents that they need to retract their son's foreskin at every diaper change. This is extremely dangerous, excruciatingly painful, and leads to those infections/health problems you mentioned. The ONLY proper way to care for a natural penis is to wipe it clean, like a finger. The foreskin is tightly adhered to the penis like a fingernail is to a finger. The only person who should ever attempt to retract a boy's penis is the boy himself, when it is retractable, sometime between toddlerhood and the end of puberty. Every single doctor we saw in my son's first month of life wanted to "peek" at his urethra - just leave it alone, and make sure everyone else does. I equate the misinformation of the need for forced retraction with a doctor telling parents to douche their girls. There is no perfectly safe way to cut off a newborn's necessary parts. All surgeries carry risks.

I will respectfully disagree with you still. I have known several men who have struggled with infections and had to be circumcised later in life. There many more risks for adult circumcision.

Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

[Green Decals]

Originally Posted by lynn97 I will respectfully disagree with you still. I have known several men who have struggled with infections and had to be circumcised later in life. There many more risks for adult circumcision. Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

I am not here to argue, but your statement is completely false. Infant circ, done with minimal (if any) pain medication, when there is no clear differentiation of where the foreskin lies, in an undeveloped/immature penis, without the consent of the person who is being circed... I could go on and on. Point is, it is far riskier to cut off a baby's healthy organ than it is to remove an adult's "infected" one. I have never known of an adult man to die from circumcision. I do personally know 2 baby boys who died from their circumcisions, and statistics say approx 120 die every year from it.

That is all I am going to post here - the facts speak for themself, and you can do your own research. We can agree to disagree, but the bottom line is, the rest of the world laughs as us Americans and our false fears of flawed foreskins. It's a natural thing to have, that's why we (even women) are born with it. Cutting it off is dangerous and unnecessary. I would no sooner circ my dog than my baby. But, maybe that's just me. You can agree to disagree :-)

[tasundance]

Didnt read other comments but I wouldnt circ. My older 2 boys are but my youngest isnt and Im so thankful that we left him alone. If I could have a do over I wouldnt have circed my older boys.

They have seen him getting changed and in the tub and they have never said anything about it.

[lynn97]

Originally Posted by Green Decals I am not here to argue, but your statement is completely false. Infant circ, done with minimal (if any) pain medication, when there is no clear differentiation of where the foreskin lies, in an undeveloped/immature penis, without the consent of the person who is being circed... I could go on and on. Point is, it is far riskier to cut off a baby's healthy organ than it is to remove an adult's "infected" one. I have never known of an adult man to die from circumcision. I do personally know 2 baby boys who died from their circumcisions, and statistics say approx 120 die every year from it. That is all I am going to post here - the facts speak for themself, and you can do your own research. We can agree to disagree, but the bottom line is, the rest of the world laughs as us Americans and our false fears of flawed foreskins. It's a natural thing to have, that's why we (even women) are born with it. Cutting it off is dangerous and unnecessary. I would no sooner circ my dog than my baby. But, maybe that's just me. You can agree to disagree :-)

I have done my research and will agree to disagree with much of what you have posted :-)

Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

[Puppydog]

Originally Posted by lynn97 I will respectfully disagree with you still. I have known several men who have struggled with infections and had to be circumcised later in life. There many more risks for adult circumcision. Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

I know 3 women who have had double mastectomies because they developed breast cancer.
I still have my breasts.

[lynn97]

Originally Posted by Puppydog I know 3 women who have had double mastectomies because they developed breast cancer. I still have my breasts.

I don't know of anyone with penile cancer; it is extremely rare, even for intact males. Everyone I know who has had problems which led to adult circumcision had chronic UTI/bladder infections which led to kidney issues.

Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

[KelseyH]

Originally Posted by lynn97 I don't know of anyone with penile cancer; it is extremely rare, even for intact males. Everyone I know who has had problems which led to adult circumcision had chronic UTI/bladder infections which led to kidney issues. Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

Unfortunately, I'm sure you have no way of measuring the personal hygiene of these men. That has a great impact on things like UTI and bladder infections. Even my little brother - one time - when he was about seven or eight, got a little lazy with cleaning and told my mom "It hurts when I pee." She told him to stay on top of cleaning it and it wouldn't hurt. He hasn't had an issue since.

[Galatea]

Originally Posted by lynn97 I will respectfully disagree with you still. I have known several men who have struggled with infections and had to be circumcised later in life. There many more risks for adult circumcision. Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

What are the risks for adult circumcision vs. infant circumcision?

Taken from: http://www.moralogous.com/2012/02/20...-for-an-adult/

Infant Circumcision:

Often does not receive adequate anesthesia during surgery or pain relief during healing

Penis is undeveloped; foreskin has to be ripped from glans

Cannot foresee how much skin will be needed to cover penis and sustain erection; frenulum almost always lost

Wound is in a diaper exposed to irritating urine and feces

Foreskin remnants will try to readhere to glans, causing adhesions; medical professionals will often (mistakenly) advise ripping open adhesions every day, causing more pain and potential skin bridges

Can bleed to death (only 2.3 ounces of blood loss can kill a newborn)

Adult circumcision:

Always receives anesthesia and pain relief afterward

Penis is fully grown and foreskin has separated from glans

Easy to see how much foreskin to remove; can preserve frenulum

Wound not exposed to urine and feces

Because laminopreputial membrane has long dissolved, no adhesions will form

Cannot bleed to death

In addition, your argument that it is better to do it in infancy presupposes that men will need to be circumcised in adulthood. In countries which do not practice routine infant circumcision (and thus most men have foreskins and know how to take care of them) the incidence of necessary circumcision is 6 per 100,000. This begs the question, why do so many men in the US "have" to be circumcised as adults? The answer is twofold: 1) Circumcision is inappropriately recommended by doctors for a large variety of unrelated reasons because the doctors themselves are part of the culture of circumcision, have no foreskins themselves, and thus do not value it; and 2) in the 20 century, parents were incorrectly instructed to retract the infant's foreskin and clean under it. As the foreskin is adhered to the glans during infancy by the same tissue that adheres nails to their fingerbeds, this cleaning practice caused scarring and infection, which often did lead to the inability to retract the foreskin in adulthood (scarred skin is not stretchy.)

There are very few conditions that truly require circumcision, and in cultures where circumcision is not common, everyone values the foreskin, doctors included, and they are able to treat almost all problems (rare as they actually are) with more conservative measures. Men and women can both get yeast or bacterial infections; we treat women with antifungal or antibiotic creams or pills, but then we say that men must cut off the offending parts?!

The foreskin as a diseased and potentially dangerous body part that must be removed at birth to prevent any number of future problems is a culturally-bound idea. Interestingly, in cultures that routinely circumcise women, they have the same ideas of female circumcision as a preventive or curative measure for various medical conditions that we would find bizarre and ridiculous. For example, read this quote from a circumcised woman from Indonesia (from http://www.moralogous.com/2012/02/17/a-cultural-cure/): "I found my circumcision beneficial to lessen my vagina odor, and prevent risk of bacterial vaginosis."

I don't know about you, but I have had several vaginal infections, and I would never consider removing my inner labia or clitoris to cure them, but in this woman's culture, this was a reasonable medical solution. Why is she obviously crazy, but when circumcision is recommended in the US to prevent UTIs, we think that normal?

[Joyful Tie Dyes]

Originally Posted by lynn97 I disagree. There are plenty of safe ways to circumcise if a proper method is chosen and a well-trained individual is doing it. No medical procedure is ever 100% risk-free, though. Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

Originally Posted by Green Decals I disagree with you here - there simply is no safe way to do it - even with the most highly trained mohel or urologist, and the "safest" methods, and meticulous aftercare, the risk infection, bleeding, amputation, etc is still there. As for older boys/men "having to have it done because of health problems" - most of those are unnecessary, caused by improper care - that is, it wasn't simply left alone. Sadly, despite plummeting circ rates, many doctors still tell parents that they need to retract their son's foreskin at every diaper change. This is extremely dangerous, excruciatingly painful, and leads to those infections/health problems you mentioned. The ONLY proper way to care for a natural penis is to wipe it clean, like a finger. The foreskin is tightly adhered to the penis like a fingernail is to a finger. The only person who should ever attempt to retract a boy's penis is the boy himself, when it is retractable, sometime between toddlerhood and the end of puberty. Every single doctor we saw in my son's first month of life wanted to "peek" at his urethra - just leave it alone, and make sure everyone else does. I equate the misinformation of the need for forced retraction with a doctor telling parents to douche their girls. There is no perfectly safe way to cut off a newborn's necessary parts. All surgeries carry risks.

Originally Posted by lynn97 I will respectfully disagree with you still. I have known several men who have struggled with infections and had to be circumcised later in life. There many more risks for adult circumcision. Sent from my iPhone using DS Forum

Funny that this "had to be circed as an adult" thing pretty much only happens in the US...

And the risks are much lower for adults. In addition an adult can choose for themselves whether or not to have this procedure.