moms of boys

tfarabians

Great article came out in our paper today on circumcision

https://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012632000_circumcision16m.html

emmacwn

huh, I didn't realize that circumcision rates were only 56% nationwide.

 

this article doesn't really sway me one way or the other,  if my kid grows up to be a man-whore who doesn't use protection circumcision isn't going to protect him.  

pixieprincss

I have researched circumcision in depth for a long time, so I didn't realize this wasn't common knowledge. The study of circumcision benefits in parts of Africa has been happening for years, but I guess I am weird in that it has been an interest of mine for a long time. LOL!

It would be great to know how the the use of condoms plays into those results, as sub-Saharan Africa tends to not have a condom-friendly culture from my understanding. Also, the prevalence and impact of sex education talking about STD risks and the value of monogamy or abstinence (but NOT advocating abstinence-only education) would also be great to know.

Also, is the benefit the same with infant circumcision as with circumcision at puberty (or later), which some Muslim and African tribal cultures practice and is a huge celebration for the boys and their families and serves as symbolic entry into "manhood"?

My guess is that using condoms and receiving sexual education (both of which are MUCH more acceptable in the US--though certainly not universal), might just about wipe out this benefit of circumcision. Perhaps that is what the, "But the results from these studies don't necessarily translate to the United States," comment means.

I am glad to hear that my research on all aspects is still up to date! We still are 100% happy with our decision to not infant circumcise.

starsmaycollide

PP-I have heard from another article that the rates are closer to 50/50 now, so I am guessing the stat in the article was accurate. 

I don't get this at all.  Of course, a doctor on a circumcision 'task force' is going to say how beneficial it is. They make Washington's low rate of circumcision sound as though it is some sort of problem that needs to be higher, like they are trying to fix it. That's just the tone I gather from it.

So, it may lessen the risk of HIV or STDs, that's fine (though honestly, if you can't even tell me WHY it does, that seems like a problem in of itself) . But whether that makes you want to circumcise your son or not,  that doesn't mean there is something wrong with the current rate and that there needs to be some kind of big push towards something that may only get a "slightly stronger' recommendation from the AAP.

bridalinsane05

ugh, this is one decision I really don't feel qualified to make.  I keep waffling.