- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
2nd Trimester
s/o circumcision...pros and cons?
Hi all.
For those of you who are not having your sons circumsized, what's your reasoning? I'm really not very well educated on this issue and thought you ladies might be able to enlighten me a bit. Thanks!
This discussion has been closed.
Re: s/o circumcision...pros and cons?
It's not necessary.
it's not done often where my DH is from (It's not common in most of Europe in fact)
It's becoming less common here so the 'locker room' excuse isn't a big deal to me.
I don't see the point of doing unnecessary surgery on a newborn. (ETA - except in cases where it's for religious reasons. That isn't an issue for my family, but wanted to address this from the PMs I got).
I am not trying to debate you in anyway, because I am not a strong pro-circumcision person, but I wouldn't exactly call it "surgery". It takes less than a minute. I think calling it surgery makes it sound more scary than it actually is.
I dont know if LO is a boy or a girl yet, but to be honest I don't know how I feel about this topic.
DH and his whole family are not. They say it's a family tradition... It's not necessary... The sensation..
First of all I will not be making any judgements about this due to the sensation of sex for my newborn "son." I mean DH has never had any problems, but I worry about my "son" keeping it clean the way he should. Of course I'll have DH teach him, but God know's if he'll listen! And I have a step-son that is, and it will be hard explaining why LO's looks this way and step-son's doesnt. I'm thinking about just letting DH make the decision if LO comes out to be a boy just because I do not have a penis...
I disagree.
They numb the baby (in most cases) and remove a portion of their skin. It's documented as a surgical procedure for insurance. OBs typically do it as they are 'surgeons' vs a pedi.
An orange is an orange. I don't care what people do, but it's surgery. Not complex surgery for sure, and very common, but it's still 'surgery'. I had a piece of glass cut out of my foot and that was considered 'surgery'.
My husband isn't circumcised and he's never had a problem with his penis. DH has never had a UTI or jock itch. Its not ugly or nasty, its just him. Most people will cite clenliness as the reason they are having their sons circumcised. Its just another fold of skin you have to teach them to clean when they are boys, just like you would teach a little girl to wash her vagina in the tub.
Circumcision creates a wound that then sits in a diaper. I don't see how removing a protective covering from a vulnerable orifice is a good idea. (Unless you're doing it for religious reasons, that's a completely different topic.)
The studies from Africa that found that uncircumcised men were more likely to get HIV were skewed. Circumcised men in urban Africa are more likely to be raised by more westernized parents, and therefore are exposed to sex education that includes the use of condoms. Uncircumcised men are more likely to be in families that adhere to traditional ways of life in those countries, which are not always compatible with western medecine.
This is so interesting to me. I just did some quick online research and found that more than a few studies have sited significantly lower risks of getting and transmitting STDs in circumsized men. Also, men who were circumsized as newborns have virtually 0% chance of developing cancer of the penis, whereas uncircumsized men have a 1 in 600 chance.
I am not on either side here. Just learning from you ladies and doing some research along the way.
This has been a heated topic to many..It isn't medically ness and is painful, yet we have decided to go ahead with it..These are our reasons: It is easier to keep clean and decreases irritation, inflammation, infection, etc while in diapers..When they are older it decreases risk of std's and infections by more then 60%..Studies now show it also decreases chances of penile cancers and ED by about 45%..I have talked to many men, both circumcised and not and have found more pros..Several have decided to have it done later and had to deal with long healing times and loss of feeling..Those who are have had no real complaint..For us there are more pros then cons..but to each their own
We wouldn't circumsize if we were having a boy, mostly for the reasons listed by previous posters: we aren't religious, it's surgery, my husband isn't, etc.
We don't go so far as to bring in the mutiliation argument, it's just our personal choice not to.
blog / birth story / my baby blues
As a previous poster noted, the STD studies are inadequate and biased, based on cultural norms of the participants, not merely on physical differences in their anatomies.
I plan to teach my offspring to use condoms when they become sexually active, which will far better protect them from the spread of STDs than a lack of foreskin. When single, I would NEVER have accepted "but, baby, I'm circumcised" as a reason not to wear protection!
Ready for my book?
It is a surgical procedure done needlessly on a baby. My nether regions were sore enough after childbirth, I couldn't imagine causing pain to a helpless infant who couldn't take anything for pain and didn't have any pain coping techniques.
It's done for cosmetic reasons only
Most doctors if they do administer a shot of lidocaine to numb the area don't bother waiting for it to take affect
I believe I've read that most children who don't cry during the procedure do so because they're in shock, not because it didn't hurt.
It can cause more difficulty in breastfeeding.
It's actually easier to care for an intact boy than a circ'd one. All you do iswipe it just like you'd wipe their fingers. A circ'd boy needs vaseline applied until it heals and that's if it's done correctly. I have a friend whose 2 year old didn't have enough cut off and they're STILL having to tear the skin to keep it from readhering.
The rate of circ's now is around 60% so the arguement to do it to avoid lockerroom teasing is invalid IMO (Also most kids aren't taking showers in gym class until HS and what high schooler in their right mind is going to admit to checking out someone else's penis?
The studies of the 'benefits' are done with improper care. If you forceably retract the child it can create problems such as infection and other things... we've learned that the only person who should ever retract a child is the child. (Some aren't retractable until they're teens and that's NORMAL!) Only the child knows how far they can pull the skin back until it hurts.
The "study" of it decreasing the risk of HIV is also flawed... that was done by comparing the rate of HIV in underdeveloped areas of Africa to a developed urban area. Having a foreskin doesn't exempt a man from safe sex practices and teaching your child about condoms means their chances of contracting HIV are the same as a circ'd man who uses condoms.
Older child cleanliness is easy (once retractable you teach them to pull it back and rinse just the same way you teach a daughter to properly clean herself.
The arguement of doing it to look like daddy is silly because how often do daddy and child compare penis's?
Letting daddy choose also doesn't make sense to me because it's not daddy's penis... just because he has the same equipment doesn't mean it's his right to choose what happens to someone elses.
I've read things along these lines too. I'm not well researched in the area though.
All really interesting, but this one baffles me a bit. How does it impact breastfeeding??
If we have a boy, we will not be having it done. I feel it is unnecessary. DH is not circumcised and has never has issues with infections. I am against circumsision whether it be male or female, because I think it is mutilation.
Well, my husband and I choose together what elective medical procedures will be done on our underage child. I don't see why it should be the mother's right to choose any more so than the father's. In my case, my husband laid out several arguments to why he was against circumcision, and I found I had no particular arguments as to why I was for it.
There are other cases where I made a strong argument for how I wanted to handle certain options and he agreed with me. That's how our partnership works.
https://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686
There's the abstract of the AAP's position on circumcision. Interesting reading no matter which way you lean on the procedure.
Yes I am curious as well. I had no issues bfing, and neither did my BFF who had two sons both circumcised, nor several other friends.
If and when I have a boy, he won't be circumcised, unless for some reason I convert to Judaism before then. As a religious ritual, it's fine and dandy, but I'm Catholic. The Church doesn't expressly forbid circumcision, but there are certain canonical laws that could (and often are) be taken to strongly discourage it, at the very least.
Plus I've never seen an argument for circumcision that made any sense at all to me, with the exception of religious reasons.
*Lurking*
In a book my doctor gave me this morning called Healthy Beginnings It states:
"The Canadian Pediatric Society does NOT support circumcision as a routine procedure for newborns."
It isn't common where I live. We won't be having our son circ'ed unless it is medically necessary. There is no need to.
Very interesting discussion. I too am undecided on this issue, or whether I will even need to decide as I don't know baby's sex yet. My limited understanding is that it is really just a hold-over practice from times when hygiene was much less understood and practiced, and that assuming you keep the child/he keeps himself clean, there is really no issue with leaving the penis intact. BUT I don't know much really - just my limited understanding. I too have the "why remove something that doesn't need to be removed" attitude. I don't think we should take out parts and pieces of ourselves that we came with, unless they are causing a problem. If there is no problem, in general, I say leave it. (I feel that way about tonsils and appendixes, too)
My husband doesn't care either way, so we are both really undecided, and don't have any religious reasons to do it. I am finding this whole post very educational and interesting.
My point is that I've talked to women who were blatantly against it but felt they had no right to speak against it because they don't have the same equipment. I'm sorry that wasn't clear...DS wasn't too thrilled I was typing at the same time LOL!
DH isnt,i didnt want our son to be either but i still left the decision to do/not to do our son when he was born up to DH because i felt he knew more about it..having a penis and all lol. He chose not to, i think his exact words were "no one is coming near my son's penis with a scalpel" he was very against it. I just dont see the point (unless for religious reasons) its a peice of skin..DH has never had an problems with his, and i happen to love the way his penis looks. Also i couldnt justify spending $300 to clip a little peice of skin and inflict needless pain on my child..
This. My husband was in charge of deciding, and he wants his son to look like him. I know there are risks and benefits, but the reason I'm going with hubby on this is that I don't have a penis. He does. He would know how to feel about it.
At this point we believe we are having a girl so this may be moot for us. With that said, my husband and I discussed this previously in case we had a boy. I didn't have a feeling either way because I don't have one and really can't weight the pros and cons as personally as my husbandcan so I deferred to him. My husband felt strongly that we should circumsize because he didn't want our son to be embarassed when with a girl in the future. I'm not saying that's a great reason, but that's my husband's logic.
Personally, I don't think there is a right or wrong answer. Both sides have valid arguments. Just weight both sides and make the best informed decision that makes you happy.
No professional medical association recommends it anymore. There is no medical reason to circ.
That being said, DH has already asserted that our LO will be circed "just like Daddy!"
2011 Reading Challenge
A bumpie posted a link to her blog before when this subject came up - here is one of the entries: https://thefrontporchswing.blogspot.com/2010/04/pain-is-topic-of-todays-post.html
She did a series of circ posts that were interesting to me... I was already anti-circ; reading her entries only reaffirmed my decision.
We're having a boy and whether or not to circumcize never even crossed my mind. It was already such a forgone conclusion that we wouldn't.
We are going to circumcise our son. DH and I have had several lengthy conversations about this and feel that it is the right thing to do. We have made the decision partly on religion, partly on medical research, and partly because its every families personal choice so we choose what we thought was the best. However, I believe that every family is different so everyone has to make the decision that is right for them.
However, I have done some research into the topic of infant/small child pain and many studies show that pain is a learned response. For instance a toddler falls down while learning to walk and bumps their head. The child then looks around to see if anyone is watching and how they are reacting. If no one is looking or freaking out then typically they will get up and continue playing. However, if someone is running over to check on them or "freaking out" then the child will begin to cry. So the idea that a day or so year old has the pain of circumcision seems impossible to prove IMO.
Good luck to all trying to make this tough decision.
If you click on my blog link in my sig- a few weeks ago I wrote 5 posts for Genital Integrity Awareness Week- they explain a lot of my experiences and thoughts on this.
The STD argument infuriates me to no end. I have herpes and will have it till the day I die. I got herpes from a circumcised boyfriend. The fact that he was circumcised did NOTHING to protect him from getting it... and the fact that he was circumcised did NOTHING to protect me from getting it from him. You know how I got it? I trusted him... and he lied to me. I was a stupid naive person who believed that people with STDs were for stanky gross low life sluts and druggies... I didn't think in a million years that a handsome charming blue eyed upper middle class college guy _who loved me_ was someone that i had to worry about infecting me with a STD.
DUH- I made a STUPID STUPID assumption and I got screwed!! I learned this lesson the hardest way possible. Lucky for me- I only got herpes from him and not AIDS.
The best way to catch STDs is misplaced trust. Don't put your trust in anything because your personal health is way more valuable that some statistics that will NEVER protect you.
If a person doesn't have a STD- you can't get the STD from them... and if you don't KNOW they don't have a STD you better damn well be wrapping it up or taking a walk to the clinic to get yourselves a test together so you can know.... but for people to ever let myths and gambling and statistical percentages of risk reducing dictate your behavior is IDIOCY!... and to impose that on a child who is not sexually active- is unethical. Your job as a parent is to teach them self esteem and sexual responsibility and morality... NOT to try to reduce their risk with some hocus pocus out of Africa- by cutting off a piece (a wonderfully functioning important piece at that) of their sex organ.
Look up STD state in the world and look who has the worst STD rates. We have much worse STD rates in the USA than in Europe where hardly anyone has been circumcised. it doesn't even make sense!
As for the whole idea that girls won't like him, give oral, etc... this is the most absurd thing ever- get your head out of the sand! Since when were European and Latin lovers a *bad* thing? ehem... don't they kinda have a GREAT reputation?
So... you know about Kim Kardashian's new boyfriend? OK... being insanely rich probably doesn't hurt his chances either... but comon- These girls could surely have any rich circumcised guy they want too- if a natural male body was such a terrible thing... but the fact is- it isn't... in fact- it's really nice!
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/379631-cristiano-ronaldos-20-hottest-girlfriends#page/1