CDC considering a recommendation

[Murphy101]

I don't really care what the rest of the western world is or is not doing.

 

If we have more sons, we'll be taking them in to a ped urologist at about 2 weeks old for a circ with the plasti bell method. So far the 3 urologists we've used have let me be present (and no it's not all that traumatic for anyone in the room, including the baby) and said they see a fair number of teens and older come in wishing they'd had it done as babies.

 

Yes, I've read the same stuff anti-circ folks have and come to the conclusion that getting it done was best.

 

I also get my girls ears pierced at about the same age.

 

I don't consider either "mutilation".

 

Still I think the recommendation is stupid. I don't think one shoudl count on being circ'd preventing an STD.

 

It's not anyone's business or decision other than my dh and I. And we don't have to justify it to anyone. And I doubt my boys will care other than to be grateful. That's dh's perspective and I have no reason to think they won't share it.

[Greta]

So, I'm thinking that if a fully aware 5 year old has no memory of it, a newborn won't either.

 

I took the PP to mean that the fact that they won't remember the pain should not be taken to mean that they don't experience pain (and therefore cannot be used as justification for the procedure).

 

I had surgery at the age of 4 and, unfortunately, remember it in detail. I'm glad for your son that he does not!

 

BTW, don't have an opinion on circumcision -- not trying to get involved in the debate! Just thought there was a miscommunication.

Edited August 24, 2009 by GretaLynne

[Plucky]

 

Still I think the recommendation is stupid. I don't think one shoudl count on being circ'd preventing an STD.

 

 

Yep, I agree.

 

BTW, I have one circed and one not. Our first son had a botched circ.

[Miss Marple]

Not only that, but the original way to circumcise (old Jewish Law) was to just nick the foreskin, not completely remove it.

 

I'm not sure where this idea comes from. Scripture doesn't appear to support the notion that the foreskin was only nicked (see Exodus 4:24-26)

 

25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet

[Aggie]

 

25 Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet

 

At least we moms don't have to do it now! Yikes..talk about traumatic!

 

The only evidence either way I've ever heard is from a young married intact man. He had the procedure but was sorry afterwards. He said the feelings were much more intense when he was intact.

 

That's all I know about the subject.

 

Are the dads conspicuously quiet on this thread?

[ThatCyndiGirl]

Here is the actual quote:

 

 

Interestingly, Messrs. John Harvey Kellogg and Sylvester Graham (advocates of fibre, of both the moral and dietary varieties) were involved in this movement. Here's what Dr. Kellogg recommended:

 

 

A

remedy for masturbation

which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision. The operation

should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment.

In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement.

 

[ciyates]

We didn't have our DS c'd at birth for only one reason. It was his choice. If I had daughters they would not have had their ears pierced until they were old enough to ask for it and take care of it themselves.

 

When DS was 12 he decided he wanted it done and we took him in and had it done. He was not in a great deal of pain and only had to miss swim for 2 days. We informed him of the pros and cons ahead of time and let him make the decision.

 

I don't think this is a religious issue (at least not for us) or a medical issue. This is a personal choice about his body that he was the only qualified to make (in our opinions) :D

[FO4UR]

Paula, I was under the impression that the CDC was just going to recommend it.

 

Forcing it would be wrong, I totally agree.

 

If they're just endorsing it, though, eh, they endorse all kinds of things that people ignore.

 

 

Perhaps I'm reading too far ahead into the future...call me paranoid:tongue_smilie:...I think this is opening the door to a passive method of forcing circ's on the general population. It's not a far-fetched notion, especially when we are discussing the gov't running our health care system.

 

I am not anti or pro circing - but I am very pro-parents maintaining the authority over the matter.

 

Why not allow pediatricians to debate this topic in a forum where parents can see the risks and benefits? Why do we need the CDC to recommend these things?

[Miss Marple]

Unfortunately, a huge percentage of the doctors out there have very little training on the care of the normal, intact penis, and they give parents terrible medical advice, leading to problems

 

OK, I'm not trying to be snippy here, but how do you know that a huge percentage have very little training? And in the rest of the post you are giving what could be construed as medical advice - what training do you have to qualify you more than a pediatrician or a urologist?

 

I have 4 sons. I can say with great confidence that the foreskin does in fact retract whenever the little guy gets an erection. And I can say that *that* occurs frequently and almost from birth.

[Renee in NC]

OK, I'm not trying to be snippy here, but how do you know that a huge percentage have very little training? And in the rest of the post you are giving what could be construed as medical advice - what training do you have to qualify you more than a pediatrician or a urologist?

 

I have 4 sons. I can say with great confidence that the foreskin does in fact retract whenever the little guy gets an erection. And I can say that *that* occurs frequently and almost from birth.

 

I have 5 sons - 3 are not circ'd and 2 are. I am not involved in this whole circ/non-circ debate because frankly I don't care enough one way or the other.:D However, I am interested in the retraction statement you made here. Of my 3 non-circ'd, two do not have retractable foreskins. I was told by my past ped not to force it to retract. Are you saying that most do retract? She told me that they most likely wouldn't until adolescence.

[Miss Marple]

I'm sure all boys are different which is why the physicians will tell not to force it (which I would agree with). In fact I have been told the same thing. But with my sons it was never an issue.

[Audrey]

I don't really care what the rest of the western world is or is not doing.

 

If we have more sons, we'll be taking them in to a ped urologist at about 2 weeks old for a circ with the plasti bell method. So far the 3 urologists we've used have let me be present (and no it's not all that traumatic for anyone in the room, including the baby) and said they see a fair number of teens and older come in wishing they'd had it done as babies.

 

Yes, I've read the same stuff anti-circ folks have and come to the conclusion that getting it done was best.

 

I also get my girls ears pierced at about the same age.

 

I don't consider either "mutilation".

 

Still I think the recommendation is stupid. I don't think one shoudl count on being circ'd preventing an STD.

 

It's not anyone's business or decision other than my dh and I. And we don't have to justify it to anyone. And I doubt my boys will care other than to be grateful. That's dh's perspective and I have no reason to think they won't share it.

 

I respect your right to your decision, but comparing male circumcision to getting a girl's ears pierced is an egregiously erroneous comparison. The more accurate comparison would be male circumcision to labial circumcision. This practice is also common in some areas of the world. The labia is cut away from the infant girl's genitalia. Likewise, the foreskin is cut away from the infant boy's genitalia. THAT is a like comparison.

[phathui5]

I respect your right to your decision, but comparing male circumcision to getting a girl's ears pierced is an egregiously erroneous comparison. The more accurate comparison would be male circumcision to labial circumcision. This practice is also common in some areas of the world. The labia is cut away from the infant girl's genitalia. Likewise, the foreskin is cut away from the infant boy's genitalia. THAT is a like comparison.

 

That makes more sense.

[Renee in NC]

I'm sure all boys are different which is why the physicians will tell not to force it (which I would agree with). In fact I have been told the same thing. But with my sons it was never an issue.

 

OK, thanks! I was a little concerned that something was wrong.

[Emmy]

Of my 3 non-circ'd, two do not have retractable foreskins. I was told by my past ped not to force it to retract. Are you saying that most do retract? She told me that they most likely wouldn't until adolescence.

 

My boys' foreskins usually retract sometime around 3 or 4. I know it can happen at different times though.

[Dirtroad]

I respect your right to your decision, but comparing male circumcision to getting a girl's ears pierced is an egregiously erroneous comparison. The more accurate comparison would be male circumcision to labial circumcision. This practice is also common in some areas of the world. The labia is cut away from the infant girl's genitalia. Likewise, the foreskin is cut away from the infant boy's genitalia. THAT is a like comparison.

 

Sorry, but gotta disagree.

 

They are not comparible in the least. A quick visit to Wikipedia gives you enough information to discern the EXTREME differences. Most of the female mutilations interfere with normal body functions (even urine flow) and often require many surgical procedures before sex can occur... and even more before childbirth may occur (horrific stuff here). Even the mildest levels are harmful in many ways b/c you are mutilating the organ by removing more than thin layer of skin.

 

This is not even close to male circumcision which does not cause damage to or removal of part of the sexual organ itself.

 

Regardless of pro or con for circumcision... it is NO business of the gov't!

[fshinkevich]

Sorry, but gotta disagree.

 

They are not comparible in the least.

 

I agree, I do not think they are comparable procedures, regardless of your view on circumcision.

 

My own personal story - I chose to not circumcise my oldest, and it turns out he was born with a disorder that was not apparent at birth (I cannot remember what it was called, but the foreskin was blocking his opening). It made urinating difficult and he was getting bladder infections, so at age 9 they recommended circumcision.

 

It was horribly painful for him, weeks of really bad pain. I'm not sure if it was more painful because of his disorder or what, but the experience was traumatic for both of us (him more, I'm sure, but it was horrifying for me to watch his discomfort). He went to a therapist for other, unrelated reasons, and this surgery came up. His therapist said he was displaying signs of PTSD from the surgery.

 

So, while I know it is not totally logical, when my second son was born I had him circ'd right away, on the off chance that he might have to have it done at a later time. The area was numbed, and he didn't even cry. He healed quickly, and does not seem to have any memory of it :)

 

Of course I think every family should be able to decide for themselves.

[mcconnellboys]

I've been reading articles for years that indicate STD's of all types are more readily spread via uncircumcised males. I, myself, contracted pelvic inflammatory disease while in college. My doctors felt then, and later doctors agreed, that it was due to the promiscuity of my then male partner (who was uncircumcised).

 

When the new vaccine for cervical cancer came online as a requirement for girls, I asked then why not circumcise? I fully agree that self-control is the better alternative to any of these requirements, but I don't know that I hold out much hope for the world. In my own case, I thought I was in a monogamous marriage. I very nearly died, and developed infertility problems as a result of my ignorance....

[mycalling]

And I doubt my boys will care other than to be grateful. That's dh's perspective and I have no reason to think they won't share it.

Once my husband learned of all he lost from his circumcision, he was angry with his mother. He's even commented that ignorance was bliss. Did everyone here know that roughly half of the nerve endings in the penis are located in the foreskin?? Kind of something you'd think a man would like keeping.It comes down to robbing a male of his choice whether to amputate a part of his own perfectly functioning body.

 

It still amazes me that parents are allowed the choice to amputate a part of their newborn's anatomy. What else should we be allowed to amputate? Unfortunately, there will be a following of misguided parents who will buy anything. Fingernails, those are a real pain...do you know you can have those removed off of your child? (I'm serious) That would save a whole lot of hangnail infections and baby won't scratch himself. Think of the nail clipping time you'd save! :001_huh:

I have 4 sons. I can say with great confidence that the foreskin does in fact retract whenever the little guy gets an erection. And I can say that *that* occurs frequently and almost from birth.

I have 5 sons (since we're comparing) and know for a fact that the foreskin is not retracting, it just sort of shrink wraps around the swollen head during erections.

 

I was told by my oldest's first Ped after learning my son was not circ'ed to never forcefully retract it because it is attached to the glans and by forcing it back you can damage the glans. Yet, let's rip it back and cut it off!:glare:

[NavyWifeandMommy]

We are military and when my son was born he got it done. I been told that now it's not covered and you have to pay. I have heard that more and more hospitals are going that route and not making it a norm.

[Mom-ninja.]

Why is it that these so called experts are not looking at Europe? HIV is not spreading as rampant as in Africa, and most males are intact.

 

 

No son of mine will ever be circ'd. Over my dead body. Made that VERY clear to my DH. If God didn't want my sons to have a foreskin they wouldn't be born with one.

[SonshineLearner]

Ok, so...maybe I'm wrong, but does bacteria really grow under there very much if it's not pulled back?? The have to pull(kinda rip) back the skin to cut it off right? And, the tip is the most sensitive....including the sensations....(so later s*xual activity is affected, even though it may be minimal)

I do know that in the Old Testament that there was some amount of f***skin removed, because there was a pile of it. But, there are different lengths that can be taken off, it can be used later if skin graphs ever are needed, for the child.... While I can't say it's inhumane because I know it is/was commanded by God, I don't think that it's necessary unless you believe you live under Jewish Covenant.

If I were to do it, I'd have a pain med topically used, a specialist do it with whatever is considered the safest and least likely to accidentally slip make a mistake.

I suppose that when my son is old enough to retract, his dad will have to show him how to clean it. I'll teach him to clean his ears out...and belly button:-)... his dad will have to teach the rest.

I'm not sure how England and France ever get by with all of their wrong info on this subject... (along with other spots, but I'm not sure who else...) And, I'm sure I won't ask a an organization about an extra procedure for my son.

Carrie:-)

[dirty ethel rackham]

I've been reading articles for years that indicate STD's of all types are more readily spread via uncircumcised males. I, myself, contracted pelvic inflammatory disease while in college. My doctors felt then, and later doctors agreed, that it was due to the promiscuity of my then male partner (who was uncircumcised).

 

When the new vaccine for cervical cancer came online as a requirement for girls, I asked then why not circumcise? I fully agree that self-control is the better alternative to any of these requirements, but I don't know that I hold out much hope for the world. In my own case, I thought I was in a monogamous marriage. I very nearly died, and developed infertility problems as a result of my ignorance....

 

If this were the case, the US should have less than half the STD rates than Europe based upon the percentage of the male population that is circumcised. Yet, the rates in this country are only slightly lower than in Europe. Circumcision does not prevent STD's. Promiscuity has a much higher correlation to STD's than circumcision status. There are millions of women in this country who have contracted STD's from circumcised males.

[Murphy101]

I respect your right to your decision, but comparing male circumcision to getting a girl's ears pierced is an egregiously erroneous comparison. The more accurate comparison would be male circumcision to labial circumcision. This practice is also common in some areas of the world. The labia is cut away from the infant girl's genitalia. Likewise, the foreskin is cut away from the infant boy's genitalia. THAT is a like comparison.

 

wel I was mostly comparing the issue of pain and trauma - as in there is none to no more than when getting ears pierced if done properly.

 

that aside, no I would not compare the two just because they are in like locations, for reasons a pp noted.

 

I find all the hype about how it is supposedly affecting men's s**uality humorous at best. All I can say is my dh isn't feel anything is missing from our sex life and would insist our sons be circ'd. If I put my foot down, he'd drive them there himself to take care of it without me.

 

As for Europe... I wouldn't blame circing or not circing for either low or high outcomes. There's no evidence to truely say it's a definitive contribution imho.

[dirty ethel rackham]

OK, I'm not trying to be snippy here, but how do you know that a huge percentage have very little training?

 

 

Based upon the moms I met in my 12 years in LLL and as a childbirth educator, there are very few pediatricians in my town of over 100,000 people who knew the proper care of an intact penis. Many moms complained about doctors forcibly retracting and then the baby suffering from infections and problems afterwards. Many docs expressed hostility toward moms who did not have their sons circumcised. They were horrified to find out that the doctor did not know how to care for it. There seemed to be only a few doctors in our town who had a clue. Even my family practice doc had to be educated. My sons are circ'd because we didn't know any better at the time (I was the obedient, easily intimidated parent type back then.) Before my last was born, we decided not to do it if we had a boy. However, the point was moot.

 

And in the rest of the post you are giving what could be construed as medical advice - what training do you have to qualify you more than a pediatrician or a urologist?

 

 

Pretty much everything she posted can be found in pamphlets on care of the uncircumcised penis - not medical advice or anything, just information.

[Sarah CB]

Interesting, esp. considering my third baby boy is due in a few weeks.

 

I probably would not have chosen to circ any of my sons if it were left up to me, but DH was insistent on it. I don't want to start a circ/non-circ debate...I have read extensively on the subject and I still have mixed feelings about it.

 

One of the reasons I was hoping for a girl this time around was so that we wouldn't have to go through that again. When you first take their little diaper off and see what they look like after the procedure, it's just heartbreaking. I bawled my eyes out when they took my other boys to have it done. DH was all stoic about it, but I couldn't stand knowing they were hurting my baby, or thinking about the residual pain the poor things go through afterward.

 

Still, DH made a valid point and this study echoes it: circumcision does seem to have some disease-protecting benefits for both the man and his future partner. I know we all have to decide for ourselves how much weight we give those studies when we make this decision.

 

What's worse is actually having to hold your baby's arms down while they circumsize him. I had one boy circumsized and it was while we were in the UK. I had to go in with him and help hold him down. At one point I thought I was going to pass out - the nurse saw and told me to go sit down. It was the most horrific thing I've ever seen in my life.

 

Our first boy is not circumsized - I had no idea that it had to be done before a certain age and I missed the opportunity. Dh was upset.

 

Our second one was circumsized.

 

Our third was not. I couldn't do it after seeing what actually happens. I invited dh to be the one to go in with ds - we both decided that we'd leave well enough alone.

 

I am really on the fence when it comes to circumcision. My is a nurse and has worked in retirement homes for many years. She's told me way too many horror stories of old men who have had their foreskin removed because of painful infections in old age. Apparently it's very, very painful and horrible for them. My mom heartily recommends circumcision.

[Sarah CB]

WE had our son circumcised. I had no idea about his grandfather (my FIL) until he had prostate cancer. He had to be circumcised in his 80's. It was very painful, much more so than the cancer procedures. After that, I was very thankful that both my dh and my ds had had this procedure done at infancy.

 

.

 

And this is why I still second-guess our decision not to circumsize our third boy. My mom is a nurse who works in retirement homes and she's seen first hand how painful and horrible it can be to have to go through a circumcision at an old age. She's told me many horror stories about old men, infections, and circumcision.

[MBM]

Based upon the moms I met in my 12 years in LLL and as a childbirth educator, there are very few pediatricians in my town of over 100,000 people who knew the proper care of an intact penis. Many moms complained about doctors forcibly retracting and then the baby suffering from infections and problems afterwards. Many docs expressed hostility toward moms who did not have their sons circumcised. They were horrified to find out that the doctor did not know how to care for it.

 

This is our experience exactly.

 

Our ped in Chicago was Dr. Famous Sleep Expert, and at almost all visits, the MDs would attempt to retract my toddler's foreskin. I had to tell them not to do it. Made me wonder about how much they really knew.

 

The ped practice we go to in Lake Forest seems to have only one doctor who supports us for choosing not to circ. One doc recently gave us a tongue lashing for not circumcising. Hostile is right.

[Pretty in Pink]

Is circumcision really more painful the for grown men than infants? How do we know?

[Miss Marple]

Pretty much everything she posted can be found in pamphlets on care of the uncircumcised penis - not medical advice or anything, just information.

 

My point was not that her advice was wrong, but rather that she somehow had expert knowledge that was not available to a "huge number of doctors". In fact, what she wrote was entirely what I and all the medical professionals I know are aware of...and as you said, easily available information to find. So...again, why would one assume that a "huge number of doctors are unaware" when the information is so readily available?

 

All of the "horror" stories I have heard here I cannot relate to because in my 30 years of being involved in the medical community I have not heard or encountered these. Anecdotal? Perhaps, but I think working in the largest teaching hospital in the nation for years would probably be a good spot in which to hear these stories and again working in a small community (where we may be accused of having "poorly educated physicians") I have not encountered such "ignorance". All the physicians I know present both sides and leave the decision up to the parent. Every physician I know who performs the surgery uses anesthesia of some sort. Some are of the "full circ" persuasion, others advocate a "half-circ". I just haven't seen the "ignorance" purported here.

 

I'm sure there are poorly educated physicians as well as poorly educated teachers, homeschoolers, etc. But I do think it's unwise and even rude to make blanket statements when one has no statistics to back it up. If she knows there is a "huge number", one would have to assume that she has talked to a huge number of physicians about the issue. That's where my beef lies :-)

[ThatCyndiGirl]

We currently have a ped who is VERY pro-"whateve works for ya", as long as it is not to the detriment of the child. She was very patient as I worked through my vaccination fears and explained things to my satisfaction.

 

We didn't circ Jake and she is/was very supportive. I wrote on his diaper with a sharpie, "Intact! Don't retract!"

 

She just laughed and said,"don't worry, we don't do that OR advocate it!"

 

So, it seems that the tide may be turning. Also, when he was born a ped from Georgia saw him (NOT the Georgia in the US!) and he was pleasantly surprised that Jake wasn't cut. He said,"yeah, we don't do that where I come from". (I took that to mean "we don't do it routinely".)

 

 

And, ftr, I have never seen my son's foreskin retract during an erection. While bathing I remind him to clean that part of his body as well as toes and behind ears and, in time ,I believe it will retract on it's own. It is being gently nudged during bathtime. (and, I believe, that he may touch it at other times as well. ;) )

[Renee in NC]

We are military and when my son was born he got it done. I been told that now it's not covered and you have to pay. I have heard that more and more hospitals are going that route and not making it a norm.

 

I am kind of surprised that the gov't is going back on it - Medicaid doesn't pay for them, so there are a HUGE number of uncirc'd boys out there.

 

I wonder what people would do if insurance quit paying as well - would most pay the $650 to get it done?

[chaik76]

I am kind of surprised that the gov't is going back on it - Medicaid doesn't pay for them, so there are a HUGE number of uncirc'd boys out there.

 

I wonder what people would do if insurance quit paying as well - would most pay the $650 to get it done?

Our insurance tried not to pay this time...it was only about $350. We just fought them until they did. I have mixed feelings about circumcision, but both my boys are circumcised.

[Mom-ninja.]

wel I was mostly comparing the issue of pain and trauma - as in there is none to no more than when getting ears pierced if done properly.

 

that aside, no I would not compare the two just because they are in like locations, for reasons a pp noted.

 

I find all the hype about how it is supposedly affecting men's s**uality humorous at best. All I can say is my dh isn't feel anything is missing from our sex life and would insist our sons be circ'd. If I put my foot down, he'd drive them there himself to take care of it without me.

 

.

 

 

You can not compare the amount of sensitivity in one's earlobe to one's genitals and say it is roughly the same. Nope. A person has much more sensitivity in the genitals.

 

It has also been noted that s*x with an intact man is usually more pleasant for the *woman* as well. Just sayin'.

 

If my DH had my son circ'd without my consent...that's grounds for divorce for me. Yep, I'm hard core.

 

 

Oh, and my ex-boyfriend was intact, and had no STDs. My circ'd DH...he's had STDs.

 

My best friend was put in the hospital with PID. She became septic and was in critical condition. She has only ever had s*x with her circ'd DH.

 

 

Oh, and to the poster that said segma is gross and breeds bacteria. Um, females have segma as well. You gonna cut bits from *your* genitals because it's gross?

[Murphy101]

I wonder what people would do if insurance quit paying as well - would most pay the $650 to get it done?

 

:001_huh: I didn't think insurance ever paid for it! Our insurance has never covered it, we've always paid the approx $200 out of pocket.

 

You can not compare the amount of sensitivity in one's earlobe to one's genitals and say it is roughly the same. Nope. A person has much more sensitivity in the genitals.

 

sure you can. because sensitivity is not the issue - it's whether they are traumatized by it and whether it is painful for them. I've seen both and neither appeared to be all that painful. My first girl slept through getting her ears pierced. My 4th boy slept through his circ. I nursed him to sleep, laid him on the table, the ped urologists nurse warmed up a topical before applying it and the ped urologist came in and did the plasti bell and the boy slept through it all. He slept hard like many 3 week old babies do. so yes, from my personal experience and observation - there was no difference in pain or trauma.

 

It has also been noted that s*x with an intact man is usually more pleasant for the *woman* as well. Just sayin'.

 

I think this is just as silly an argument as getting circ'd for mast--- issues. Do it or don't do it - but I wouldn't base it on whether it makes their sex life better. And I woudl think whther it is better for the woman depends on the individual woman's opinion.

 

Oh, and my ex-boyfriend was intact, and had no STDs. My circ'd DH...he's had STDs.

 

My best friend was put in the hospital with PID. She became septic and was in critical condition. She has only ever had s*x with her circ'd DH.

 

again, I think doing it or not doing it on the basis of sexual practices is foolish and not even backed up by science.

 

Oh, and to the poster that said segma is gross and breeds bacteria. Um, females have segma as well. You gonna cut bits from *your* genitals because it's gross?

 

hmm. I would imagine if you did a search for libial reduction, you would see that many women do choose this slective surgery. and that some girls born with it have parents who select to hae it done on them as babies. Yes it is for cosmetic and hygene reasons. And that is a good enough reason.

 

Altho I don't think anyone has to give an explaination as to why they do what they do for their children. It's none of anyone's business.

 

Like others, I've worked briefly in the past with elder care and 1 year of that was plenty for me to decide that all my boys will be circ'd.

[ThatCyndiGirl]

If my DH had my son circ'd without my consent...that's grounds for divorce for me. Yep, I'm hard core.

 

 

 

 

:iagree:

 

 

I absolutely feel that way. DH and I discussed this issue before we even married. I told him, "no way, no how!"

 

To those who say that "their circed dh's don't feel any loss of sensitivity"....how would they know?! If they were cut as babies, how would they know the difference? They have only had circ'd sex!

 

It can always be done later, but it is REALLY difficult to put a foreskin back on! Too much is lost. I know that some men practice restoration, but....it's still not the same as never losing it in the first place.

[sagira]

As a Christian, I think God put it there, don't mess with it. My boy is not and is fine. Smegma may be gross like our female liquids, but like ours, it only becomes gross when you don't clean it. I remember in school it said that boys had to clean down there so it doesn't develop "cheese". This was the unofficial, popular term. For us girls it was a fishy smell.

 

Where I come from males are not circumcised.. unless they happen to be Jewish.

[OnTheBrink]

It has also been noted that s*x with an intact man is usually more pleasant for the *woman* as well. Just sayin'.

 

That is so subjective, it's laughable to even say it. Intensity of sexual pleasure is different for everyone. Having only been with 2 men in my life, one circ'd and one not, there was no difference in how it felt, at all. Since the skin is completely retracted during intercourse, how in the world would there be a discernible difference? I think that's just a ridiculous argument.

[ThatCyndiGirl]

That is so subjective, it's laughable to even say it. Intensity of sexual pleasure is different for everyone. Having only been with 2 men in my life, one circ'd and one not, there was no difference in how it felt, at all. Since the skin is completely retracted during intercourse, how in the world would there be a discernible difference? I think that's just a ridiculous argument.

 

 

It is true that during sex the foreskin retracts, then it moves back again, then it retracts again,.....lather,rinse, repeat.

 

It's a good thing, is all I'm sayin. ;)

[kmacnchs]

This seems to parallel the recommendation to inject each pre-teen girl with Gardisil. :glare:

 

NO KIDDING!!!

 

Because of all of the hoopla about it, I asked my OBGYN about getting the vaccination and she asked "why?" since I am in a monogamous relationship...I felt stupid but when there are SOO many commercials about it, I thought it was something I needed to do.

 

I don't have a problem with circumcision...just with being told what to do by the government...just the republican bone in me ;)

[Renee in NC]

I didn't think insurance ever paid for it! Our insurance has never covered it, we've always paid the approx $200 out of pocket.

 

Oh - the $650 came from the hospital where I had my last child. I read before that you had it done after birth at a doctor's office. That is actually how it came to be that my 3rd ds did not get circ'd (or his next brother down.) The birth center I used didn't do it and I couldn't handle taking them at 2 weeks to get it done somewhere else. So, it just didn't get done. It wasn't a huge moral or philosophical decision at all. If it had been offered and included in the cost, we would have had it done.

 

I guess that makes me a clueless parent!:lol: I see the evidence both ways and I figure it is six of one, half a dozen of the other. I know that some people who homebirth/use a birth center have a mohel do it, but I didn't look into it much. It's never even come up in discussion with the boys, which is pretty odd considering they aren't and 2 brothers and dh are. The irony? I *did* have to have a "pull the skin back and clean there" discussion with a *circ'd* ds!

[Lovedtodeath]

I know of two married men who had it done because their wives were getting recurring infections.

 

I didn't read the rest of the thread, and I am not telling you what our decision was, or why. ;) So there!:tongue_smilie:

[Pamela H in Texas]

Carmen, LOL. Seriously, I highly doubt that you did it (if you did) so that your ds wouldn't give his multiple women sexually transmitted diseases.

[KidsHappen]

And this is why I still second-guess our decision not to circumsize our third boy. My mom is a nurse who works in retirement homes and she's seen first hand how painful and horrible it can be to have to go through a circumcision at an old age. She's told me many horror stories about old men, infections, and circumcision.

 

Can someone tell me why it would be so horrible and painful for a man in old age? I have known full grown men voluntarily get circumcised and the only problems they had was unfortunate arousal until the stitches healed. They were given a small can of something that blew cold air which usually took care of the problem pretty quickly. So I am not understanding why it would so much more painful for an older man. Perhaps the pain was due to the infection instead?

[Mom-ninja.]

As a Christian, I think God put it there, don't mess with it.

 

This sums up how I feel exactly. It's a strong moral and religious issue for me.

 

 

 

That is so subjective, it's laughable to even say it. Intensity of sexual pleasure is different for everyone. Having only been with 2 men in my life, one circ'd and one not, there was no difference in how it felt, at all. Since the skin is completely retracted during intercourse, how in the world would there be a discernible difference? I think that's just a ridiculous argument.

 

Oh, I'm not using it as an argument trying to tell people why they shouldn't circ. I have much stronger arguments than that. ;) All I'm saying is that it is a nice side benefit.

 

"Look like his daddy"...now that is a laughable argument.

 

 

Can someone tell me why it would be so horrible and painful for a man in old age? I have known full grown men voluntarily get circumcised and the only problems they had was unfortunate arousal until the stitches healed. They were given a small can of something that blew cold air which usually took care of the problem pretty quickly. So I am not understanding why it would so much more painful for an older man. Perhaps the pain was due to the infection instead?

 

I don't think it's more painful. I just think that as a culture we don't respect babies as a person that has basic human rights. Those who circ, but insist on the use of a topical.....thank you. I'm sure your sons thank you as well. To me it is simply a violation of human rights to strap someone down without their consent, and perform such a precedure without any form of pain meds. Just because they won't remember does not make it ok to cause someone pain.

[Lovedtodeath]

 

I don't think it's more painful. I just think that as a culture we don't respect babies as a person that has basic human rights. Those who circ, but insist on the use of a topical.....thank you. I'm sure your sons thank you as well. To me it is simply a violation of human rights to strap someone down without their consent, and perform such a precedure without any form of pain meds. Just because they won't remember does not make it ok to cause someone pain.

:iagree:

[Lovedtodeath]

 

Carmen, LOL. Seriously, I highly doubt that you did it (if you did) so that your ds wouldn't give his multiple women sexually transmitted diseases.

Yep. And the same applies to the Hep B shot, IMO. ;)

[Sarah CB]

Can someone tell me why it would be so horrible and painful for a man in old age? I have known full grown men voluntarily get circumcised and the only problems they had was unfortunate arousal until the stitches healed. They were given a small can of something that blew cold air which usually took care of the problem pretty quickly. So I am not understanding why it would so much more painful for an older man. Perhaps the pain was due to the infection instead?

 

Yes, I imagine it has more to do with the fact that they start with a painful infection and then end up with a circumcision because of it. I doubt that healthy young men who elect to have a circumcision would have the same type of pain that an elderly man with a severe infection would experience.

[justamouse]

I didn't have my oldest circed and it became a nightmare. Apparently his foreskin wouldn't retract. So, after many infections, he got one at 11. After going through all of that (trying to pull it back when he was 5/6/7 only to have him scream and cry) ALL of my boys got circed and they have never had any problems.

 

That being said, it IS a parents choice.

[Renee in NC]

I didn't have my oldest circed and it became a nightmare. Apparently his foreskin wouldn't retract. So, after many infections, he got one at 11. After going through all of that (trying to pull it back when he was 5/6/7 only to have him scream and cry) ALL of my boys got circed and they have never had any problems.

 

That being said, it IS a parents choice.

 

Not arguing for or against here - I said before it doesn't matter one way or the other to me. It is a parent's choice, absolutely.

 

The foreskin should never be forcibly retracted ever as this leads to infections as it "rips" inside and leaves an opening for bacteria. The "not retracting" (as I understand it) is not an issue until after puberty (by which time it almost always retracts on its own.)