BS: Circumcision: pros and cons

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,Art
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 01:11 AM

My old uncle, who I like to quote here every so often, was out plowing with his prize bulls one day. Pretty amazed, I yelled, "Uncle, uncle, why are ya plowing with your two prize bulls?"
He answered, "Well, I don't want 'em to start thinking that life is all fun and games!"

Extrapolating, I've always figured that a little early pain might be a good instructive lesson for the kids!! ;-)

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST,ghost
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 12:13 AM

I thought the reasons for and against were cut and dried.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 12:03 AM

Joybell, things have changed. Most doctors who do circumcisions these days use a local anesthetic or some other method of pain control.

Personally I have mixed feelings about it, and I was very glad my daughter was a daughter so I didn't have to face that decision. (Since I'm Jewish, there would have been a very strong expectation--both from outside and from my own beliefs--that it would be done, but I also would have had strong reservations.) I was also glad that for most of my career as a general pediatrician I practiced in an area where the pediatricians did not do circumcisions...because I didn't like doing the procedure.

Basically, some form of ritual mutilation has been part of human culture for thousands and perhaps millions of years. In many cultures it's done at puberty as part of a rite of passage. Many anthropologists believe that the ritual represents a symbolic death and rebirth. (Read the book "Transitions" by William Bridges for a helpful discussion.) In other cultures, the mutilation, without the ritual, is done as a personal or fashion statement...witness all the tattoos and piercings that are currently so popular among young (and not so young) people these days--or, if you prefer, try to find a pair of clip-on earrings in a jewelry store.

Circumcision is generally considered not to be medically necessary. On the other hand, it clearly does protect against urinary tract infection in infant boys, which is much less common than in girls. That can lead to kidney failure or death if not treated adequately, and that's not trivial, though I'm not sure it's enough of a justification for the procedure. Also, I've treated more than a few uncircumcised boys for infections caused by lack of careful hygiene. Those problems don't exist in circumcised boys. On the other hand, we don't pull out everybody's teeth because some people get bad tooth decay.

An interesting sidelight is that when doctors do circumcisions, it's sometimes obstetricians and sometimes pediatricians. Which one does it depends completely on the tradition in the local community. The fact that obstetricians sometimes do this surgical procedure on babies, when they don't provide any other care to the baby, is a throwback to the old days when the newborn nursery was considered part of the obstetric service, and the mother and baby were both the obstetrician's patients until they went home.

Whether or not babies are circumcised mostly depends on the history and culture of a particular community. I've been in places where nearly all the boy babies were circumcised, and in others where the percentage was much lower. The numbers also change over time, as "what everybody does" goes in and out of fashion.

Aloha,
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 12:02 AM

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

My daughter is uncircumcised, and I am uncircumsized. My son, like his father, are uncircumcised. It seems only fair!

We recognize female circumcision as barbarous and cruel, yet male circumcision has continued to the present day in this "enlightened" nation.

I heard a program on NPR quite a number of years ago now in which a fellow who had been circumsized went through the skin stretching process to restore his foreskin. He was very happy with the results.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 11:59 PM

During WW2, both my wife and I served in the Medical Corps. Many servicemen coming back from the South Pacific and Asia after jungle fighting had horrid hard-to-treat infections in the genital area. Infections were far less serious on men who had been circumcised.

We had our male children circumcised and made sure their male children also were circumcised. I doubt that a nurse who served in WW2 (or Vietnam), who dealt with jungle rot and other infections contracted in the South Pacific, would ever argue against circumcision. In WW2 there were only the rather unpredictable sulfa drugs. Treatments and antibiotics may be much better now, but because of our hospital service at that time, we would be hard to convince.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 10:46 PM

All is not lost guest foreskin restoration

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 10:36 PM

Another rationalization I can give to my therapist for the general malaise that is my life ...

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Joybell
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 10:07 PM

Another point worth mentioning - Having worked as a nurse during the time circumcision was more popular, I can say that it is most surely an extremely painful proceedure. I've held babies down while it was done. I never could come to terms with the idea that "it's quick and he'll forget all about it." Also for what it's worth, I worked for 30 years in surgical hospitals and came across only 2 adult men (no young boys) who needed circumcision for medical reasons. They, of course, had the operation under general anesthetic.
Cheers, Joy

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Rapparee
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 09:58 PM

While there might not be medical reasons, there certainly are religious ones. Both Islam and Judaism ordain circumsion for male infants, and other religions may do so as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: dianavan
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 09:57 PM

I understand where and when and who started it but will never understand why it became standard procedure in the U.S. How did this happen?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bbc
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 09:41 PM

I didn't have either of my sons circumcised (now 20 & 23) & both are quite happy about it. My husband was circumcised; my dad was not.

bbc

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: michaelr
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 08:30 PM

open mike -- thanks for those links! Just what I needed to present my coworker some food for thought.

gnu -- check out this link to find answers to your question.

Don't mutilate your children!

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 08:30 PM

What are the good reason not to do it?

Seems pretty obvious that unless there is a pretty good reason for it you don't go cutting off bits of your baby's anatomy just for fun of it.

I've never understood why people who are horrified at the idea of genital mutilation for girls seem so unperturbed about circumcision for boys.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 08:19 PM

I heard a report recently on a news broadcast that said non circumcised men are more likely to contract HIV. The broadcaster just announced that "finding" and gave no further information.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:55 PM

I had no choice in 1939, when 'most' boys in the US had it done....I did have a say when my son was born in 1983, and he was spared. There are VERY few cases where there is a medical reason for the procedure, and that can usually be put off for a few years.

I am told that uncircumcised means 'higher sensitivity' and thus occasionl premature ejaculation, and requires greater care in washing....but circumcision seems like a pretty strong cure for minor problems.

I have never really heard who invented it and why it was started in the first place.

But...this is the internet, and I suppose a 3 minute search would tell me.

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: bobad
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:41 PM

A common error made by those who want to justify infant male circumcision on the basis of medical benefits is that they believe that as long as some such benefits are present, circumcision can be justified as therapeutic, in the sense of preventive health care. This is not correct. A medical-benefits or "therapeutic" justification requires that overall the medical benefits sought outweigh the risks and harms of the procedure required to obtain them, that this procedure is the only reasonable way to obtain these benefits, and that these benefits are necessary to the well-being of the child. None of these conditions is fulfilled for routine infant male circumcision. If we view a child's foreskin as having a valid function, we are no more justified in amputating it than any other part of the child's body unless the operation is medically required treatment and the least harmful way to provide that treatment.

From Margaret Somerville, director of McGill University's Mcgill centre of Medicine, Ethics and Law

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: open mike
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:26 PM

any one dare to comment?

here are some comments pro and con

http://www.naturalfamilyonline.com/2-ch/412-circumcision.htm

and Mothering magazine is primarily against circumcision.

http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/circumcision/protect-uncircson.html

http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/circumcision/against-circumcision.html

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Organizations
If your physician or healthcare provider ever recommends that your child be circumcised, get another opinion from a physician who understands the important functions of the foreskin, no matter how "urgent" the situation may be. For help finding one in your area, contact:

National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers (NOCIRC). PO Box 2512, San Anselmo, CA 94979-2512. 415-488-9883. Fax: [phone]. www.nocirc.org/

Doctors are encouraged to contact and join:
Doctors Opposing Circumcision (DOC). 2442 NW Market Street #42, Seattle, WA 98107. 360-385-1882. Fax: [phone]. faculty.washington.edu/gcd/DOC/

Another resource especially for nurses:
Nurses for the Rights of the Child. 369 Montezuma #354, Santa Fe, NM 87501. 505-989-7377. www.cirp.org/nrc/

For information about alternative bris for Jewish parents:
Circumcision Resource Center. Ronald Goldman, PhD. PO Box 232, Boston, MA 02133. 617-523-0088. www.circumcision.org/

One of the best sources of information on the Internet:
The Circumcision Information and Resource Pages. www.cirp.org/

rganizations
Doctor's Opposing Circumcision (Doc) 2442 N.W. Market Street, Suite 42 Seattle, WA 98107 206-368-8358 weber.u.washington.edu/-gcd/DOC/

The National Organization of Circumcision information Resource Center's (NOCIRC) PO Box 2512 San Anselmo, CA 94979-2512 415-488-9883 www.nocirc.org

The National Organization to Halt the Abuse and Routine Mutilation of Males (NOHARMM) PO Box 460795 San Francisco, CA 94146-0795 415-826-9351 www.noharmm.org

Nurses for the Rights of the Child 369 Montezuma, Suite 354 Santa Fe, NM 87501 505-989-7377 www.cirp.org/nrc/

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: gnu
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:02 PM

What are the good reason not to do it?

Subject: RE: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:01 PM

I've never missed it.

Subject: BS: Circumcision: pros and cons
From: michaelr
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 06:55 PM

(In USA) A coworker of mine has a new baby boy. When he mentioned he's planning to have him cirumcised, my reaction was "People still go for that barbaric nonsense?"

Having been born in Europe, I am uncircumcised; so are my stepson and grandson. It's never caused any of us any problem. I believe there are no medical reasons for circumcision, but there are good reasons not to do it.

Anyone care to comment?

Cheers,
Michael