To circumcise or not to circumcise?

[Aegon]

Okay, I've read the thread through and everybody's responses to my articles and I've decided that I may have been exaggerating the benefits of circumcision. To say that there aren't benefits would be incorrect. And as for circumcising later in life, as one of the studies I linked says, circumcision when the patient already has a history of things like phimosis will do you no good when it comes to other things that phimosis can lead to. The only way to basically ensure a life without risk of those things is to be circumcised at birth. But I'll admit, I was probably exaggerating before.

But, just like a lot of you can't fathom why anybody would do this to their son, I can't fathom why anybody would see it as a big deal. Child abuse? Trauma? I can promise you exactly 0 percent of circumcised guys remember it, let alone are traumatized by it. I've never even really had to think about the topic until I read this topic. There are a dozen things wrong with my body. My penis is not one of them. I promise you that a majority of those properly circumcised have absolutely no problem with it. It's not a big deal at all. The risk is low, and even if the benefits aren't as great as a lot of people make them out to be, the extra foreskin is just not that big of a deal.

I understand the whole "don't make this sort of decision for your child that can't consent." But a parent makes those decisions every day. They say breastfeeding can asist cognitive function in infants, as well as preventing asthma and many allergies. Are we gonna call moms using bottles child abusers too because they made a decision concerning the baby's body that the baby had no say in and may have had a negative impact? I wouldn't think so. But even then, opposing it on principle like that is understandable, but don't make it out to be more than it is. It's not a terrible traumatizing child abuse. It's something that we have absolutely no memory of and something that most of us just don't really care about.

Would I circumcise my child? I always figured yes, but now I'm not too sure. If it's really not beneficial, maybe I won't want to. But I wouldn't not do it because of all the ridiculous rhetoric I've read.

[dyresand]

Come on the whole foreskin deal is unnecessary to cut off unless it really needs to be otherwise.
For one never do that to a child its wrong.. then down the line you pretty much messed up his male parts because
that little bit of skin being cut off reduces sexual sensitivity to 50%. But through technology and lots of time you
can regrow it though so yeah.. that's a thing

[robvalue]

Aegon: I respect you taking the time to consider the information.

You say parents make decisions for their children all the time, and this is true. However, it's not the case that either parents make whatever decisions they want and we say "that's fine" (as a society); or they make no decisions. We can and do have a happy medium.

In the case of breast feeding versus formula, you can argue that using formula isn't optimal. But this really isn't the same as circumcision. The mother has to choose one or the other: breast or bottle. They are both methods for the same thing. The consequences of not acting are that the child will die.

With circumcision, if you do nothing, there are no significant consequences. There are some health benefits from doing it of course, but medical opinion still deems these not enough to do it as a matter of course, especially since there are very real balancing risks. So you are choosing to do something unnecessary. It's more akin to adding some sort of medicine to the child's food, which was considered to have significance and benefit in the past, but which you now know is not recommended, even after considering the possible benefits. Medicine that also causes some sort of irreversible change to the baby. The medicine may still be appropriate in certain cases, experts say, but that doesn't mean everyone should give it to their baby.

Sex is a squicky topic religious or no - it makes people uncomfortable to discuss. There's a lot of misinformation that gets perpetuated in all circles - including information about circumcision.

But it's not just the mechanics of sex that need to be explained - it's also body image and relationship health that should be promoted, and they don't do that either.

Yeah, I can understand that - not about circumcision cos that's just not a 'thing' here in the UK, not at all - but in general sex is still an uncomfortable topic for most people. And overall I think that is probably due to religious baggage down through the ages, but who knows whether it would still be the case even without religion. I know that I was very uncomfortable talking explicitly about sex in A69 when I first got to this site but now I'm more comfortable saying the sorts of things I've said in this thread... so this uncomfortableness can be challenged and overcome. So I thank AF for that... for opening me up hehe. But yeah, I'm all for being more open about sex and more realistic sex education all round. Especially about body image etc... as it is everyone's essentially isolated because of this fear of talking about it, leaving everyone to their own ignorance and delusions.

My wife's opinion is that our general taboo attitude towards sex here in England is left over from the Victorian era. We need to fuck that shit up and start educating our kids! I received precisely zero information and guidance from my parents, about both sex, sexuality, and the surrounding issues.

I don't think we should be too hard on people who have had their children circumcised.
I think we can generally except that it is a fact that none of them did it to be mean.
They may have been medically misguided or driven by cultural norms.

It seems to me that if there are medical benefits, it appears to be in the area of sexual health.
Given our level of understanding on the issue these days, maybe it would be better to wait until the child is of sexual age and let them make the decision/incision then.

I agree. If someone had the procedure done because they were medically advised to do so, I don't think badly of them. We put our trust in doctors, and in the medical opinions of experts. Opinions change as understanding improves. Some people have expressed regret for doing this, because they wouldn't do it now. But now is not then. However, people who continue to do it while ignoring new understanding are the ones I have a problem with.

Your baby is totally reliant on you to act in its best interest. How about not making unecessary, irreversible decisions on its behalf against the advice of experts? You like your dick how it is? Awesome, I'm happy for you. But please don't assume your child will simply agree with you about theirs.

[Aoi Magi]

I don't think badly of a parent just because of how they choose to raise their kids, however I do want people to at least be open to discussing things over and do some proper research for facts, especially when most other people are telling them they might be making a mistake. If even after their own research they decide something which they feel is better for their child, I may not agree with their decision, but I'd not consider a bad parent, in fact I'd have respect for them for caring about their child.

[robvalue]

Sure, yeah. But if they can't give any kind of decent justification, I'm not going to be impressed. I will assume they are projecting themselves onto the child and then rationalising after the fact. I don't consider "I like how my dick looks" to be adequate justification for surgically altering someone else's dick without their consent.

Not that they are accountable to me personally of course. I'm just saying how I would evaluate a parenting decision.

[Whateverist]

If kiddo doesn't have the same look as dad I guess that just means you'll be talking about it some. My stepson is not cut. I was. It happened before I was on the scene of course. But I think I too would have elected not to sign up for avoidable elective surgery. I mean they're sooooo small and fragile looking already. I vote for: don't mess with it. Those who do it will tell you kids don't feel anything at that age but I don't believe that for a minute.

[robvalue]

I can tell some people on this thread have given the issue serious thought, and taken in what others are saying.

Whether they've changed their mind or not as a result, I respect that.

[LadyForCamus]

What makes a study true and what makes a study crap to you?

Studies that are peer reviewed. And done outside of America.

Still, even from your own link to the AAP earlier they say there's not enough benefit to do this routinely.

To be fair, studies done outside of America and on non-Americans are not considered to be generalizable to this population. I had not seen this AAP link before, and I don't think it's right to dismiss it just because we don't like what it says. If we, as skeptics, are not going to consider scientific research from a reputable, national medical organization, then we are no better than the crazy Christians who deny evolution research because the source has an "agenda."

[Mr.wizard]

Sure, yeah. But if they can't give any kind of decent justification, I'm not going to be impressed. I will assume they are projecting themselves onto the child and then rationalising after the fact. I don't consider "I like how my dick looks" to be adequate justification for surgically altering someone else's dick without their consent.

Not that they are accountable to me personally of course. I'm just saying how I would evaluate a parenting decision.

Rob, what you have to understand is that  a circumcised penis is the norm in America. You don't want your child to be the kid with the weird dick in the locker room or cause any type of awkward sexual situations for them down the road. So for parents in America its not as easy as saying well he can do it when he's an adult, there are things parents are considering beyond religion or medical reasons.

[Heatheness]

Then it was medically necessary, some are, my grandson's was as well but most are not.

Of course it wasn't but they all said it was and had I not known I'd have had him circumcised not realizing it was unnecessary. My point wasn't that it's never necessary. Just that there's a massive amount of ignorance about it even in the medical field. The 2 doctors who weren't urologists even thought it was a medical emergency that my son's foreskin wasn't retracting and they treated me like some horrible neglectful mother when I told them it's not supposed to retract.

Yes there are medically necessary reason for circumcisions. My grandson's foreskin was attached to the opening of his penis and could not be drawn back without tearing the skin and the foreskin was not long enough on that side, it was pulling his penis down to a curved position. It would not be able to extend. They didn't circumcise him at birth because of this. They recommended he see a urologist surgeon. The urologist said the operation would wait until he was 6 months old because he would have to be put under and reconstruction of the glans skins and foreskin would be necessary.

At 6months he had his surgery. His is fine now with plenty of skin for normal use of his penis and not even a scar on the glans now. There are medical reason for this kind of surgery, I simply object to the non-medical reason. Fad is not a reasonable reason.