This is pretty funny, given how hysterical DCUMers become over other newborn risks. Consider the amount of angst women display over things like Pertussis, flu, drop side cribs and crib bumpers. You realize that circumcision kills more newborn babies per year than all of these other things combined? Yet, you find all the DCUmers who are willing to refuse grandparents the right to see their baby if they won't get a DTAP and others who want to report to CPS those families who they see not using a car seat once. Amazing then, how with a surgery that is cosmetic in nature and absolutely unnecessary and 100% avoidable - and actually KILLS and maims newborn babies - you have DCUMers saying "hey, it's my choice and you should just shut up and let me do what I want." Totally bizarre. As an aside, how do you know you managed his pain? He wasn't able to tell you, you know. Do you think an adult male would be satisfied with taking a tylenol after the procedure? For the record, I don't actually think "it hurts" is the most compelling reason we should not be circumcising our newborns; there are plenty of other reasons not to do it. But yes, it does hurt and we really aren't able to assess exactly how much. Though the few studies which have been done actually demonstrate excruciating pain to the point that some babies go into shock. Yahoo! Welcome to the world, little one! Glad your daddy will now be satisfied with the appearance of your penis! |
How do you think countries such as Germany, England, Sweden and Argentina are able to avoid adult penile complications? You realize that over 95% of the adult male populations in those countries (and many, many other countries as well) are intact and do not experience the same type of problems that adult intact males seem to experience in the United States? Mull that one over. Perhaps your diagnoses are incorrect and your treatments are harmful and/or unnecessary. Maybe the way doctors instruct the parents of intact boys to care for their foreskins actually leads to the types of problems you have witnessed. Furthermore, by your logic, we should just start cutting off any body part that could cause a problem later in life. You realize that specialists see diseased body parts every day? For example, men are likely to get breast cancer than penile cancer. Why not remove male breast tissue at birth? Think of all the pain it could save in the future! There is an endless list of problem body parts. My question to you is: why the foreskin? Why do you think the foreskin, in particular is so expendable and so important to remove? |
I think the problem is that some adult men DON'T take care of their foreskin. Or they don't address their incontince or terminal dribbling issues. Just a few days of yeast infection involving the foreskin can result in phimosis. The fix for phimosis is a circ. I voiced my opinion, which I formulated after seeing hundreds of cases (ie penises) every week, for YEARS. Mull that over. No matter my opinion, the OP will do well if she does a bit of research, discusses her concerns with her physicians and close friends, weighs her husband's wants equally with hers. |
\ ... or a topical steroid cream. In Scandinavian countries, the rate is something like 1 in 14-16 THOUSAND boys end requiring circumcision. They've created alternate methods of surgery for hypospadias in order to preserve the foreskin... where we have physicians jumping to surgery rather than stretching exercises and steroids. Insane. |
Also, many of the penises you see have been altered by poor medical advice from America's past -- parents used to be advised to forcibly retract the foreskin and clean under it. Very damaging. |
K, you are definitely the expert! Congrats. |
You flippantly dismiss what is being said with a classic American medical-professional attitude, that no one could possibly know more than you. What about Europeans ability to treat foreskin problems without amputating? Do you even know the value and functions of the foreskin, or were you just taught to amputate? What about the connection between forced retraction in young boys and subsequent problems as an adult? Doesn't it make you wonder why European men can get a yeast infection and not need a circumcision? Your theory that "men just don't keep it clean" is absolutely ridiculous. We are cleaner now than any time in human history. We wouldn't be here if the natural human penis was so fragile; that a yeast infection caused severe enough damage that surgery was required to correct it. |
If you're the "medical expert" above, you'd know damn well that you're being misleading and inflammatory by stating that THE treatment is circumcision. http://urology.ucsf.edu/patient-care/children/phimosis
|
Europe is always behind in medicine because they have systems that are not quick to pay for new advances. |
Oh, I call BS on your supposed experience. Where the hell are all these intact men that have been flocking in by the hundreds Week after week, year after year? 90% of the adult males in this country are already cut. |
In almost all cases it doesn't matter either way.
I personally know three men who had to be circumcised as adults and no boys or men who have had botched circumcisions, so we chose to circumcise. I asked my OB and other doctor friends and all leaned toward circumcision. It went fine. |
Circumcision might have various health benefits, including:
Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. Washing beneath the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis is generally easy, however. Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The overall risk of urinary tract infections in males is low, but these infections are more common in uncircumcised males. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on. Decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections. Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential. Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis. Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men. |
And if those men lived in many other countries, they probably would have been treated without circumcision just fine. We jump to it very quickly, in part because the functions of the foreskin are not known or valued in our society with a high adult circ rate. |
And you think there are high percentages of men in agony due to inadequate medical treatment? I find that laughable. My husband is from a country that does not routinely circ. No issues. Didn't know anyone with any issues, either, most men there seem to find the idea horrifying -- it came up more frequently in conversation than one might imagine because we were living in a small town with a major university and many international students. |
That may be true. I'm an American mom of an American son, though, so we made our decision based on the practices and practitioners here. |