We're Jewish, and used rabbi henesh, who was very sweet. My son cried more about being undressed than he did about the circumcision! I'd definatley recommend him. But, obviously pricey. We picked him because he was very organized and clear in his instructions. I gave birth at holy cross and they offered tO do it there. (but for religious reasons we obviously said no). That may be easier for u?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i just read this letter from someone circumcised by the rabbi you recommend, who later in life regretted having it done and felt he had problems as a result of it.

http://www.thewholenetwork.org/14/post/2011/8/an-open-letter-to-mohel-michael-henesch.html

Anonymous wrote:http://www.mysonsbris.com/about.html

Excellent mohel.

Sounds like he should be addressing his parents and he can gain a little insight into why they chose to have him circumcised. Maybe he would realize that he doesn't get to make that decision, his parents do. He can make the decision for his own children which is his right to do. And if he is having issues, go see a Urologist for assistance. I stand by the post that he did an excellent job for my child and I would use him again with out a second thought.

OR, we can stop treating our children like our possessions, and let them decide what will happen to their bodies, from ear-piercing to circumcision, for themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rabbi Raphael Malka is absolutely incredible:

http://www.otbrit.com/

He circumcised our last two sons, who were born at home. He is a delightful man, and his skills are unparalleled. My MIL is a pediatrician who has performed thousands of circumcisions herself, and she observed his work and admitted she had never seen such skill. My boys did not cry and did not bleed after the first diaper change. If our new baby is another boy, we will be honored to have him to our home again.

We are faithful Catholics, and my MIL is Hindu, and Rabbi was just lovely to us.

So your MIL has done thousands of circumcisions? That's impressive.

Ro Rabbi Malka circumcises a lot of non-Jewish boys as well as Jewish ones?

Yes, my MIL has been a pediatrician for almost 50 years.

Yes, Rabbi Malka cares for Jewish and non-Jewish boys, and I could not recommend him more highly.

My new, spring baby is a girl, but I will still be sure to email him and thank him for his incredible skill, and promise that any boys of mine will be honored to have him back to our home.

So basically she started practicing right at the beginning of the great cultural lie regarding circumcision, and has continued practicing right through the end of this era. You do realize that within another decade or two, circumcision will be mostly eradicated in this country? As the numbers rapidly drop in this country, your future sons will be one of a very small number who are cut. Unfortunately your MIL has managed to spread her misinformation down through her son and grandsons. I wonder, if your husband was not cut, would you still find there to be any justification for doing this to your sons? For all the people who like to pretend they do it for "medical" reasons, I guarantee that if Dad wasn't cut, the sons wouldn't be either.

As a faithful Catholic, you owe your future sons more than continuing to stick your head in the sand regarding this issue. Circumcision truly goes against everything you believe in, and when it finally dawns on you what you have committed against your sons, I bet you find yourself begging their forgiveness.

Anonymous wrote:Which mohels circumcise non-Jewish boys?

We also used Rabbi Henesch, and he was fine, and very experienced. I am not Jewish, but DH is. I'm pretty sure he does circumcisions for non-Jews. It cost around $700.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rabbi Raphael Malka is absolutely incredible:

http://www.otbrit.com/

He circumcised our last two sons, who were born at home. He is a delightful man, and his skills are unparalleled. My MIL is a pediatrician who has performed thousands of circumcisions herself, and she observed his work and admitted she had never seen such skill. My boys did not cry and did not bleed after the first diaper change. If our new baby is another boy, we will be honored to have him to our home again.

We are faithful Catholics, and my MIL is Hindu, and Rabbi was just lovely to us.

So your MIL has done thousands of circumcisions? That's impressive.

Ro Rabbi Malka circumcises a lot of non-Jewish boys as well as Jewish ones?

Yes, my MIL has been a pediatrician for almost 50 years.

Yes, Rabbi Malka cares for Jewish and non-Jewish boys, and I could not recommend him more highly.

My new, spring baby is a girl, but I will still be sure to email him and thank him for his incredible skill, and promise that any boys of mine will be honored to have him back to our home.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rabbi Raphael Malka is absolutely incredible:

http://www.otbrit.com/

He circumcised our last two sons, who were born at home. He is a delightful man, and his skills are unparalleled. My MIL is a pediatrician who has performed thousands of circumcisions herself, and she observed his work and admitted she had never seen such skill. My boys did not cry and did not bleed after the first diaper change. If our new baby is another boy, we will be honored to have him to our home again.

We are faithful Catholics, and my MIL is Hindu, and Rabbi was just lovely to us.

So your MIL has done thousands of circumcisions? That's impressive.

Ro Rabbi Malka circumcises a lot of non-Jewish boys as well as Jewish ones?

Spoken like a true circumfetishist......ewwwwww..........

http://www.circleaks.org/index.php?title=Circumfetish

or this:

http://www.drmomma.org/2009/11/brian-morris-his-circumfetish-push-to.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quick question - how much did it cost (for those using only the medical aspect, we are not Jewish), and did insurance cover it? TIA.

It was $500, and our insurance did not cover the rabbi, but would have covered it if we had used an in-network doctor who was also a mohel. We actually found a great mohel + MD who was approved by our insurance and who would come to our house, but we were so thrilled with the rabbi's care, we decided it was worthwhile. My MIL was so impressed by what she saw, she actually paid him herself as her gift to her new grandson.

By the way, I respect Catholics who choose not to circumcise because of the Church's emphasis on the sanctity of the body. That is one of the reasons why fertility must not be artificially destroyed--that counts as self-mutilation, of course, to destroy or hinder healthy body parts. Also why we should not get drunk, take harmful drugs, or have self-destructive habits. But we chose circumcision for our sons based on our experiences with urologists and other specialists, as something that offers health benefits; and it does not destroy the penis to circumcise it.

Also, on a lighter note, God defined His chosen people by circumcision (before the Incarnation), and the Second Person of the Holy Trinity was circumcised Himself, so I don't think He has too much of an issue with it.

So, it's okay to mutilate as long as it offers potential "health benefits". I think that many of us have been absolutely brainwashed by a generation of doctors who equate the foreskin to a dirty flap of festering skin. Fortunately we now have access to a vast amount of information online, and can really discover what exactly the research shows, as well as gain insight into the political and financial aspects of those who continue to support RIC. Also, we have the ability to discover what exactly IS mutilated and lost by circumcision. I always wonder if those who justify their decision to circumcise really delved into any of this research, or if they really just were influenced by a doctor in the family and by the circumcised dad. Anyway, yes, in some cases it DOES destroy the penis, as little boys have completely lost or permanently maimed their penis as a result of their unnecessary routine infant circumcision. My husband, in fact, is one of these who has lasting, disfiguring and sometimes painful problems as a result of this "beneficial" surgery.

As to Jesus, he was Jewish, so it is right that he was circumcised. However, we were subsequently relieved of that duty. Also, it is thought that the type of circumcision performed at that time was quite different (less invasive) than what we routinely do today.

My sister in Christ, I completely respect your position. I am a homebirthing, homeschooling, midwife-loving, chiropractor-believing medical skeptic. I was completely open-minded about circumcision, and did not make the decision lightly. Rabbi Malka uses the "traditional" technique, and my boys did not cry, and were held in their father's arms. They nursed immediately afterwards, and healed completely and quickly. I do recommend to mothers who circumcise to use a trained and experienced mohel, even if they need to sacrifice financially. It is worth it.

This is one of those decisions conscientious, informed, and educated parents get to make, and there are benefits and drawbacks each way, as there are for many things in life. I am at peace with our decision, and I can see that you are with yours. That's wonderful!

Well, no, there aren't "drawbacks" to having a foreskin - I would love to hear what you believe they are. An intact penis is normal and healthy. Would you say there are "drawbacks" to allowing a person to keep their ears? Their little toes? It is immoral (from a Catholic perspective, as well as a basic human rights perspective) to have normal, healthy, functioning body parts cut from our babies because we are afraid that one day they might acquire an infection. Many body parts eventually become infected, yet we would never remove them at birth to save this from happening. What has caused you to believe that the foreskin is likely to have more problems than any other body part? This is the lie -- you have given in to our cultural lies that this is a superfluous or infection-prone body part (hint - it is not). My guess is that you do not understand the purpose and function of the foreskin, nor do you understand that it is no more likely to become infected than, say, a vulva (actually, it is LESS likely to become infected than a baby girl's genitals, but that is another conversation).

Also, whether or not the procedure makes a baby cry is completely irrelevant. Babies cry from all sorts of things; we can't always change our care for our babies based on whether it makes them cry or not. The issue is the sanctity of their bodies; we do not have the right to remove a healthy, functioning, normal part of their genitals. If you are somehow able to justify this bizarre practice in your mind, you have not done your research. It truly is that simple.

Anonymous wrote:Rabbi Raphael Malka is absolutely incredible:

http://www.otbrit.com/

He circumcised our last two sons, who were born at home. He is a delightful man, and his skills are unparalleled. My MIL is a pediatrician who has performed thousands of circumcisions herself, and she observed his work and admitted she had never seen such skill. My boys did not cry and did not bleed after the first diaper change. If our new baby is another boy, we will be honored to have him to our home again.

We are faithful Catholics, and my MIL is Hindu, and Rabbi was just lovely to us.

So your MIL has done thousands of circumcisions? That's impressive.

Ro Rabbi Malka circumcises a lot of non-Jewish boys as well as Jewish ones?

We're interfaith, DH is Jewish. Malka will do it, but he was pretty rude to us reminding us that our son still wouldn't be Jewish even if we had him circumcised since I'm not. We never led him to believe we thought otherwise, but it was insulting that he chose to focus on that and not at all on what we were asking him to do or answering our questions.

We haven't used him yet, but we plan to have Dr. Adashek who is a mohel and dr., uses a nerve block and has a great reputation while also being a really nice person.

Anonymous wrote:Rabbi Raphael Malka is absolutely incredible:

http://www.otbrit.com/

He circumcised our last two sons, who were born at home. He is a delightful man, and his skills are unparalleled. My MIL is a pediatrician who has performed thousands of circumcisions herself, and she observed his work and admitted she had never seen such skill. My boys did not cry and did not bleed after the first diaper change. If our new baby is another boy, we will be honored to have him to our home again.

We are faithful Catholics, and my MIL is Hindu, and Rabbi was just lovely to us.

Is Rabbi Malka one of the Rabbis who does circumcisions for non-Jewish boys then? So he is comfortable circumcising Catholic boys?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quick question - how much did it cost (for those using only the medical aspect, we are not Jewish), and did insurance cover it? TIA.

It was $500, and our insurance did not cover the rabbi, but would have covered it if we had used an in-network doctor who was also a mohel. We actually found a great mohel + MD who was approved by our insurance and who would come to our house, but we were so thrilled with the rabbi's care, we decided it was worthwhile. My MIL was so impressed by what she saw, she actually paid him herself as her gift to her new grandson.

By the way, I respect Catholics who choose not to circumcise because of the Church's emphasis on the sanctity of the body. That is one of the reasons why fertility must not be artificially destroyed--that counts as self-mutilation, of course, to destroy or hinder healthy body parts. Also why we should not get drunk, take harmful drugs, or have self-destructive habits. But we chose circumcision for our sons based on our experiences with urologists and other specialists, as something that offers health benefits; and it does not destroy the penis to circumcise it.

Also, on a lighter note, God defined His chosen people by circumcision (before the Incarnation), and the Second Person of the Holy Trinity was circumcised Himself, so I don't think He has too much of an issue with it.

So, it's okay to mutilate as long as it offers potential "health benefits". I think that many of us have been absolutely brainwashed by a generation of doctors who equate the foreskin to a dirty flap of festering skin. Fortunately we now have access to a vast amount of information online, and can really discover what exactly the research shows, as well as gain insight into the political and financial aspects of those who continue to support RIC. Also, we have the ability to discover what exactly IS mutilated and lost by circumcision. I always wonder if those who justify their decision to circumcise really delved into any of this research, or if they really just were influenced by a doctor in the family and by the circumcised dad. Anyway, yes, in some cases it DOES destroy the penis, as little boys have completely lost or permanently maimed their penis as a result of their unnecessary routine infant circumcision. My husband, in fact, is one of these who has lasting, disfiguring and sometimes painful problems as a result of this "beneficial" surgery.

As to Jesus, he was Jewish, so it is right that he was circumcised. However, we were subsequently relieved of that duty. Also, it is thought that the type of circumcision performed at that time was quite different (less invasive) than what we routinely do today.

My sister in Christ, I completely respect your position. I am a homebirthing, homeschooling, midwife-loving, chiropractor-believing medical skeptic. I was completely open-minded about circumcision, and did not make the decision lightly. Rabbi Malka uses the "traditional" technique, and my boys did not cry, and were held in their father's arms. They nursed immediately afterwards, and healed completely and quickly. I do recommend to mothers who circumcise to use a trained and experienced mohel, even if they need to sacrifice financially. It is worth it.

This is one of those decisions conscientious, informed, and educated parents get to make, and there are benefits and drawbacks each way, as there are for many things in life. I am at peace with our decision, and I can see that you are with yours. That's wonderful!

i don't think there's anything wrong with the letter. i found it very interesting. i don't think most of us consider that someday our sons may be unhappy that we decided to circumcise them.

i agree that talking to his parents would make sense, but i also don't see anything wrong with addressing the mohel.

while i guess it's true that parents "get to" make this decision for their child, in my mind, i equate a parent deciding to have their male child circumcised with a parent deciding to get their female child circumcised, or a parent deciding in some other instance to harm their child or cut off a part of the child's body. Sure, parents have dominance over their children and can decide to hurt them, but does that make it right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i just read this letter from someone circumcised by the rabbi you recommend, who later in life regretted having it done and felt he had problems as a result of it.

http://www.thewholenetwork.org/14/post/2011/8/an-open-letter-to-mohel-michael-henesch.html

Anonymous wrote:http://www.mysonsbris.com/about.html

Excellent mohel.

Sounds like he should be addressing his parents and he can gain a little insight into why they chose to have him circumcised. Maybe he would realize that he doesn't get to make that decision, his parents do. He can make the decision for his own children which is his right to do. And if he is having issues, go see a Urologist for assistance. I stand by the post that he did an excellent job for my child and I would use him again with out a second thought.

Anonymous wrote:i just read this letter from someone circumcised by the rabbi you recommend, who later in life regretted having it done and felt he had problems as a result of it.

http://www.thewholenetwork.org/14/post/2011/8/an-open-letter-to-mohel-michael-henesch.html

Anonymous wrote:http://www.mysonsbris.com/about.html

Excellent mohel.

Sounds like he should be addressing his parents and he can gain a little insight into why they chose to have him circumcised. Maybe he would realize that he doesn't get to make that decision, his parents do. He can make the decision for his own children which is his right to do. And if he is having issues, go see a Urologist for assistance. I stand by the post that he did an excellent job for my child and I would use him again with out a second thought.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quick question - how much did it cost (for those using only the medical aspect, we are not Jewish), and did insurance cover it? TIA.

It was $500, and our insurance did not cover the rabbi, but would have covered it if we had used an in-network doctor who was also a mohel. We actually found a great mohel + MD who was approved by our insurance and who would come to our house, but we were so thrilled with the rabbi's care, we decided it was worthwhile. My MIL was so impressed by what she saw, she actually paid him herself as her gift to her new grandson.

By the way, I respect Catholics who choose not to circumcise because of the Church's emphasis on the sanctity of the body. That is one of the reasons why fertility must not be artificially destroyed--that counts as self-mutilation, of course, to destroy or hinder healthy body parts. Also why we should not get drunk, take harmful drugs, or have self-destructive habits. But we chose circumcision for our sons based on our experiences with urologists and other specialists, as something that offers health benefits; and it does not destroy the penis to circumcise it.

Also, on a lighter note, God defined His chosen people by circumcision (before the Incarnation), and the Second Person of the Holy Trinity was circumcised Himself, so I don't think He has too much of an issue with it.

So, it's okay to mutilate as long as it offers potential "health benefits". I think that many of us have been absolutely brainwashed by a generation of doctors who equate the foreskin to a dirty flap of festering skin. Fortunately we now have access to a vast amount of information online, and can really discover what exactly the research shows, as well as gain insight into the political and financial aspects of those who continue to support RIC. Also, we have the ability to discover what exactly IS mutilated and lost by circumcision. I always wonder if those who justify their decision to circumcise really delved into any of this research, or if they really just were influenced by a doctor in the family and by the circumcised dad. Anyway, yes, in some cases it DOES destroy the penis, as little boys have completely lost or permanently maimed their penis as a result of their unnecessary routine infant circumcision. My husband, in fact, is one of these who has lasting, disfiguring and sometimes painful problems as a result of this "beneficial" surgery.

As to Jesus, he was Jewish, so it is right that he was circumcised. However, we were subsequently relieved of that duty. Also, it is thought that the type of circumcision performed at that time was quite different (less invasive) than what we routinely do today.

This is why it is inane to discuss this, because you consider it mutilation and you consider those who disagree with you "brainwashed by a generation of doctors." How rational. If you "feel" this way, clearly then don't do it. But you should really stop haranguing people who think differently than you, or assuming they have a different opinion because they are uninformed. Pretty hard to have a real discussion with someone who just assumes they have to yell louder to get you to see it their way. Yes, actually, it does, empirically speaking, offer potential health benefits. If those are compelling to me as a mother or to my husband as a father, that's our choice. I can guarantee some of the choices you've made would not appeal to me, but to each his or her own. Keep your eye on your own kid's penis--why is this such a difficult concept? Of all the things to get worked up about in the world, it amazes me that women get their undies in a bunch on this one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Quick question - how much did it cost (for those using only the medical aspect, we are not Jewish), and did insurance cover it? TIA.

It was $500, and our insurance did not cover the rabbi, but would have covered it if we had used an in-network doctor who was also a mohel. We actually found a great mohel + MD who was approved by our insurance and who would come to our house, but we were so thrilled with the rabbi's care, we decided it was worthwhile. My MIL was so impressed by what she saw, she actually paid him herself as her gift to her new grandson.

By the way, I respect Catholics who choose not to circumcise because of the Church's emphasis on the sanctity of the body. That is one of the reasons why fertility must not be artificially destroyed--that counts as self-mutilation, of course, to destroy or hinder healthy body parts. Also why we should not get drunk, take harmful drugs, or have self-destructive habits. But we chose circumcision for our sons based on our experiences with urologists and other specialists, as something that offers health benefits; and it does not destroy the penis to circumcise it.

Also, on a lighter note, God defined His chosen people by circumcision (before the Incarnation), and the Second Person of the Holy Trinity was circumcised Himself, so I don't think He has too much of an issue with it.

So, it's okay to mutilate as long as it offers potential "health benefits". I think that many of us have been absolutely brainwashed by a generation of doctors who equate the foreskin to a dirty flap of festering skin. Fortunately we now have access to a vast amount of information online, and can really discover what exactly the research shows, as well as gain insight into the political and financial aspects of those who continue to support RIC. Also, we have the ability to discover what exactly IS mutilated and lost by circumcision. I always wonder if those who justify their decision to circumcise really delved into any of this research, or if they really just were influenced by a doctor in the family and by the circumcised dad. Anyway, yes, in some cases it DOES destroy the penis, as little boys have completely lost or permanently maimed their penis as a result of their unnecessary routine infant circumcision. My husband, in fact, is one of these who has lasting, disfiguring and sometimes painful problems as a result of this "beneficial" surgery.

As to Jesus, he was Jewish, so it is right that he was circumcised. However, we were subsequently relieved of that duty. Also, it is thought that the type of circumcision performed at that time was quite different (less invasive) than what we routinely do today.