To have zero sympathy with this mother who lost her baby

(193 Posts)
ReallyTired Tue 27-Nov-12 23:42:34

Allowing someone to circumcise a baby with a pair of sissors at home is child abuse.

Surely the mother could have taken the child to A and E if it was bleeding so much.

I think that both women deserve to go to jail for child cruety and manslaughter.

It needs to be made a criminal offence for someone to carry out a circumcism who isn't a doctor. I also feel that circumcisms need to be carried out in a hospital enviromnent with proper pain relief and emergency facilties. Anything else is child abuse.

It is a point less waste of life what happened to this little baby.

CindySherman Tue 27-Nov-12 23:45:30

I can't click the link. I really hope it isn't what I think
It is that happened to that baby sad

CindySherman Tue 27-Nov-12 23:46:19

sad why on earth did blush face come up ...

CharlieCoCo Tue 27-Nov-12 23:49:37

it didnt, i see sad face.

Poor baby sad

ChippingInLovesAutumn Tue 27-Nov-12 23:50:15

I am not clicking that link.

Poor, poor baby sad

Circumcision should be illegal unless absolutely necessary for medical reasons.

pigletmania Tue 27-Nov-12 23:50:47

I agree yanbu

MrsMushroom Tue 27-Nov-12 23:51:54

The parents were not from the UK and did not know the operation was available free in the hospital and the woman who did the wasn't a circumcision it was a murder imo....she never told them.

ThatVikRinA22 Tue 27-Nov-12 23:53:24

good god. i should be shocked but im not.

WelshMaenad Tue 27-Nov-12 23:54:48

In principle I agree Chipping, but illegality would only drive more parents to backstreet scissor-wielders, with horrible consequences.

It makes me feel nauseous. Poor baby.

I know the parents didn't know it was available for free on the NHS. They should have bloody asked about getting it done by a proper professional though, even if they thought they might have to pay. They didn't even bother to find out. No excuse, sorry.

MrsMushroom Wed 28-Nov-12 00:00:24

Cultural differences sometimes mean that people are afraid of authority....and often due to having lived under dictatorships.

SirBoobAlot Wed 28-Nov-12 00:03:59

I didn't think circumcision was covered by the NHS unless for medical reasons?

It should be illegal. There is no need for newborns to be put through that, it makes me feel sick.

That poor poor baby.

MrsMushroom Wed 28-Nov-12 00:06:22

I think it's covered for cultural reasons too.

expatinscotland Wed 28-Nov-12 00:07:34

The mother may have been forced into the circumcision, and forced not to take her son to A&E. She may not have spoken English as a first language and known about how the NHS works and how there was help for her child.

WarmFuzzyFun Wed 28-Nov-12 00:08:08

I feel sad that a child has died.sad I am sure that the mother, and her wider family will mourn the loss of this child irrespective of the events that lead up to the child's death. It is unspeakably awful to lose a child, imagine the elation for the parents when that baby was born.

I agree entirely that circumcision should not be permitted unless for medical reasons, but I am aware that for some people it is a cultural dictate that is non negotiable.



Pixel Wed 28-Nov-12 00:16:12

It says the woman was paid £100 for the 'procedure' so I don't think money was necessarily a factor.

80sMum Wed 28-Nov-12 00:19:04

How tragic! Just imagine how the mother must feel, no doubt blaming herself and wishing she could turn back the clock.
Sorry, but I think you're being rather harsh not to feel sympathy for a mother who's lost her son, even if it was as a result of foolishness.

RyleDup Wed 28-Nov-12 00:24:12

You are being harsh op. Very harsh. And I have every sympathy for her.

ripsishere Wed 28-Nov-12 00:34:42

YABVU OP. You don't know the first thing about the background of the family. To me, the fact that they didn't know it was available on the NHS speaks volumes.

DioneTheDiabolist Wed 28-Nov-12 00:39:09

This family probably thought that by paying a nurse to perform the circumcision that they had got a professional.


ThatVikRinA22 Wed 28-Nov-12 00:52:27

but the mother had been in the UK since 2008, surely in that time you start to find out what you are entitled to as a resident of the country you have called home for 4 years?

the baby bled to death.

in any culture, surely any mother would sense something was wrong and seek help?
we need to educate people, and particularly those cultures who still circumsize their children, both male and female. female genital mutilation is illegal in this country - does it still happen? you bet it does, and all underground. i cannot advocate, or justify it under any circumstances.

Monty27 Wed 28-Nov-12 00:54:13

Hmmm, don't like the idea of any mother deserving the death of her baby. Particularly when you don't know the facts op do you???


ThatVikRinA22 Wed 28-Nov-12 00:54:38

btw, i do have sympathy for the mother. of course i do. i have sympathy for any parent who loses a child.

monsterchild Wed 28-Nov-12 01:02:08

YABVU to not have sympathy for the parents. I understand your outrage that they let this happen, but condemning them is no different than condemning any parent who's poor decision lead to the death of a child.

I certainly have sympathy for her. Being a parent is terrifying.

EmmaBemma Wed 28-Nov-12 05:29:58

"serves her right" is a shockingly callous reaction to this awful story, OP. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Goldenjubilee10 Wed 28-Nov-12 05:39:34

How very, very sad for all concerned.

McChristmasPants2012 Wed 28-Nov-12 06:19:57

it seems like she paid a nurse to do the job who said

Adrian Darbishire QC, prosecuting, asked Ms Attiko (mother): "Did she say anything about possible complications, things that could go wrong? "No," she said.

Op i wish you put sensitive in the title as this may upset many people

"Serves her right"?!?! Seriously?

The woman just lost her baby. Do you think she set out to have the child die? No, she set out to do what she thought was right in regards to her baby, perhaps due to her religion or just cultural beliefs.

No one 'deserves' to have their baby die. Ever.

ErikNorseman Wed 28-Nov-12 06:46:50

Circumcision is not available on the NHS for cultural reasons, but doesn't cost much more than £100 in a proper clinic.
I feel sympathy for the parents. They were ignorant. Circumcision is completely normal and everyday in many cultures, and anaesthesia is also not widely used in all countries. From their pov they weren't doing anything wrong, they had no reason not to trust the nurse. It's terribly sad.

ErikNorseman Wed 28-Nov-12 06:48:05

And may I add that both the boy's parents were present and involved, so why you are focussing on the mother as culpable is unclear to me.

LtEveDallas Wed 28-Nov-12 06:54:27

I feel sympathy for the parents, losing a child is horrific no matter what the circumstances. The guilt they must be feeling doesn't bear thinking about.

I do think they should be charged though. The nurse for doing the procedure, and the parents for not taking the boy to hospital when something was obviously wrong.

If this practice is to remain then it should be strictly regulated and only performed at specialised clinics. There is no excuse for going 'back street'. I don't accept that they didn't know - they have been in this country long enough to find out.

I would hope that charging them may spotlight this practice and ensure that other families who may be considering going outside the medical services think again.

HecatePropylaea Wed 28-Nov-12 06:55:29

Oh my god, that's horrific. That poor baby.

And I do have sympathy for the mother too (and father. I know you didn't mention the father, but I am sure you equally condemn him and think he too should go to jail) . A nurse carried out this procedure. A nurse. The parents no doubt truly felt they were dealing with a medical professional. The nurse didn't tell them of any possible complications. People do think this is a minor thing. Just a bit of skin hmm

Scissors and no anaesthetic. sad That makes me want to cry. That poor baby. He must have been in agony.

It is awful. and I personally am very much against circumcision (long personal story involving many, many rows with my husband and threats to have him deported if he allows one hand to be laid on our sons! Culture be damned. If you want to cut off a bit of someone's body in the name of your culture/god - make it a bit of your own. Not someone who's got no choice or even understands what's happening!) if it's not for medical reasons, but the parents didn't deserve this. They sought out a nurse. That means they thought they were putting it in the hands of a professional. Their mistake was in thinking that they were dealing with someone medically competent.

There must have been an awful lot of blood though. I am sure the parents wish they had realised that it was too much blood to lose and taken that baby to the hospital. I don't think they deserved this.

I do think that people need to be made aware of the dangers of doing this to your baby though. People need to understand the risks.

Sirzy Wed 28-Nov-12 06:56:23

I am glad you mentioned about it being both parents. Actually in some cultures the mother probably gets very little say in such things.

It's a tragic thing and quite sad in this day and age that people can be so ignorant of the risks sad

thebody Wed 28-Nov-12 07:03:58

When will culture and religion again be the excuse for the torture( yes the baby would have experienced agonising pain) of usually women and children.

I weep for our world I really do.

MrsMushroom Wed 28-Nov-12 07:06:34

To some people 100 is a LOT pixel

ThatDudeSanta Wed 28-Nov-12 07:08:28

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ErikNorseman Wed 28-Nov-12 07:10:42

Mrsmushroom private clinics in the uk will circumcise a baby for around £100, that includes anaesthetic and aftercare. The point is that they didn't use the nurse to save money it seems.

You must be REALLY TIRED because that would explain the loopiness.

The mother has lost a child. Ffs. Makes me wonder what else you have "zero sympathy" for, it's a slippery slope.

higgle Wed 28-Nov-12 07:13:46

Whilst I feel very sorry for the baby and that his mother is suffering this loss the fact of the matter is that no cultural reasons can justify cruelty of this kind. It makes me very sad when we all quite rightly condemn the "culture" of the 1970's when sexual abuse of teenage girls was viewed by some as acceptable and then seek to justify mutilation of children by long term residents of this country on the basis of "ignorance" and "cultural differences"

Muffintop101 Wed 28-Nov-12 07:16:54

There wasn't an awful lot of blood, Hecate. There was a small amount, relatively-speaking, but it only takes a small amount for a baby to bleed to death. He did so over 24 hours and the parents called an ambulance as soon as they realised something was wrong. He died on arrival at hospital, apparently.

So I have every sympathy with the parents. I also feel sympathy with the nurse who is being prosecuted for gross negligence manslaughter, not murder. Whether she was grossly negligent will be a matter for the jury after hearing the evidence, but it seems to me, having been recommended to the family by other members of the Nigerian Christian community, she'd done this procedure before and there had been no problems. The procedure is often done in this manner in many cultures at around 8 days old and without anaesthetic.

And OP, YABVU and reactionary.

thebody Wed 28-Nov-12 07:31:08

So sympathy for both parents and the nurse. Baby not mentioned.

Culture is no excuse for cruelty, this was a cruel act as all 3 of the adults present would know that to cut skin off of a human being with a scissors would be agony. Would any of those 3 have laid back and allowed someone to do this to them? Of course not.

Religion is no excuse for barbaric acts, and all religions are guilty of some.

Messages need to be sent out that such barbarism and cruelty is not acceptable here, it's abuse pure and simple.

No understanding or excusing please as that's an insult to the little life lost here.

thebody Wed 28-Nov-12 07:32:24

Amend barbarism and cruelty is not acceptable anywhere...

OpheliaPayneAgain Wed 28-Nov-12 07:33:27

So this 'nurse' - was she actually qualified or just had status in that community? - has been palming £100 a throw for years doing private operations? Nice little earner.

MrsDeVere Wed 28-Nov-12 07:48:13

Home circumcision is widely practiced in Orthodox Jewish communities is it not?
Or has that changed?

So it is not like this family were doing a quick appendectomy on the kitchen table.
I prefer to assume that because they paid a nurse to to the procedure they thought it was ok and their baby would be safe.

Many of the families I work with are used to paying for medical things when they need them. They are bewildered by the NHS. I don't mean they are stupid and easily confused, rather that in their home country if they need/want an MRI (for example) they just pay for it.
I am very anti circumcision btw.

But this family did not deserve for thier baby to die.

Jossysgiants Wed 28-Nov-12 07:59:32

monsterchild Being a parent is terrifying

We all make mistakes as parents -some big, some small. I have EVERY sympathy for these parents who have made a catastrophic one. Yes, most sympathy must be for this little baby whose life has been cut short. But there isn't a finite amount of available sympathy. Have a little compassion. YABU.

thebody Wed 28-Nov-12 08:23:00

The day an adult lies down and asks a 'nurse' to circumcise them in their home without anaesthetic is the day I won't think these 3 adults are guilty if barbarous cruelty.

Cultural mutulation is practised on small people who cannot defend themselves.

Amazing that!

MrsDeVere Wed 28-Nov-12 08:27:41

I understand your anger. I am anti circumcision
But it is a hell of a lot to expect a parent to go against everything they have been taught and their families have been taught. We are talking about thousands of years of indoctrination.
Why else would loving parents do this to their children?

Morloth Wed 28-Nov-12 08:29:21

My sympathy is with the poor little baby who bled to death because the stupid fucking adults in his life thought he wasn't perfect as he was.

He would have died in agony, a tiny little baby.

Any god who could possibly call for such a thing is evil and anyone who would arrange/carry out such an act is also evil.

valiumredhead Wed 28-Nov-12 08:30:11

Zero sympathy? I have nothing but sympathy for anyone whose baby has died.

anewyear Wed 28-Nov-12 08:35:04

But why do they do it in the first place, thats what I dont understand.
I mean I know it takes place, but why?
Is it a religion thing?

I wonder though, is circumvision considered a medical procedure? Is a nurse authorised to perform it? Does anyone know the legalities?

I also have sympathy for the parents, they probably feel devastated now if they have realised that this could have easily been prevented. And while I am totally against circumncision (sp?) like mrsdevere said it's not easy to go against thousands of years of conditioning if that is the "norm" for you.

HecatePropylaea Wed 28-Nov-12 08:56:41

In my husband's culture it is done ritually. Without anaesthetic. To symbolise their transition into manhood.

He was done at 14.

His idea of a 'compromise' was to suggest we have our sons mutilated at birth. hmm Apparently they won't be accepted as men with their foreskin. hmm

I said that hell will freeze over first. (and many other things!) Nobody is touching my children. When they're old enough to understand and assuming they have the capacity to understand, if it is their choice to go through this, that will be up to them. But apart from that and assuming no medical need - over my dead body!

They remain intact to this day.

As far as I can understand it, the religious reason is that it's some sort of test. Apparently god sends your sons to earth with a bit of skin that you have to cut off them. and this shows your commitment or something. Apparently it makes you 'perfect'

Which begs the question - why would a god create you imperfect and require you to have a bit of you removed in order to make you perfect?

It's baffling.

Whatever the reason, I remain of the opinion that if you believe that something needs cutting off a person in order to make them acceptable to god - go mad with a knife on yourself. Not someone else.

waltermittymistletoe Wed 28-Nov-12 08:57:46

Ok thinking they deserve to have their child die is U. But you must know this?

However, I don't think it being a cultural thing makes it ok. There are certain cultural practises in the world that are just horrendous. They MUST be stopped.

This, using a scissors to hack away at a baby? That is horrendous. That MUST stop.

I don't mean to be insensitive to people's beliefs. But I think a lot of it comes down to being uneducated and possibly oppressed in your home country.

I don't, for a second, believe these parents wanted their child to die but...

why not take him to the hospital when the bleeding continued. If he bled to death it didn't happen in 5 minutes did it?

*I'm not reading it. I can't. I had a massive argument with my sister recently about this so it would just upset me.

mercibucket Wed 28-Nov-12 09:04:36

V v v sad. I would like to see it outlawed as a 'home op', and only carried out in clinics by certified nurses/doctors. I don't know if that would have saved this little boy though. So sad and such a waste of a little life.

ReallyTired Wed 28-Nov-12 09:22:56

I feel the parents had a responsiblity to get medical help. They let their baby down.

We live in a developed country with excellent medical facilites. Most immigrants know this otherwise they would not have come here.

Being black or a muslim does not make someone stupid.

FeckOffCup Wed 28-Nov-12 09:31:45

YABVU to have zero sympathy for parents whose baby has died, that sounds very cruel.

YANBU to feel angry that this was allowed to happen, poor baby having to go through that agony, if it's not already illegal to do circumcisions without anaesthetic then it should be.

ReallyTired Wed 28-Nov-12 09:35:08

Do you have sympathy for baby P's mother? Or the parents of other children who died as a result of physical child abuse?

"YANBU to feel angry that this was allowed to happen, poor baby having to go through that agony, if it's not already illegal to do circumcisions without anaesthetic then it should be. "

The parents allowed the nurse to carry out the circumcision and did not seek medical help when it went wrong. Surely they are partly responisble.

Fairylea Wed 28-Nov-12 09:37:17

I truly believe that circumcision for anything but solid medical reasons should be illegal. It is child abuse unless the child already has a medical problem that would be made better by removal of the foreskin.Sorry but I feel very strongly about it.

I don't care if it's cultural or religious or whatever else. Religion and culture moves on all the time. It's a completely outdated and barbaric practice and it seems everyone in the media etc is too scared too say so for fear of upsetting people. We should stand up for children. They can't do it for themselves.

Tryharder Wed 28-Nov-12 09:38:00

My DH is West African and he is circumcised as are all his family including the women although attitudes are changing there regarding female circumcision and it's no longer the case that all girls are circumcised particularly in the towns or amongst "educated" people. My boys are not "done" though and my DH isn't massively into religion or culture so isn't bothered.

All my DH's family I know in the UK who have had their boys circumcised have had it done on the NHS in hospital.

My DH was circumcised ritually so to speak. All the young boys from his local area were taken into the bush over a period of about a week and given instructions about how to be a man amongst other things and then were circumcised en masse by a bloke with a razor blade. No pain relief. My DH remembers the horrific pain but is positive about the overall experience.

I feel sorry for the parents of this baby. They thought they were doing the right thing and it went horrifically wrong. Poor little baby though. sad


Dh told me that any sons born to us would need to be circumcised. Hell froze over on that day. What I find surprising is that his mum (who claims to hate religion of any kind) let him (my dh) have this procedure. When I briefly considered a christening for ds she acted as if I was preparing him for a satanic ritual and told me that she wouldn't be attending. Yet for 6 months she tried convincing me to "get him done". hmm She always claimed it was for cultural and hygiene reasons. Apparently cervical cancer is practically nonexistent in countries where males are routinely circumcised. Nothing to do with girls not as likely to have sex at younger ages or have less sexual partners then?

Zero sympathy, really, wow.

A baby has died, her mother did what was the norm for her and misguidedly trusted a nurse, a medical professional.

On another article it says 1/3 pint of blood loss is fatal in a newborn, in a absorbent nappy, I can understand someone may not pick up on that being a dangerous amount after a procedure performed by a medical professional.

FeckOffCup Wed 28-Nov-12 09:49:18

I do think that the parents were partially responsible but I think they will also realise this and regret their actions for the rest of their lives.

I don't think comparisons to systematic and horrific abuse like in the case of baby P is entirely fair, circumcision isn't carried out specifically to cause pain to the baby, more for cultural/religious reasons and in the vast majority of cases it is achieved without further complications. I'd like to see it made illegal to be done anywhere than in a medical setting with anaesthetic and doctors present in case of unexpected high blood loss though, if that's not the case already, I don't really know what the legalities are around circumcisions carried out for religious reasons.

FreudiansSlipper Wed 28-Nov-12 09:51:38

being black or being muslim does not make someone stupid oh right thanks for that info very informative

what about a white jewish person

it is a tragic story. information and education and an understanding of other cultures is the way forward not telling people that they are cruel or evil child abusers they do not see it that way if they are not doing something to deliberately harm their child how can it be considered abuse by them

SoupDragon Wed 28-Nov-12 09:53:50

Since when does ignorance and naiveté mean you deserve to have a child die?

Spero Wed 28-Nov-12 09:55:59

Of course you are unreasonable to have 'zero' sympathy and I hope you will eventually accept this or I would worry about what kind of person you are.

You can criticise a person quite rightly for their stupidity, their failure to do the right thing. But to say you have 'zero' sympathy for a woman who has lost her baby marks you out as an individual lacking any compassion - which to me is much more worrying than parents who did a misguided and stupid thing because they wanted to do right by their child, according to their perception of the world.

MrsDeVere Wed 28-Nov-12 09:57:55

clutching is right. It takes very little time for a baby to bleed to death.

I am not going to click on the link. I have no wish to read the details of the death of a child.

There will be a serious case review and it will be published on the borough's website so the full story will come out for those who are interested.

This baby should not have died but to compare this with the death of a toddler who was wilfully tortured for month and months? Really?

strumpetpumpkin Wed 28-Nov-12 10:00:17

i dont have any sympathy for the parents either, and every sympathy for the poor child to have his penis butchered without consent for whatever fantasy fairyland reason and then bled to death. have they been prosecuted? I bloody hope so

Spero Wed 28-Nov-12 10:02:44

O yes let's call for them to be prosecuted, because that will of course miraculously bring the baby back to life and in no way drive this kind of practice further underground.

guccigirl666 Wed 28-Nov-12 10:10:26

Mumsnet is allowing me to actually really begin to understand things from a much wider perspective. Since having my ds, I'd have felt enraged at this, hated the mother because I simply let my own emotions get in the way of understanding this on a deeper level.

But I am beginning to see how irrational that is. Op I understand what your saying is because you are upset at reading this story and focusing on how awful it was for the poor baby and a few months ago I'd have felt the same. But this poor mother I'm sure never dreamt of this happening to her child. And so whilst part of me is angry, it would be misplaced to focus the anger on the mother.

blisterpack Wed 28-Nov-12 10:11:48

Oh yes they should be prosecuted. After all they are a danger to all of us, and any future children they may have. Because of course they know how great this turned out and would love any future children to have the same experience. hmm

FFS some people should engage their brains before talking.

Little sympathy maybe, but zero sympathy? I am surprised at your lack of compassion.

It sounds like they were stupid, frightened and culturally oppressed but they did not set out to kill.

Spero Wed 28-Nov-12 10:16:20

I wouldn't fuss if the person who mutilated the baby was prosecuted because it seems she was holding herself out to have an expertise she plainly did not have and a child died because of this. So a manslaughter charge looks appropriate.

But I struggle to see what criminal offence the parents committed. They paid money for a service, this procedure is not itself an offence. I imagine the death of their baby is punishment enough without spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on trying them and locking them up.

You CAN'T compare this tragedy with Baby P. hmm The people 'looking after' Baby P, and countless other abused children, were deliberately inflicting violence on their children, and they knew it. This poor, ignorant woman did something that I think she believed was 'best' for her son, and he died. She was ignorant, probably fearful of getting the authorities involved after it went wrong, and coming from a very different cultural background where genital mutilation is thought to be the right thing for children. sad To say you have no sympathy for her is inhumane, in my opinion. That bloody 'nurse' should be hauled over the coals though.

It does make you wonder how many times this sort of tragic death has almost happened, if circumscisions are done underground as this one was.

Cantbelieveitsnotbutter Wed 28-Nov-12 10:25:41

Awful, I have every sympathy for a parent whose lost a child.

Blu Wed 28-Nov-12 10:26:29

As I understand it, and I apologise if I am wrong, many mohels, rabbis who specialise in ritual circumcision, are not actually doctors?

In fact I have just looked at the website of one who is not, and who has been cirumcising babies in people's homes for 13 years.

I am horrified that any baby should be cut with scissors, and with no anaesthetic, horrified that a nurse would do such a thing and not provide the aftercare which would reveal that the child was suffereing and bleeding to death, and horrified that a mother would not realise that the level of bleeding was dangerous.

Do I feel sorry for that mother? Desperately.

Spero Wed 28-Nov-12 10:27:12

Even those who murdered Peter Connolly merit some compassion. They weren't born evil murdering psychopaths, their own childhoods were pretty awful. We are all products of our environments, to some extent.

You can rail against the cruelty and hatred behind certain acts without utterly destroying your compassion. I don't think you are much of a person if you can't manage that.

CogitoErgoSometimes Wed 28-Nov-12 10:32:33

YABU. Whatever happened, however irresponsible or stupid anyone has been, let's not be so disgustingly devoid of humanity as to crow over a grieving mother and a dead baby.... hmm

Enigmosaurus Wed 28-Nov-12 10:38:22

Horrible thread title. I'd hate to be so callous and cold-hearted that I could not find some sympathy within me for a mother who has tried to do what she believed was the right thing by her baby and had the very worst thing possible happen.

HullyEastergully Wed 28-Nov-12 10:40:07

FFS all round

waltermittymistletoe Wed 28-Nov-12 10:40:44

Spero I don't think I can dredge up any sympathy for the murderers of Baby P. That's beyond my capacity for sympathy!

But, OP, these parents didn't systematically abuse their child. I think the practise is truly awful but the blame for the procedure lies with that nurse.

I've already said though, I don't understand why they didn't get medical help after the fact. But perhaps they are thinking that too and I wouldn't want to have to deal with that as the parent responsible. Would you?

EugenesAxe Wed 28-Nov-12 10:46:31

This is hideous, but she didn't go into it thinking she would kill her baby. Therefore, I have sympathy for her. I agree with expat's comments in particular.

OxfordBags Wed 28-Nov-12 10:56:53

If you have no sympathy for a mother (or father) who has lost their child, then you have no place to be talking about this issue in the first place, OP. You've lost any moral highground on the matter with that sort of disgusting attitude. You don't try to demonstrate sympathy for the child by saying you have none for the mother - that just shows you up as the sort of person who doesn't actually feel or understand genuine sympathy. That poor woman thought she was doing was was right for her child, however much we might not agree, and she thought only of the benefits for him (and I say that as someone who has campaigned against FGM). That anything bad would happen to him would've been the last thing on her mind. She will have to live with this for the rest of her life and my heart goes out to her.

Your post smacks of grief tourism to me.

It is also disgusting to compare those parents to the killers of Baby P. The two situations are poles apart.

I have sympathy for the children that became the adults whose actions led to the death of Baby P. What must've happened to them in childhood to make them like that is heartbreaking and shames us as a society.

higgle Wed 28-Nov-12 11:03:13

Of course they need to be prosecuted, we can't bring back the child but it will bring publicity and deter others from this barbaric abuse of children.

Spero Wed 28-Nov-12 11:03:29

As the Barnados bloke said, had Peter been allowed to live he would most likely have turned into a pretty horrible adult and done to his children what was done to him ... And then we would all be haying for his blood too.

All these armchair warriors, spitting out your hatred (interestingly mainly on the mother, as if she conceived quite immaculately) what do you actually DO in your day to day lives to make it better for children who are abused and suffering now? Or is it just easier to spout this kind of stuff on the Internet, make you feel all important because you care about the kiddies.

Poor baby, and of course I feel sympathy for parents who have lost their child.

I do think though circumcision (apart from medical reasons) is cruel and barbaric and I think it should be a criminal offence to carry a circumcision out (with sissors and olive oil!?) I don't know how feasible that it (would it be assault?) and how it would work in practice but it just makes me feel so sad that there are little babies being put through this for appearance or culture.

As for the parents being prosecuted? I don't know. I don't know enough about the symptoms of blood loss in a baby or normal 'healing' after a diy circumcision to pass comment on whether or not they were negligent. I am sure they will be punishing themselves for the test of their lives though.

As the mother of three boys I couldn't stand the thought of anyone hurting them. Not a comparison directly but ds3 was born with quite severe tongue tie and we took him to see a specialist. She explained that they would cut the tie (tied in two places) but they wouldn't use anaesthetic and it would be done using something that looked suspiciously like sissors. I believed that having it cut was best in the long term, for feeding, speech etc. But, the thought of someone cutting my 10 week old baby with no pain relief etc was disgusting to me. I was really conflicted. According to the doctor, nerve endings weren't developed, pain would be minimal, over in seconds etc. In the end I decided it was best in the long term to have it done. My ex had to hold him down and my poor baby screamed. It made me literally vomit in the doctors office and I would happily have cut out her tongue if I had gotten hold of the sissors. It bled, for quite a while - I had no idea and not was I told about monitoring blood loss in a baby. He did heal quickly and has no problems now. It's me that can still see it in my mind. I've rambled on but I suppose for some mothers if they truly believe that circumcision is the best thing for their boys long term (I'm not sure of the reasoning behind it - purity? cleanliness? Acceptance?) then I can see why they would bite their lip and just try and get it over with. I don't agree with it, but I can see a little of the thought behind it.

JenaiMathis Wed 28-Nov-12 11:10:23

You sound delightful, op.

ClippedPhoenix Wed 28-Nov-12 11:10:41

My friend married a jewish man, she INSISTED that their childrens circumcisions were carried out in hospital. She had a massive fight on her hands with him about this though.

Another friend married a West Indian man, their boys were circumcised on the NHS.

My son was circumcised due to his foreskin being too tight.

Whilst I have no problem with circumcision for cultural reasons, these barbaric rituals must be stopped.

In saying that my heart goes out to that poor woman.

To be honest, for all your concern about this poor baby, I wouldn't want you to look after my child (if I had one). What does it take for you to dole out some sympathy and sensitivity? What would you teach a child with that sort of attitude? Direct this concern a little closer to home as well as condemning a woman whose life will never be the same again because of this tragedy, won't you.

moajab Wed 28-Nov-12 11:46:24

I do feel sympathy for the parents, but also anger at them and their culture which encouraged this procedure. But most of all I just feel very sad for a little boy who should have had his whole life ahead of him. RIP little one.

atacareercrossroads Wed 28-Nov-12 12:53:45

I have a tiny, and I do mean very tiny, amount of sympathy for the parents, only in that they have lost a child.

IMO they are complicit in this and they should also be up for manslaughter.

I am saving most of my sympathy for the poor boy who was put in this situation by the two people who should want to protect him the most, but failed.

McChristmasPants2012 Wed 28-Nov-12 18:06:10

I have sympathy for any parent that has lost a child, even baby peter mother.

With baby Peter it is a different remorse as it mixed with hatred, I feel sorry that she didn't see what a lovely little boy she had and she didn't get help or put him up for adoption.

CaroleService Wed 28-Nov-12 18:21:47

What Erik said about the father.

I guess the baby was wearing a nappy, which hid the bleeding.

I feel very sorry for the parents, anyway. I don't think there's anything to be gained by sending them to prison, especially if they have other children - they're not likely to do this again, after all.

thebody Wed 28-Nov-12 18:27:02

Dinosaurs.. That must have been literally soul destroying for you.

I just don't understand any culture or religion that dreams up such barbaric cruelty.. Each and every religion has blood on their hands.

Why can't 'culture' just be gentle and kind?

Why is so much of it cruel and harsh to mainly women and defenceless children. That's what I can't get past here.

I can't imagine inflicting pain on my children. Just because its 'always been done' doesn't make it right.

My dd is recovering painfully from a crash and I absolutely hate the driver who caused it. I mean that.

I know we in the west have a totally different culture but we don't have different pain thresholds or ability to empathise.

Show me any adult who has been circumspect willingly as an adult and then I will totally believe in this culture crap.

The parents and nurse should be charged with manslaughter I think as they caused the death of this baby. That's the law. Just as the man who caused dds injuries and a death is being charged with this.

We need to send out a message that this is barbaric and unacceptable.
Of course it won't bring this poor baby back but he deserves justice.

Alisvolatpropiis Wed 28-Nov-12 18:58:12

How can you not feel sorry for the mother and father? Through one misguided action their baby is dead.

Yes it was stupid and ignorant of the services available but they didn't set out to kill him.

I feel awfully sorry for them both. They have to live with that mistake for the rest of their lives. I hope the "nurse" who did it is arrested and prosecuted.

GrimmaTheNome Wed 28-Nov-12 19:07:47

The 'nurse' who performed this should be prosecuted. At very least gross negligence.

I feel very sorry for the parents - that this has happened to their child, that they were persuaded through culture/religion that it was a good thing to do, that they were ignorant of the proper medical options.

There is perhaps something constructive that could come from this tragedy...presumably the family had some contact with healthcare professionals ante/post natally. Shouldn't there be information provided on the issues and options for circumcision (medical facts as to whether its necessary; availability; dangers of DIY) - I'm presuming there isn't at the moment(I don't have boys)

Primafacie Wed 28-Nov-12 19:31:18

YABVU, unkind and cruel.

My friend (white, British born, educated professional) lost a son following a lung infection that got misdiagnosed as croup by the on-call gp. The baby died in his sleep the same night. Was she guilty of manslaughter? Or does your prejudice to trusting nhs staff only extends to blacks and muslims?

There are plenty of documented medical reasons to have circumcision performed on a newborn. You clearly know nothing about them. Your post has made me very angry in a very personal way. Parents who choose to circumcise are not satanic, evil or even just stupid parents - they act on advice and choose what is best for them. Your ignorance is staggering and makes me question your own ability as a parent.

Primafacie Wed 28-Nov-12 19:35:05

Oh and by the way - one third of men worldwide are circumcised. Over half of all Americans and Canadians are, as well as Muslims, Jewish, South Korean men and a fair chunk in India and loads in Africa. You are spouting racist bullocks.

SantasStrapOn Wed 28-Nov-12 19:55:16

Of course I sympathise with the parents. They have lost their child, how could you not feel sympathy and pity for them.

Save your anger for the people who perpetrate these crimes. The people like the person who performed the circumcision, the people who prey on parents like these..

baublesandbaileys Wed 28-Nov-12 20:01:10

I feel sorry for the parents!

they DID seek help from a nurse when the bleeding continued, when a HCP tells you that something is normal you do doubt yourself!

the nurse is the guilty one

I don't agree with circumcision for non medical reasons, and I've only ever been with circumcised men due to comming from somewhere where it was routinely done in infancy for men my age and as such prefer them as non cut penises look odd to me! I still wish it didn't happen for non medical reasons but that doesn't mean that I think these parents deserved this at all sad

Primafacie Wed 28-Nov-12 20:10:32

And by the by, if something like this happened in North America, the parents would sue the nurse and probably win. So go on, cross the next line and say that all American and Canadian parents are child abusers. I will be here, waiting for you. Because what you are doing is despicable, racist and plain wrong. Would it really kill you to have a minimum of empathy? These parents have lot a child. Do you have the remotest idea of what their grief is like? Or maybe you don't think this mum is here tonight, reading your posts, because she doesn't belong to your society... Shame on you OP.

waltermittymistletoe Thu 29-Nov-12 15:23:05

Primafacie don't make this thread something it's not intended to be.

Everyone has said OP is BU to have a complete lack of sympathy but she is in no way the only one thinking that this practise is WRONG.

I didn't know the couple's race when I said that I disagreed with it. It has nothing to do with race. I'm pretty sure OP would have been outraged had the couple been white British.

Don't assume people don't know what they're talking about just because they don't agree with this.

You question the OP's ability as a parent? Really? You don't think that's being just as judgemental?!

Alisvolatpropiis Thu 29-Nov-12 15:27:05

primafacie - the OP isn't racist. Lacking in empathy yes,racist,no.

It's not racist to think something is barbaric, cruel and wrong. It's not a racial issue.

lola88 Thu 29-Nov-12 15:46:27

any mother in the world who watches there baby bleed to death and does nothing gets no sympathy from me she should have done something end of story.

GrimmaTheNome Thu 29-Nov-12 15:50:57

lola - they took the baby to A&E when they realised - the poor mite was wearing a nappy and it just doesn't take much blood loss to kill a baby. sad

I would blame the 'nurse' for not giving them proper aftercare instruction (well, and having done it in the first place)

MrsDeVere Thu 29-Nov-12 16:28:37

I got accused of being racist on a thread about circumcision.
What made it worse that it was done in a 'oh, I notice you mention Jews and Muslims..I wonder why? ' nudge nudge wink wink.

Pissed me off no end.

Spero Thu 29-Nov-12 16:32:00

Objecting to circumcision is not racist. That is silly. All races and colours circumcise. Isn't it 80% of white US males? I think it is stupid and abhorrent in and of itself. To say that makes me racist is a non sequitur.

MamaMumra Thu 29-Nov-12 16:38:48

I thought the OP was the one who first mentioned Muslims and blacks btw.

fromparistoberlin Thu 29-Nov-12 16:45:30

what a horrible thread

yabu, some thoughts are best not aired

RooneyMara Thu 29-Nov-12 16:45:38

There was a case where a little baby died of blood loss, after circumcision, linked from here about a year ago maybe. Very, very sad indeed.

In that case it was done at a hospital but still, something went very wrong, it took a few days, for him to die - his little body shut down bit by bit.

It was a dreadful, absolutely dreadful waste of life. It just goes to show how dangerous this procedure can be even when done by supposedly qualified professionals, and even when the parents DO notice blood loss and do report it.

I am thoroughly against circumcision, personally, though I can see that there is some pressure in some families to have it done and if it is donewith anaesthetic and safely, then I can think of worse things.

But generally no, it's something I am fairly strongly against even in medical circumstances - we were almost referred for ds1 to be 'done' when he was 3 or 4, purely because his willy was a bit sore. A different GP told us to stop using bubble bath and it was fine immediately. Not that I would EVER have let it be done, unless his penis was actually falling off.

mathanxiety Thu 29-Nov-12 16:46:08

YABU to be so heartless.

I agree with MrsDeVere's comments wrt what immigrants may expect from the medical world in Britain. A lot of British people who are used to the NHS post here on MN with questions about American healthcare delivery in teh living overseas section, and are shocked about cost, necessity for comprehensive insurance, etc. They post about Irish healthcare delivery for that matter. The ins and outs of costs, what is covered and available, etc., are not common knowledge and people have expectations that they carry with them. They might also have a view of circumcision as a religious or cultural operation that would not necessarily belong in a hospital or surgery setting, just as people get ears pierced for themselves or their children in places other than a medical setting.

And to say people come to Britain for the NHS comes across as a bit BNPish imo so YABU on that score too.

YABU for trivialising real child abuse with your references to Baby P, and comparisons of male circumcision to FGM also trivialise FGM.

Spero Thu 29-Nov-12 16:47:12

I think she said 'being black or Muslim does not make you stupid'. Which seems to be a statement of fact. Unless referring to anyone's race or religion in any context whatsoever is now sufficient to make you racist. Which I am seriously wondering might be true for some.

PropertyNightmare Thu 29-Nov-12 16:52:47

Yanbu. If you are happy to allow your baby to be mutilated then be prepared for the fact that mutilation is detrimental to your baby's well being. It's not rocket science.

mathanxiety Thu 29-Nov-12 17:02:38

TheBody -- men discuss circumcision and it seems practical issues are uppermost in their minds. They are not getting their knickers in a twist about mutilation, and seem to focus pretty much exclusively on functionality.

crescentmoon Thu 29-Nov-12 17:07:17

Thanks primafacie. Why mention the culture or race when Many others circumcise their babies...including white anglo saxon protestants in the united states and canada.

This family was a specifically a Christian family and the nurse was a Christian. Why say 'blacks or Muslims are not stupid?' why bring Muslims into this at all? You Do you not realise how many north American white people circumcise their children too?

You left out this family's religion which is common to the British isles but only mentioned their race- black- to make them 'other' and open the way to call them 'barbaric'.

Here's more details on the story...

insancerre Thu 29-Nov-12 17:12:02

how sad
sad that the baby died
sad that this practice is still going on
and very sad that some people think the parents deserve no sympathy

MrsDeVere Thu 29-Nov-12 17:13:34

Personally I think the entire OP is offensive.
I have no idea if the writer is racist or not. They may well be.
But to behave as if the primary objection to circumcision is racism is unfair on those of us who abhor it regardless of who does it and why.

mind you, it is always novel to find myself being accused of something I am generally accused of being professionally offended by and/or 'looking for racism'.

I think when people think about circumcision for non medical reasons they think about people who are jewish or muslim in this country because it is not widely practiced outside these groups.

We are not in North America (well I'm not).

crescentmoon Thu 29-Nov-12 17:32:36

The word barbarian slips off some people's tongues easily when they have a different ethnicity or religion- there are more circumcised men in the USA than uncircumcised would they be called barbarians?

this family have a common religion with most people here and yet the OP still says 'serves them right'. FFS they called their child 'goodluck' - this was a birth much celebrated in that house.

Circumcision in north America became a widespread practise after the second world war in Christian families and non religious American families too.nothing to do with ancient religion or ancient culture...

waltermittymistletoe Thu 29-Nov-12 17:35:26

Crescentmoon why are you presuming that by "barbarian" people mean "barbarian because they are muslims".

Nobody said that. Again, you're making this a race issue when it wasn't intended as such.

You talk about it being common in North America as if North America is the holy grail of civilisation! I don't care where they do it, I don't like it.

CindySherman Thu 29-Nov-12 17:41:20

They are obviously incredibly ignorant people; black, white, green or blue.
Babies die from "surgical" circumcsision. It is not talked about and kept hidden. I feel it is a very high-risk, barbaric practice and people should be educated.

I do have sympathy for the parents, absolutely.

MrsDeVere Thu 29-Nov-12 18:02:11

crescent most responders thing the OP is outrageous. I am not sure why you think we agree with her.

The origins of circumcision are irrelevant. I want it to stop now. The colour of the penis it is performed on doesnt matter to me, nor the religion of its owner.

crescentmoon Thu 29-Nov-12 18:02:15

Why did the OP say 'blacks or muslims are not stupid'? What kind of fucking patronising colonialist bullshit is that?

most families that circumcise their children in the Uk are Muslim or Jewish but this was a Christian family and a Christian health practitioner. I doubt very very much that the words barbaric would have been used in this thread had this been a white christian family.

But the colonialist overtones come out when discussing a tragedy involving a black family. Poor them to be lumped in with the

crescentmoon Thu 29-Nov-12 18:10:48

I've read through my posts mrsdevere I don't think I am insinuating that most people agree with her.

waltermittymistletoe Thu 29-Nov-12 18:14:33

I doubt very very much that the words barbaric would have been used in this thread had this been a white christian family

You have no reason to think this.

Molehillmountain Thu 29-Nov-12 18:17:03

Astonishing. To have no sympathy with a mother who has lost their child is just beyond me. I say lost-she didn't set our to kill or actually to, in her or her religion's view, to harm him. The debate over whether circumcision is right or not is separate from this. I feel for her.

Svrider Thu 29-Nov-12 18:21:42

3 children a month admitted to Manchester hospital due to botched circumsion
Ffs what is wrong with these people
Op yanbu

MrsDeVere Thu 29-Nov-12 18:21:47

Why did the OP say 'blacks or muslims are not stupid'? What kind of fucking patronising colonialist bullshit is that?

I have no fucking idea. I am not the OP. I have no idea what colour she is either (or what gender for that matter). I dont know why she has lumped in 'blacks' with 'muslims' and what that is all about.

My point is that this is not a racist thread, whatever you think of the OP.

I am not racist. I am anti circumcision and I have plenty of sympathy for the parents.

I have not clicked on either of the links because I do not want to read about a dying child. I had no idea where they were from or what religion they were. I could only assume they were from a cultural background that circumcised for reasons other than medical.

Which is a fair assumption I think?

Alisvolatpropiis Thu 29-Nov-12 18:22:16

crescentmoon - I think it would actually. The practice is barbaric. The culture/race/religion of those who continue the practice doesn't make it any more or less so.

Wheresmypopcorn Thu 29-Nov-12 18:24:40

This is an awful awful story - I am shocked. What a horrible situation.

Frontpaw Thu 29-Nov-12 18:41:34

Will anyone be charged? Was she a qualified nurse? I didn't read it as I don't think I could stomach it (I remember the last one on here - in Germany, wasn't it?) and that just made me feel so sad.

No-one wanted the baby dead. They all thought it was a simple procedure. Maybe that was the problem - the attitude of 'it happens to thousands of babies every day' made the nurse blase about aftercare. It would have been easy monry for her. God only knows how the parents are feeling. Im sure they would give anything to turn back the clock. They trusted someone to take care of their child. They weren't being neglectful, but if someone had come near my son with a pair of scissors, I would have run a mile, God's wrath or no. They must have had their doubts. I hope to God this story is publicised far and wide so that people are educated in the hows and whys of this procedure and can make choices and know where to go for help. Just because dad, and his dad, and his dad was 'done' with a pair of scissors, why should baby in this day and age?
I don't agree with it without medical reason. If we are 'in god's image' then why the urge to mess with it? But why, if people insist, can it not be law to be carried out in hospital or clinic with proper aftercare?

A friends son had it done in the US (religious reasons) and they made a right pig's ear of it. Poor kid ended up with an infection and was very poorly. His dad is a doctor too! I shudder to think what can happen at home, in the wrong hands with naive parents.

Primafacie Thu 29-Nov-12 19:10:47

To be clear, I am not saying that everyone who opposes circumcision is racist. It is a practice that attracts very heated debate and I fully understand that some people find it abhorrent and are against it.

But to say, as the OP did, that "being Black or Muslim does not make you stupid" is to oversimplify the true picture of circumision in today's world, and it has an underlying tone, an innuendo which in my view clearly indicts those who practise circumcision (which the OP seems to think are Black and/or Muslim) on grounds of their culture/race. So yes, I stand by my view that the OP was racist, and yes, I judge her for that.

The WHO has found circumcision to be an efficacious means of preventing the spread of the HIV epidemic in Africa. Countries such as Nigeria, where the male circumcision rate is over 80%, have an immensely lower HIV infection rate than countries where circ is not prevalent, such Botswana and Zimbabwe. Circumcision reduces the risk of catching HIV by 60%.

The loss of any child is a tragedy. Also a tragedy is the fact that one in three pregnant women, and 40% of all babies born in Botswana, is HIV positive. Half of them die before the age of two. One may wonder where does barbarism lie, in the fact the rest of the world is allowing this to happen, or in parents deciding to circumcise to reduce that risk.

Coming back to this poor family, their mistake was to trust a nurse to perform a circumcision. It is a mistake they will regret all their life. I feel very very sad for them. The OP's abuse is nothing short of shocking.

waltermittymistletoe Thu 29-Nov-12 19:19:24

One may wonder where does barbarism lie, in the fact the rest of the world is allowing this to happen

And you criticise OP for oversimplifying?

MrsDeVere Thu 29-Nov-12 19:21:07

That is interesting prima and relevant. Circumcision will not prevent infection though will it? It can only lessen the chance of getting it each time you have intercourse.
So if you have a one off with an infected woman you might not get it. If you are having regular sex with an infected person you are still likely to get it.
And the presumably the same goes for passing it on.

The answer to the reduction of hiv infection surely has to lie in sex education, the empowerment of women and the use of barrier contraceptives. Poverty, ignorance and sexual violence against women are the enemies here, not foreskins.

Circumcision is surely a sticking plaster (no pun intended) to the HIV pandemic?

The babies born hiv infected are not going to be saved by being circumcised either. They would surely be put more at risk by going through an unnecessary procedure.

Each circumcision must cost money? Money that may be better spent elsewhere in the fight against against aids.

I am not anyway and expert and you sound like you know what you are talking about so feel free to put me straight smile

hermioneweasley Thu 29-Nov-12 19:46:46

I come from a culture where male circumcision is the norm. I assumed that my DS would be circumcised - it's what we do, and I wanted him to look like the men in his family. Then I looked into it and was bloody horrified. I absolutely refused, much to the anger of my father.

As a parent we have the responsibility To make informed decisions for our kinds, not blindly follow culture, tradition or religion.

Primafacie Thu 29-Nov-12 19:48:00

MrsDeVere - agreed, circumcision is only one aspect of the fight against aids in Africa, and a controversial one at that. And I also agree that babies who are born with HIV may not benefit from circumcision. It's a long game - in the sense that infant circumcision is for the benefit of future generations, not just that of the circumcised child himself. It's like a form of vaccination, and interestingly, it is about as effective as the bcg vaccine is against TB, which is not generally viewed as controversial.

In an ideal world, condoms would be available everywhere and African women would be empowered. However, the real world is different, and most epidemiologists seem to think that there is a proven link between male circ and the spread of HIV. It is but one measure, I am not at all saying it is a panacea, but a 60% reduction of the risk is viewed as significant enough to warrant massive circumcision drives in Zimbabwe, Kenya and other countries, even taking the costs into account.

Walter, would you care to expand on why you think I am oversimplifying?

mathanxiety Thu 29-Nov-12 20:28:02

MrsDeVere, that's like saying if this was a perfect world then there would be no more HIV. It is absolutely true but a long shot nonetheless.

Adult circumcision is promoted as a means of reducing risk of contracting HIV in Africa and so is condom use. Research into a cure is ongoing. While we wait for an end to the sort of world where women are exploited and abused it behoves humanity to use whatever comes to hand since the disease cannot be cured and can be passed on to babies.

Pixel Thu 29-Nov-12 20:51:00

Why did the OP say 'blacks or muslims are not stupid'? What kind of fucking patronising colonialist bullshit is that?

I didn't read it like that. I can't find the comment now but I thought it was a response to posters who were suggesting that the parents couldn't have been expected to know any better because of their 'cultural differences'. She was actually doing the opposite of patronising them. Perhaps I've got it wrong though, if anyone knows what time the post was?

waltermittymistletoe Fri 30-Nov-12 09:59:23

Primafacie I think statements that imply we are the barbaric ones because circumcision stops the spread of HIV is massively oversimplifying, yes.

The HIV epidemic has a lot to do with ignorance and lack of education. It's like the free condom debate in the church a few years ago. Yes, these procedures stop the spread but this problem needs to be worked at from the roots, ie giving people a sexual education.

And it's irrelevant to this particular story anyway. If the thread becomes a discussion on the HIV epidemic in Africa then fair enough. But it's taken a nasty turn towards accusations of racism.

This is not about the big western bullies picking on "blacks or muslims" it's about a horrific tragedy which could have been prevented because the procedure was completely unnecessary.

Forgive my ignorance, and you seem much more educated in the field than I, but the threat of HIV was no bigger to this baby than any other born to healthy parents in the UK was it?

naturalbaby Fri 30-Nov-12 10:12:55

YABU to have no sympathy for a mother who was doing what she believed was the best for her baby.

The issue is with the nurse who performed the procedure and the mother who didn't make an informed decision.

mignonette Fri 30-Nov-12 10:22:17

Any community nurse would visit and monitor a patient post procedure and would give clear instructions as to the monitoring of blood loss and for infection.

So if this nurse performed a circumcision then failed to closely monitor this child knowing that parents are not medical professionals and often pretty lacking in knowledge about the specifics of post surgical care, then she/he is negligent.

The babies deterioration would have been picked up with proper nursing post surgical care.

Debster7808 Sat 01-Dec-12 09:10:17

It's almost impossible not to have a strong emotional perspective on circumcision, whether it be for or against.

A lot of people who are against circumcision associate it with agony and cruelty and say that it is barbaric. Certainly, there ARE ways that a baby can be circumcised which are is cruel and barbaric, especially if no anaesthesia is given.

However, if you ever wanted to see how a circumcision can be performed, with no real distress for the baby, and a neat and tidy result, this short clip might be worth watching:

somewherewest Sat 01-Dec-12 10:08:46

Some people will always opt to circumcise their children for cultural or religious reasons. Making it illegal will just drive it undergound and create more cases like this. If botched home circumcisions are a problem, the NHS needs to publicise the fact that safe, free circumcision is available for cultural or religious reasons. Likewise prosecuting the parents may just mean that more children suffer, because other parents will be less likely to bring their children to hospital after complications with home circumcisions.

SirBoobAlot Sat 01-Dec-12 10:18:16

Circumcision is always barbaric. The procedure itself is horrific, and the long term results are devastating.

Why is there an uproar when we think about female gentile mutilation, and yet think its perfectly okay to do it to boys?

sheeplikessleep Sat 01-Dec-12 10:26:35

How sad, I can't open up the link, but I'm sat here fighting tears. That poor poor baby sad

picnicbasketcase Sat 01-Dec-12 10:39:58

Oh god, how appalling. I do feel sorry for the baby's parents for their loss but how awful that such a thing could happen.

butterfingerz Sat 01-Dec-12 11:15:03

Why do people think HIV is just an African problem? HIV is rampaging through Russia, you know a western country not so different to our own.

Even in the news today, apparently 20,000 people in the UK are living with HIV and do not know... Or I guess ignorance is bliss to the typical MC mumsnetter and you assume that 20,000 are gay or not from the UK, could never be a average heterosexual that will sleep with you or one of your family.

Circumcision is a WHO recommended procedure in the fight against HIV, who knows if that could one day be relevant to UK (the country with the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in Europe, so much for sex ed and condoms eh?).

Proudnscaryvirginmary Sat 01-Dec-12 11:19:09

1. What an awful, awful thread title. Just...hideous.

2. I'm Jewish. Most boys I know (not mine) have been circumcised with NO ill effects at all. That's by hospitals and rabbis.

3. However, I do err on the side of 'it's barbaric' and I would never put my own child through it. Luckily I am a non-practising, atheist Jew (yes that does make sense!).

CindySherman Sat 01-Dec-12 11:52:03

Babies who make no noise or apparent distress whilst being cut ate going into shock. It doesn't mean they don't suffer.

notnagging Sat 01-Dec-12 15:20:27

I think you are bu op & so are a lot of people on this thread. It is not just 'black or Muslims' that curcumcise. America & Canada have high rates too. Don't generalise. Aids is a genuine concern to people who come from countries with high rates. I read today that 2million people this year alone have been newly diagnosed. Circumcision is done by parents with good intentions, that may not have a choice due to cultural pressures.

MrsDeVere Sat 01-Dec-12 15:28:08

butterfingerz who the fuck do you think you are to come on here and lecture me? And make assumption about me and what I know and how I live.

I am 45 years old. I lived through the 80s. Unlike a lot of my friends.
Wind your neck in.

I couldn't imagine being so cold and callous that I would not feel sympathy for someone who appears to have lost a child through ignorance.

BegoniaBampot Sat 01-Dec-12 17:00:43

because it's not the norm here we tend to not understand or think circumcision is wrong. If you were brought up in a country like the US where it's seen as the norm then you probably wouldn't have a problem with it.

mathanxiety Sat 01-Dec-12 22:31:28

That is very true. You certainly wouldn't see comments thrown about along the lines of 'barbaric', and 'devastating consequences'.

To put it in the same category as FGM trivialises FGM, which has devastating consequences for women, and is truly barbaric. There is absolutely no comparison and women who claim there is should wind their necks in. Scroll down to 'complications' and compare with the forum I linked to earlier.

SirBoobAlot Sun 02-Dec-12 09:06:22

Circumcision does NOT prevent HIV. Its utter bollocks. Think about it logically for a second, and then just do some research. The WHO have now acknowledged that it does not. Its an out of date excuse for assault.

And no, I don't think any of the men who are living with the endless consequences of circumcision would feel that they are suffering any less that those sufferers of FGM. In fact there are a lot of FGM victims that are part of the inactivist movement, to protect all babies. Botched MGM can lead to full amputation of the penis, and death. Babies die in the USA every year because of circumcision. The fact that this is in the UK is the only reason it has been given any press.

lovebunny Sun 02-Dec-12 09:59:25

sounds very sad, to me. right or wrong in choosing circumcision, they didn't expect to lose their child.

waltermittymistletoe Sun 02-Dec-12 12:21:17

because it's not the norm here we tend to not understand or think circumcision is wrong. If you were brought up in a country like the US where it's seen as the norm then you probably wouldn't have a problem with it

I find this very patronising. Like the only reason people have strong views and certain principles about circumcision is geography!

SirBoobAlot Sun 02-Dec-12 13:14:30

And I know plenty of people where circumcision is common who are disgusted by the practice as well. There is a huge movement within USA and Canada to get circumcision reconsidered. Its currently not covered by some insurance companies, which is big progress.

BegoniaBampot Sun 02-Dec-12 13:47:47

It's not patronising. Unless you have been brought up in the states or a country where it's the norm and have still formed an opinion against it then you can't honestly say you wouldn't have any sons circumsized if you lived there. I've read forums where Americans think uncut penis are horrible as they are used to most penis being cut. Some men choose to get cut because they don't like the look or being different from the norm. I think it's easy for us in the UK to feel outraged or think it's weird and that other countries have got it wrong. There seems to be a feeling that we are superior and more civilised than those that close to cut. That's a bit patronising as well.

SirBoobAlot Sun 02-Dec-12 15:10:57

No I don't think I'm superior, I think there is a shocking lack of education. And lets remember that as later as the 1980's, FGM was still being suggested; one article was entitled "Female circumcision: the kindest cut".

You can still think it is a horrific unnecessary breech of the human rights of newborn babies when you don't live in a country that it happens routinely in. I am grateful for that every day.

waltermittymistletoe Sun 02-Dec-12 15:18:32

I'm not in the UK.

I don't think I'm superior but I wouldn't choose to have my son's bodies mutilated for no real reason.

BegoniaBampot Sun 02-Dec-12 15:55:23

And nether would I, don't see the point in changing the natural way or inflicting unnecessary pain with possible complications. Just have no idea how I would feel if I lived in the US. I might still be against it or might just go with the flow.

mathanxiety Sun 02-Dec-12 16:09:38

SirBoob -- there have been plenty of studies showing that circumcision does in fact prevent HIV infection. Iirc, one study was halted because the evidence was so compelling it was considered unethical to continue while there were men in the community who could benefit from a full blown programme.

And stop interjecting FGM into the discussion. The two are not comparable.

'I find this very patronising. Like the only reason people have strong views and certain principles about circumcision is geography!'
Not so much geography but the echo chamberish culture associated with being an island perhaps? Some of the statements here wrt circumcision are nothing short of hysteria and appear (1) never to have been seriously challenged, and (2) to have been formulated from half baked ideas that have been spread using the method of the children's 'telephone' game -- barbaric? akin to FGM? devastating consequences? Seriously? A little more exposure to men who have been circumcised, a little more questioning of the UK zeitgeist, a little more reading of scientific studies would result in a lot of toning down of comments, if not a complete change of mind.

The 'huge movement' mentioned is a very small fringe group. US society and culture is very fractured and doesn't get gripped en masse by huge movements of any sort.

waltermittymistletoe Sun 02-Dec-12 16:41:43

Why presume though that the only reasons people are against it are because they don't know enough about it?

I researched it in the not too distant past for personal reasons. IMO there is no compelling reason, aside from medical if necessary, to do this to a baby who can't speak for himself.

SirBoobAlot Sun 02-Dec-12 17:13:02

Myth: Circumcision prevents HIV/AIDS.

Reality check: Three studies in Africa several years ago that claimed that circumcision prevented AIDS and that circumcision was as effective as a 60% effective vaccine (Auvert 2005, 2006). These studies had many flaws, including that they were stopped before all the results came in. There have also been several studies that show that circumcision does not prevent HIV (Connolly 2008). There are many issues at play in the spread of STDs which make it very hard to generalize results from one population to another.

In Africa, where the recent studies have been done, most HIV transmission is through male-female sex, but in the USA, it is mainly transmitted through blood exposure (like needle sharing) and male-male sex. Male circumcision does not protect women from acquiring HIV, nor does it protect men who have sex with men (Wawer 2009, Jameson 2009).

What's worse, because of the publicity surrounding the African studies, men in Africa are now starting to believe that if they are circumcised, they do not need to wear condoms, which will increase the spread of HIV (Westercamp 2010). Even in the study with the most favorable effects of circumcision, the protective effect was only 60% - men would still have to wear condoms to protect themselves and their partners from HIV.

In the USA, during the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s and 90s, about 85% of adult men were circumcised (much higher rates of circumcision than in Africa), and yet HIV still spread.

It is important to understand, too, that the men in the African studies were adults and they volunteered for circumcision. Babies undergoing circumcision were not given the choice to decide for themselves.


Circumcision does not prevent HIV spreading. Condoms do.

SirBoobAlot Sun 02-Dec-12 17:17:59
Frontpaw Sun 02-Dec-12 17:31:08

AIDS is a red herring. Its only really been on the radar since what, mid 80s, when circumcision has been around a lot longer.

There has been no study that has proven that it reduces transmission of AIDS. Condoms do, but the catholic church frowns upon it, and there is another can oif worms.

SirBoobAlot Sun 02-Dec-12 17:46:24

And we only want to think there is not similarity between FGM and MGM because MGM is still seen as socially acceptable. This chart is a very good - and fair - comparison between the two.

I hope that twenty years down the line we have the same gut wrenching reaction to MGM as we do now to MGM. Neither are okay, and both are horrific.

mathanxiety Mon 03-Dec-12 04:10:46

In the US, the largest group currently experiencing exposure to HIV is the African American community, both men and women.

There is no fair comparison between FGM and circumcision.

From my earlier link:

'De-Infibulation at time of marriage:
The closure of the introitus must be reopened at the time of marriage so that the woman is able to have sexual intercourse. The opening up of the infibulation occurs as part of a ceremony and in the presence of female members from the bride and groom’s families to verify that the bride is a virgin at the time of marriage. The opening of the infibulation is performed by a senior female member of the community, a TBA, or in a hospital by medical staff. Occasionally, the husband forcibly performs penetration and bursts through the scar of the infibulation.'

'The Dangers of FGM:
FGM puts children at risk of life threatening complications at the time of the procedure as well as health problems that remain with her for life. They may suffer bleeding at the time of the procedure or develop severe infection, both of which can lead to death if not treated promptly. Those who do not develop life-threatening complications will still suffer from severe pain and trauma.

The procedure also permits the transmission of viral infections such as hepatitis which can lead to chronic liver diseases and even HIV. The women may suffer complications such as recurrent infections, pain and obstruction associated with urination and they are at higher risk of painful menstruation and intercourse, pelvic infection and difficulties in becoming pregnant. Retention of urine and recurrent infections often require repeated hospital admissions and some women carry a risk of developing nephritis. The development of cysts and keloids at the site of the scar are very common, often causing embarrassment and marital problems, and usually require surgery for removal.

During pregnancy there are many further complications that may occur as a direct result of the FGM. Labour may become obstructed and if early medical intervention is not provided this may lead to the death of both baby and mother. WHO estimates that many women giving birth die in the process, simply as a result of FGM 19. If the mother and baby survive there is the risk of damage to the vagina leading to the formation of fistulas into the bladder or bowel, which cause constant incontinence as a result of a vessico-vaginal fistula or recto-vaginal fistula. Women in this condition are often rejected by their family and become social outcasts. During the seven years that the Edna Adan Hospital has been functional, the fistulae of over 100 women have been surgically repaired. Apart from the many physical complications, the girls and women experience considerable psychological problems including depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. These psychological problems are exacerbated at the time of marriage and often lead to increased distress and fear of intercourse. If de-infibulation is performed the woman is again exposed to the life threatening complications of sepsis and bleeding, and the transmission of chronic infections such as HIV and Hepatitis and also damage to the urethra if, as is common, the operator makes an error when performing the cut.

Considering the clumsy and un-hygienic conditions under which female genital mutilation is usually performed, complications are frequent and numerous and can be classified in the order in which they are likely to occur.

Other lacerations: in addition to the intentional cuts on the clitoris, labia minora and majora, there may be accidental lacerations inflicted on the child as a result of her struggles.

These cuts may involve the vagina, urethra, anus and thighs.

As a result, quite a few children are taken to hospitals for the control of hemorrhage, or for the repair of severe lacerations.

Within the first 10 days:

- Infection: infection to the wound and septicaemia are often encountered and tetanus is not uncommon.
Retention of Urine: (5 possible causes)
- Post-Traumatic Oedema of the vulva resulting from the damages inflicted on the clitoris and labia impedes or obstructs the passage of urine through the swollen urethra;
- Obstruction of the urethra by a blood clot or by the thorns that were inserted to hold the sides of the labia majora together;
- Accidental suturing of the Urethra itself;
- Over-tight application of the binds that were used to keep the thighs and legs together
- Psychosomatic urine retention out of fear and pain
- Failure to Infibulate: when the two sides of the labia majora fail to fuse, it necessitates that the child undergoes a repeat operation at a later date.

At the onset of menstruation:

- Dysmeorrhoea: when the post-infibulation vaginal whole is too small there is a constant stagnation of menstrual blood and other vaginal secretions, causing bacteria to spread into the vaginal and uterine cavities. This is likely to increase the risk of chronic pelvic inflammation that might cause the severe abdominal cramps experienced by infibulated females during menstruation;
- Recurrent Urinary Tract Infection: because of the flap of skin obstructing the urethra after infibulation, urine does not jet out during micturition. Instead, it hits the flap of skin obstructing the vulva and is then sprayed back into the vagina and then trickles out in drops. This obstruction also prevents proper vaginal hygiene and drainage and causes urinary stasis which is likely to cause recurrent urinary tract infection;
- Possible Second FGM: because the small artificial opening that had previously permitted the passage of urine becomes insufficient to permit the drainage of the more viscous consistency of menstrual bleeding, doctors often have to convince the parents of these girls that the small vaginal opening be enlarged to permit the flow of menstrual blood.

This the families resist because they fear that if the opening is too wide it may not be sufficient proof that their daughter is a virgin when her time comes for her to get married.

At the time of Marriage:

- De-infibulation: The infibulation opening that had until then permitted the passage of urine and vaginal secretions is no longer able to permit intercourse. This will require that the husband make a forcible penetration to burst the skin obstructing the entrance to the vagina, or the opening will have to be cut open with scissors or a knife to allow the consummation of marriage;
- Dyspareunia: the scar tissue that surrounds the vaginal orifice may be rigid and inelastic and can cause pain during sexual intercourse;
- Infertility: because of the constant stagnation of menstrual blood and other vaginal secretions that have accumulated in the vaginal cavity, the resulting pelvic inflammation may obstruct the fallopian tubes and block the normal travel of the ovum along the tubes, preventing it from becoming fertilized by the male spermatozoa;
- Vulval keloids and dermal cysts: apart from their unaesthetic appearance, these may interfere with consummation of marriage or with childbirth during delivery.

During Pregnancy:

- It is not uncommon for an infibulated and pregnant woman to attend the antenatal clinic for follow up of the pregnancy or for a pregnancy related complaint and find that the opening of the infibulation will not admit the introduction of even one finger into the vagina for diagnostic and exploratory purposes. Such women will require a de-infibulation during pregnancy if complications are to be avoided at the time of delivery

During Labour and Delivery:

Caesarian: Some women arrive at the maternity hospital in labour with a very small infibulation opening. If the vagina is seen to be too rigid and scarred, and thought to be a possible cause of severe vaginal lacerations or third degree tears, it is likely that and elective caesarian section will be decided upon. If keloids have formed and are too large, a Caesarian section might be the best option to deliver this woman.

Prolonged second stage of labour: because the vagina, perineum and the labia have all undergone mutilation that has left extensive scar formation, the vaginal canal becomes inelastic and the pelvic floor muscles rigid. Thus preventing the normal and gradual dilation of the vagina as well as the descent of the presenting part of the child during the second stage of labour.

Foetal Complications:
Large caput formation;
Excessive molding of the head;
Intra-cranial hemorrhage;
Foetal distress;
Intrauterine death.

Maternal Complications:
Obstructed labour;
Extensive vaginal and perineal lacerations;
Third degree tears;
Uterine inertia;
Uterine rupture;
Impacted foetus;
Maternal distress;
Maternal death.

Post-natal Complications:
Infection of the lacerations;
Delayed healing of the repaired perineum and vaginal tissues;
Sloughing of the vaginal wall, resulting in Vessico-vaginal fistula and/or recto-vaginal fistula;
Puerperal infection;
Cystocele and Rectocele: because of the prolonged labour during each delivery, there is added stretching of the vaginal wall muscles.
This causes a prolapse of either the bladder or rectum to bulge into the vagina.

Other Complications:

In recent years and since the HIV/AIDS pandemic, likelihood of transmission of the AIDS virus has become added to the long list of complications associated with female genital mutilation. The risk is made real because the traditional healers who perform circumcisions do not know the dangers of using unsterilized instruments that have previously been used on different individuals who might have been carriers of the AIDS virus.'

Seriously, this is comparable to an operation that leaves the vast majority of the millions of men who have had it done perfectly healthy and able to enjoy a full sex life?

Your chart is bollocks, issued by a group that doesn't know its arse from its elbow where FGM is concerned.

'It is important to understand, too, that the men in the African studies were adults and they volunteered for circumcision. Babies undergoing circumcision were not given the choice to decide for themselves.'

Babies don't volunteer for innoculations either, and other decisions that ultimately benefit them are also taken on their behalf by their parents despite risk. Circumcision on the whole does no harm and is a really, really benign procedure with no adverse effects. If there were adverse effects adult men would not volunteer for it.

CheerfulYank Mon 03-Dec-12 05:12:37

That poor baby. sad

How would you feel if you lived in the US, you ask? Well...I've lived in the US for my entire life. Every single penis I've ever seen (and I've seen some blush was circumcised.) Wait, no, I remember two uncircumcised little boys when I worked in day care, out of hundreds. I remember being really confused when I changed one of their diapers at first...sort of a "what's wrong with...oh!" I honestly had never seen a penis uncut before.

When I found out I was having a son, I went back and forth about it. When he was born I said I wasn't sure, and the terrifyingly sure and competent and slightly patronizing pediatrician told me it was much safer for many reasons, and in my drug and pain addled state I allowed him to be whisked away and done.

He never had any ill effects and I really don't think about it much...when I do, I feel guilty and wish I had been stronger. I have been adamant to DH that any further sons we have will not be cut. However, I know this is possibly setting them up for a lifetime of locker room ridicule. sad

CindySherman Mon 03-Dec-12 09:12:47

Why are so many guys in the US cut?

LadyClariceCannockMonty Mon 03-Dec-12 09:25:56

'We live in a developed country with excellent medical facilites. Most immigrants know this otherwise they would not have come here.'

This sounds very much like the 'they come here to take advantage' attitude, and for that alone I've got to say YABU.

Also, you don't know the parents' circumstances. You don't know how much and what level of English the mother (and any of family) has. You don't know if she has decent connections with the community or a real awareness of the fact that the overriding cultural norm in the UK is to have procedures done in hospital. You don't know how much knowledge/confidence she has about A&E/the NHS and other available medical support.

I can't imagine the suffering this woman is going through. Do you not think she feels terrible/stupid/guilty enough already without being judged by people who know nothing about the circumstances?

bottleofbeer Mon 03-Dec-12 10:20:33

FFS why is racism even being mentioned?

By far those most people I've had this debate with have been American, it's pretty much standard there. Although to be fair to the OP she did link the story where the family's race was mentioned so it wasn't just assumption about their race or religion.

The part about not prosecuting because it wouldn't being their baby back is rubbish, why prosecute anybody for anything? it won't undo the 'offence' committed. Yes I've got sympathy, to have a child die must be horrific, to know it was entirely preventable must make it even more unbearable but I'm sick of seeing ignorance or cultural differences as an excuse. It just screams of desperation to appear politically correct. Sometimes in people's determination to NOT be racist they're drawing lines in the sand that just highlight racial and cultural differences instead of just discussing the issue at hand.

I can still feel angry and think they were grossly negligent whilst having sympathy for them and unless I've missed something I never saw anybody saying they deserved their child to die. I think circ'ing is barbaric, pointless, cruel and maybe that's because it's not culturally normal to me but maternal instinct is universal. I can only imagine at how indoctrinated somebody must be to ever think cutting parts off their perfect child without anaesthesia is a good thing.

It should be banned, just like FGM is illegal here. Terribly sorry if it offends your sensibilities, please feel free to practice your culture in any way you see fit but no actually, we can't go along with and/or turn a blind eye to pointless, painful, potentially lethal procedures on babies who haven't chosen this for themselves and who haven't agreed for you to cut parts of THEIR bodies.

OnwardBound Mon 03-Dec-12 10:31:16

I have sympathy for the parents of this poor baby. I am sure they did not mean for their baby to perish.

But they were cruel. They allowed someone to cut their baby's foreskin off with scissors without any anaesthetic.

Even if the baby did not die I would still think what had happened was cruel, callous, negligent and barbaric.

It is a greater tragedy that the baby died.

I think the parents deserve some sympathy but also condemnation for their cruelty, whether this was fuelled by cultural demands or ignorance is irrelevant.

As someone else said upthread, it was something done to a defenceless baby. What sort of parent does that?

Frontpaw Mon 03-Dec-12 12:13:36

I am assuming that the parents were going to the usual doctor/hospital/midwife checkups in the UK. Do medical folk here ask - especially where parents are from a religion/culture/region/whatever where this is common?

Didn't the law change a while ago so that spouses had to have basic english skills (or did I mishear that on the radio)?

You can be sure as shit that if I were in another country and pregnant, I would learn related vocabulary (and I am really really shit at languages) and make sure that I knew what medical help there was. I suppose, sadly, they trusted this woman (was she from their community/home country/religion?) But who the hell would let a non-doctor go at their baby with a pair of scissor and no anaesthetic?

The whole 'tiny babies don't feel pain' theory was debunked years and years ago.

I can't begin to imagine their grief. The death of a child must be the worst pain ever - but to be responsible for his pain and suffering must be a million times worse. The baby underwent a medical procedure when he did not need to and died. How could a parent live with that?

Queenmarigold Mon 03-Dec-12 12:28:52

NHS money shouldn't be wasted on religious beliefs, it should be for medical reasons only.

baublesandbaileys Mon 03-Dec-12 12:30:54

the medical reason would be prevention of back alley circumcisions, just like abortions, a normal pregnancy isn't an illness, but NHS abortions prevent things like back street abortions plus can have a preventitive effect on mental health etc

baublesandbaileys Mon 03-Dec-12 12:35:07

"The whole 'tiny babies don't feel pain' theory was debunked years and years ago." hmm I wish someone would tell my previous GP that! hmm

but anyway, its not just people from abroad that can be a bit clueless about medical stuff and what is available to them. The NHS does offer a lot, but you have to already know its there and ask for it, I find the info of what you are entitled to isn't offered up, you have to somehow know it's there

Frontpaw Mon 03-Dec-12 12:41:40

But is it is a standard things int heir community, someone would know, wouldn't they? 'Oh by they way, we don't go to Mary with the scissors anymore, the doctor will do it for you'.

And I remember the 'babies and pain' debunking when I studies psychology in the 1980s! Many believe that babies feel pain during the third trimester onwards.

baublesandbaileys Mon 03-Dec-12 12:44:45

I dunno, I live in a community with lots of families and I didn't know that homestart existed even though I desperately needed it!

I'm near the end of my second pregnancy and have only just heard about the whole "supervisor of midwives" thing!

CheerfulYank Mon 03-Dec-12 14:48:42

Cindy I have no idea! It's just the way things are, I guess, which of course is not a good enough reason for anything. I don't think it was done except in the Jewish community up until a relatively short time ago, but now it's a lot of people.

It may be only over 50% nationwide, but in certain areas (mine for instance) it is a much much higher percentage.

BegoniaBampot Mon 03-Dec-12 15:06:46

I think a lot of folk in the UK think that it's only really common with Jews, Muslims and those that live in those sort of uncivilised places (like Africa and the Middle East cos you know they don't really know any better) that it's an ignorant religious based practise . I think that's why Folk get sort of high and mighty about it, use words like barbaric etc. It was a good few years ago that I found it it was common if not the norm in many western 'Christian' countries like the US, Canada, Australia and NZ. Think it became common or expected round about the fifties, they seem to feel it's better for hygiene reasons and overall sexual health.

Frontpaw Mon 03-Dec-12 15:34:55

Doctors used to say that smoking was good for you! I dont care where it comes from or why, lobbing bits off a perfect baby is barbaric!

baublesandbaileys Mon 03-Dec-12 15:47:05

"I dont care where it comes from or why, lobbing bits off a perfect baby is barbaric!"

y'know some people say that about giving a newborn the vit K injection!
Some people even go as far as saying that using buggies is unnatural and deprives the child
We're not all comming from the same baseline
(AM anti non medical circumcision!)

Frontpaw Mon 03-Dec-12 16:18:18

DH is of the same opinion (and he had his bits lobbed), so I suppose he has more experience of the discussion!

It's just such a weird concept that goes waaay back before doctors and health visitors!

We don't routinely take out tonsils any more do we? Mine were taken out for no reason (I never has tonsilitus) when I was quite small (barbaric to a four year old!) and I did eventually have tonsilitus when I was about 40 (not unusual aparently), so that was a monumental waste of time and resources.

OnwardBound Mon 03-Dec-12 18:22:17

Oh come on begonia, I would say that slicing off a baby's foreskin with scissors without anaesthetic is pretty damn barbaric!

In any culture, community, religion, belief system.

Not just the uncivilised ones [whatever that means]

Frontpaw Mon 03-Dec-12 18:29:43

Any other part of the body (ear lobe, pinkie, toe...) And no-one would condone it. It would be assault.

baublesandbaileys Mon 03-Dec-12 18:37:32

baby ear piercing? (I wouldn't do that either, but would that be called "barbaric?)

BegoniaBampot Mon 03-Dec-12 18:40:34

Yes but many people use this kind of emotive language for any kind of circumcision that isn't medical whether it's done by professionals in a hospital or not.

LookBehindYou Mon 03-Dec-12 18:42:23

This is an unbelievably tasteless and revolting thread. The parents will have to live with losing their child for the rest of their lives.

Frontpaw Mon 03-Dec-12 19:04:01

Its a discussion. Maybe people will not talk about this to their friends and colleagues. Maybe healthcare professionals will broach the subject with pregnant women. Maybe one woman will just say 'no thanks'.

And ear piercing in small children is not to my taste either. On a scale of gential-meddling and foot binding to haircuts, it's not way up there but still...

mathanxiety Tue 04-Dec-12 04:03:18

I have seen baby ear piercing called barbaric here.

OnwardBound, do you know what implement is used for an episiotomy?

''We live in a developed country with excellent medical facilites. Most immigrants know this otherwise they would not have come here.'
This sounds very much like the 'they come here to take advantage' attitude, and for that alone I've got to say YABU.'
I agree LadyClarice.

'Why are so many guys in the US cut? '
Because it is a simple and relatively risk free procedure done for the most part in hospitals on newborn babies and a circumcised penis is considered aesthetically pleasing plus easier to keep clean. The prevalence of circumcision depends on availability of medicare coverage for the procedure and the percentage of hispanic births tends to put a damper on it. It became the thing to do during WW2 for army-related reasons (STDs were keeping men away from the front and circumcision had some effect on STD rates - the US Army kept detailed records). Then babies were circumcised as their fathers had been circumcised and the next generations followed.

mathanxiety Tue 04-Dec-12 04:05:20

I agree Begonia.

unobtanium Tue 04-Dec-12 09:05:55

Dinosaur, I had that procedure, for being tongue-tied, done to me at the age of six exactly the way you described. I was told I wouldn't feel a thing, my father held me down, and the doc (whom I thought was a dentist) just went at me with the scissors. The pain and the blood, I vividly remember, but even more the shock that I had been lied to... my world changed a little bit that day. I was SURE that the doc at least KNEW it was going to hurt.

My dad let me go and I sort of fell off the doc's reclining chair/couch thing and headed for the door, crying and gagging on blood, hand over my mouth. I remember thinking my mother looked very upset.

Sympathy therefore for everyone concerned in this terrible story but maybe, considering my experience and the fact that the poor baby had absolutely no say in this, especial sympathy for the child.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now