Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think infant circumcision is wrong but also that a total ban on it will not work and is not the most effective way to tackle it?

732 replies

Carla786 · 04/01/2026 00:49

On the recent threads after the tragic death of the baby boy who died from circumcision performed by a non medical professional, there have been a lot of calls for a total ban on here.
Now, I think infant circumcision is very wrong. But in practice I do not think a ban will work.
Most cultural circumcisions are performed by medically trained people. Backstreet ones need to be cracked down on with the full force of the law, but they are not typical.
Second, circumcision is key in Islam. However, while most agree it’s either compulsory or strongly recommended, age requirements are not as stringent in mandating someone has to be a minor. I think there is some hope sensitive campaigning within the community could maybe make more families consider leaving it until their son is at least maybe an older adolescent with more ability to choose.
Judaism – circumcision is central to Orthodox, Ultra Orthodox Haredi ofc, and more liberal Masorti and Reform. It is extremely unlikely that any law or external pressure would stop these practices, because brit milah is a covenantal obligation tied to Jewish identity. Attempting a blanket ban would likely trigger defensiveness, fear, maybe underground circumcisions and probably emigration of at least some to Israel or elsewhere, rather than protect children.
Focusing on sterile procedures, trained practitioners, and medical supervision would be more likely to significantly reduce risk. Jews have experienced persecution for circumcision in the past (e.g., Hellenistic bans and European restrictions), so any attempt to criminalise it today can feel existential. This is only heightened by the terrible upsurge in anti Semitism recently.

I agree with sentiments behind calling for a ban - I just thing measures short of a ban are more likely to work.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
Carla786 · 04/01/2026 16:17

Mischance · 04/01/2026 15:59

But changing the law will do it - they will then have no choice. They will not need convincing about anything - they will just have to obey the law.

That assumes law automatically produces compliance.
We’ve seen this repeatedly with prohibition, abortion bans, drug laws, and even FGM before community engagement improved.

Laws don’t operate in a vacuum. If families fear prosecution, they disengage from health services, perform procedures secretly, or travel abroad. That increases risk to children. Safeguarding works best when communities trust services — not when they feel targeted or mocked.

They will have choices: leave the country, go underground, or disengage from services. None of those options improve child welfare. Assuming people will simply comply ignores how law works in practice.
. If a ban makes children less safe, it’s not protecting them — however satisfying it sounds.

Bans on Jewish religious practices including circumcision, have often been experienced as persecution, which makes compliance less likely, not more. Shia Muslims (for whom circumcision is much more likely to be seen as compulsory- ditto)

OP posts:
Fleurdeville · 04/01/2026 16:16

Usernamenotfound1 · 04/01/2026 15:42

But there are circumstances where parents can be held accountable and/prevented from harming their child, even if they deem it in their best interest.

circumcision isn’t in a child’s best interest, causes pain and risks serious sequalae such as infection or death. There has been more than one case where a circumcision gone wrong has led to amputation of the penis. There are no benefits to circumcising a healthy child with normal anatomy.

refusing or not seeking essential life saving treatment for a child. Insisting on futile treatment that will cause suffering - Charlie Gard for example.

if I decided I believed in a God who required the lobes of the ear chopping off, should I be allowed to do that?

But @sabababa I would argue that Northern European views are superior in Northern European countries - that’s the whole point - they are integrated systems. If a doctor working in UK or Norway didn’t follow the medical guidelines in line with their countries training, they would get in trouble. Medical/ health issues are managed and studied at some of the best institutes, resources are made available to understand,radical need is paramount - this also happens outside of Europe of course but each country will have its cultural and health knowledge studied to ensure the best outcome. Fro example, we have PreP available here as we know there are a percentage of gay men who will not wear condoms - the purpose of Prep is reduce transmission rates - that is a decision that has obviously been taken by medical boards and specialists and worked out to be the best course of action. That wouldn’t necessarily translate to other systems in other countries abroad.

We do have to believe that in medical matters we have best practice regarding circumcision - best practice for the patients body as we do use it in cases of phymtosis ( sp?). It’s about a different perspective- in Europe, medical and the health of the physical body is more valued than the spiritual.

sabababa · 04/01/2026 16:13

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:46

Vaccination is slightly different to chopping off a part of their body……

Some parents believe smacking/physical punishment is in a child’s best interests but the law disagrees

Actually smacking is legal in England so...

And I think all children should be vaccinated and non vaxxers are uninformed and putting theirs and other children at risk, including the most vulnerae (so even worse) but doesnt mean I would force them to vaccinate.

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 16:04

As you can tell, I'm still pissed off that I was put in the position of protecting my newborn from a dumb arse with a knife, when we were both trying to recover from one hell of an ordeal.

It would be cod psychology to speculate on the lasting effects on women who weren't able to do that and how they have to live the rest of their lives.

So roll on up ....

ElaineBurdock · 04/01/2026 16:01

I gave birth to my sons in the U.S.
I decided not to have my boys mutilated. My oldest son is in his 50's the youngest, late 30's. My boys have told me they are so glad they didn't get mutilated. My youngest told me he feels sorry for boys who had that done to them.

Apparently it's more fun to have a penis that's natural. I didn't ask for details.

I remember when my youngster was born, I had to pick a pediatrician from a list they gave, as I didn't have one already.

This pediatrician came into my room the next day with the intention of mutilating my little baby. I'd had an emergency C section, my baby was born with an Apgar score of 2. He didn't give a wild rat's arse about all that though.

This piece of shit lectured me. I was not in any condition to argue after a day of labor and then major surgery, I could barely talk. I remember him actually saying to me, "Father's want their son's to look like them". Right then so many questions went through my mind. Had he seen my husband's pecker? Was he saying my husband and son were going to compare bellywackers? My husband has a big one, if his son has a little tic tac one, would my husband disown him?

Instead, I mustered all my strength and shouted, "Nobody is coming near my baby with a knife". He ran away.

As you can tell, I'm still pissed off that I was put in the position of protecting my newborn from a dumb arse with a knife, when we were both trying to recover from one hell of an ordeal.

Mischance · 04/01/2026 15:59

Carla786 · 04/01/2026 15:13

Do you & other people using 'sky fairy' type language really think this will, to take a pragmatic view, help convince religious Jews & Muslims not to circumcise?

But changing the law will do it - they will then have no choice. They will not need convincing about anything - they will just have to obey the law.

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:51

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:46

A child's life was at immediate risk. Not remotely the same. Children are also removed from families when at risk of harm.

Oh, and infant male circumcision is totally legal in the UK.

Your turn 🙄

And the thrust of this thread is that it should not be, except when deemed medically necessary. You are arguing for the status quo on your grounds, and I and others are arguing that against on the basis that it's nothing other than mutilation dressed up in a multicoloured coat depending on which argument you are making.

Stalemate. Or perpetual check.

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:47

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:46

A child's life was at immediate risk. Not remotely the same. Children are also removed from families when at risk of harm.

Oh, and infant male circumcision is totally legal in the UK.

Your turn 🙄

Look at the Charlie Gard case

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:46

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:39

Actually yes in the UK. Even for things clearly harmful to children like not vaccinating.

Vaccination is slightly different to chopping off a part of their body……

Some parents believe smacking/physical punishment is in a child’s best interests but the law disagrees

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:46

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:42

https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2014/12/15/judge-orders-blood-transfusion-for-jehovahs-witness-child/

This judgment, although handed down four months ago, has just been published, and confirms that judges may be resolute, however politely, in the face of parents’ insistence that they know what is best for their children.

Your turn

A child's life was at immediate risk. Not remotely the same. Children are also removed from families when at risk of harm.

Oh, and infant male circumcision is totally legal in the UK.

Your turn 🙄

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:43

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:31

Guilty conscience ?

Was the snarky comment at me?
Are you implying something?
That i have some to feel guilty about? Please do elaborate or clarify....

Usernamenotfound1 · 04/01/2026 15:42

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:20

Its not mutilation. And parents make choices all the time in what they see is the best interest of their child. Thats thier perogative. You dont see the benefits, they do.

Not sure why you think north European culture is somehow superior that jewish, Muslim and some African men need to follow their lead but that seems to be the whole premise of this thread.

But there are circumstances where parents can be held accountable and/prevented from harming their child, even if they deem it in their best interest.

circumcision isn’t in a child’s best interest, causes pain and risks serious sequalae such as infection or death. There has been more than one case where a circumcision gone wrong has led to amputation of the penis. There are no benefits to circumcising a healthy child with normal anatomy.

refusing or not seeking essential life saving treatment for a child. Insisting on futile treatment that will cause suffering - Charlie Gard for example.

if I decided I believed in a God who required the lobes of the ear chopping off, should I be allowed to do that?

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:42

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:39

Actually yes in the UK. Even for things clearly harmful to children like not vaccinating.

https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2014/12/15/judge-orders-blood-transfusion-for-jehovahs-witness-child/

This judgment, although handed down four months ago, has just been published, and confirms that judges may be resolute, however politely, in the face of parents’ insistence that they know what is best for their children.

Your turn

Judge orders blood transfusion for Jehovah's Witness child - UK Human Rights Blog

An NHS Trust v Child B and Mr and Mrs B [2014] EWHC 3486 (Fam) – read judgment I posted earlier this year a discussion of Ian McEwan’s pellucid and moving account of the difficulties encountered by judges when steering between the rock of parental fait...

https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2014/12/15/judge-orders-blood-transfusion-for-jehovahs-witness-child

Carla786 · 04/01/2026 15:42

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:21

Most of the US don’t follow the covenants though?

Its still not a purpose - nothing bad will happen to a baby physically if his penis is left as it’s naturally meant to be

I didn't mean for the US - it's done for spurious reasons of apparent medical reasons. I meant for Judaism.

OP posts:
sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:39

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:28

And parents make choices all the time in what they see is the best interest of their child. Thats thier perogative.

Not in the UK.

Actually yes in the UK. Even for things clearly harmful to children like not vaccinating.

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:38

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:27

She hasn’t mentioned Judaism - she actually said ‘religions around the world’ - where has she mended Judaism in the post you quoted?

Well clearly Islam and Judaism are the focus of the thread and reference to old testament. Clearly isn't talking about Buddhism.
If you dont know the basics of Judaism then you're not really in a place to comment on why jewish parents might choose to circumcise their infant sons. Certainly not in the mocking and sneering way its being done on this thread with a nice dose of cultural superiority.

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:31

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:27

She hasn’t mentioned Judaism - she actually said ‘religions around the world’ - where has she mended Judaism in the post you quoted?

Guilty conscience ?

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:28

And parents make choices all the time in what they see is the best interest of their child. Thats thier perogative.

Not in the UK.

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:27

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:25

Tell me you know nothing about Judaism without telling.me you know nothing about Judaism.
And im not even religious.

She hasn’t mentioned Judaism - she actually said ‘religions around the world’ - where has she mended Judaism in the post you quoted?

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:25

Sparron · 04/01/2026 15:16

No its not. Religions around the world are obsessed with who, where, when and how you can have sex.(mostly decided by creepy old men in a silly hat)

Moralising and judgement of sin, controlling people's behaviour is the sole reasons religion exist. The Old Testament was just a long form Daily Mail of its day.

Tell me you know nothing about Judaism without telling.me you know nothing about Judaism.
And im not even religious.

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:23

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:11

Oh, I am well aware of the barbarity of the Romans. And the people they oppressed.

I dont think you are with idiotic post
'Even the Romans found circumcision too much'
The total ignorance and stupidity of it made me literally laugh out loud.
This makes me even more sure infant male circumcision will never be banned in the UK

Blushingm · 04/01/2026 15:21

Carla786 · 04/01/2026 15:08

Presumably the covenant?

Most of the US don’t follow the covenants though?

Its still not a purpose - nothing bad will happen to a baby physically if his penis is left as it’s naturally meant to be

sabababa · 04/01/2026 15:20

Sparron · 04/01/2026 14:43

Its not the personal of choice of the owner of the genitals being mutilated, its the parents imposing that choice.

If infant circumcision was banned, and elective circumcision could only be performed from say, the age of 14 upwards, I'd expect the rate of elective circumcision to plummet. Otherwise, why isn't there a queue of adult northern European men queuing round the block to be circumcised?

Its not mutilation. And parents make choices all the time in what they see is the best interest of their child. Thats thier perogative. You dont see the benefits, they do.

Not sure why you think north European culture is somehow superior that jewish, Muslim and some African men need to follow their lead but that seems to be the whole premise of this thread.

Sparron · 04/01/2026 15:16

Carla786 · 04/01/2026 15:11

That was the reason in the US. I think that's too much to explain the religious reason just with that, though.

No its not. Religions around the world are obsessed with who, where, when and how you can have sex.(mostly decided by creepy old men in a silly hat)

Moralising and judgement of sin, controlling people's behaviour is the sole reasons religion exist. The Old Testament was just a long form Daily Mail of its day.

SerendipityJane · 04/01/2026 15:15

Carla786 · 04/01/2026 15:13

Do you & other people using 'sky fairy' type language really think this will, to take a pragmatic view, help convince religious Jews & Muslims not to circumcise?

Why on earth should a rational person need "convincing" not to mutilate a baby ?

If you think it's OK to mutilate a baby in the name of nothing other than an imaginary friend, then why am I the one who needs to "make accommodations" ?