Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be dreadfully sad that in the 21st century child abuse seems to be part of the culture in a so-called modern, progressive and enlightened country like the USA

353 replies

Perriwinkle · 20/11/2011 22:39

I've been watching a lot of American baby programmes on satellite TV lately and have been horrified and saddened to see how many parents, who appear to be loving, caring, very protective parents who are determined to everything right by their children, have their sons circumcised in hospital just before they bring them home.

These parents then get stressed and worried when these babies are what they describe as "fussy" (which I've gathered seems to mean a collection of things such as not feeding/sleeping/settling well and crying a lot). Clearly these poor babies are in huge discomfort, due to the barbaric and hugely invasive and unnecessary procedure that's been carried out on them.

When the parents are talking to camera about their early experiences of parenthood, how it has made them feel and what their hopes are for the future, they are all full of wanting to do the best for their child, to love, cherish and protect them and about being the best parents they possibly can for their child. This seems to be so at odds with giving consent for that child to have its genitals mutilated just a day or two earlier.

One woman I saw was talking about how she was in pieces when her son had to "get his first shots" as she called it (injections I assume?) yet she said nothing about his circumcision. I know that the vast majority have it done because when you see them changing nappies you know they have had it done because they have big wadge of gauze there to protect the wound site and you often hear them saying they have to be careful due to the circumcision. If only these parents could be educated to see that it is not in their child's best interests to have him circumcised, rather than thinking it is.

I really can't believe that this practice is still carried out as routinely and widely as it is in the USA even though there is no medical justification for it and no sound evidence to justify that it is in any way beneficial or more hygenic than leaving the baby intact.

What a shame that in many cases such clearly educated and rational people, who do not appear to have any religious imperative to carry out this barbaric practice are still doing this to their children in their droves. It means that millions of children are being subjected to this abusive practice on a daily basis in the USA.

Surely with proper education and information this could be turned around and this vile practive wiped out? I know having it done due to a religious imperative is a whole different argument but surely if non Jewish and Islamic people were properly informed and enlightened on the subject surely the incidence of this completely unneccessary abusive practice could be drastically reduced and in time eschewed by the overwhelming majority of parents?

I understand that routine non ritual circumcision was once a feature of many cultures but that it has successfully died out due to education and enlightenment. Wouldn't it be lovely to think the same could happen in the USA?

OP posts:
Perriwinkle · 20/11/2011 23:30

shineynewthings, "softening them up" Shock.

You also said:

"..it is safer to have the op when they are babies."

They don't need to have that "op" as you call it, at all unless a problem presents itself!!

Can I just ask you if you would find it acceptable to routinely practice female genital mutilation on newborn girls? After all, if the apologists for routine circumcision are to be believed, the labia can be argued to give rise to just as much uncleanliness as the foreskin can if not kept scrupulously clean?

I believe that every piece of a baby has an anatomical purpose and should be left where it is unless a problem occurs that justifies medical intervention.

As the Americans say, if it aint broke, don't fit it.

OP posts:
MumblingAndBloodyRagDoll · 20/11/2011 23:31

Of course it's abuse Whatme and that's why it needs to be made illegal. One type of abuse is physical damage being caused....what is it if not damage?

DamnBamboo · 20/11/2011 23:32

Anaesthetic or not, it shouldn't be anybody's right to cut off part of another human beings body, without medical justification.

MumblingAndBloodyRagDoll · 20/11/2011 23:32

The lack of a foreskin makes a penis much more sensitive but not in a good way...there is no protective sheath!

Perriwinkle · 20/11/2011 23:32

Abuse = "to use or treat someone or something wrongly or badly"

Yep. Routine, non essential cicumcision which involves lopping off a large piece of a child's genitals without warning or anaesthetic and without the child's consent pretty much fits that description I'd say.

OP posts:
WorraLiberty · 20/11/2011 23:33

Eric the 'proven' health benefits totally depend on who is doing the 'proving' to be honest.

If there are no medical reasons for a foreskin to be removed, men do tend to live long and healthy lives with the body they were born with.

shineynewthings · 20/11/2011 23:33

But it is essentially what we do in the west isn't it? We put our values above everyone elses. We judge everyone's cultural traditions through the lens of our own.

I'm not saying we shouldn't speak out about real issues of child abuse or poverty etc, but it really doesn't do any long-term harm, so why get upset about something that people have been doing for centuries?

Now if we were talking about female circumcision which we know as -opposed to just making us uncomfortable - does real long-term physical harm, I'd be with you.

DamnBamboo · 20/11/2011 23:34

No Shiney it isn't what we do in the west.
.
Some cultures may, most don't to my knowledge.

DamnBamboo · 20/11/2011 23:35

Fuck me shiney are you actually saying that hacking off a newborn boys foreskin is ok?

Memoo · 20/11/2011 23:35

Oh so disagreeing with the op is aggressive!

This thread will probably vanish soon. Any thread that mentions Mitmoo generally does.

sallysparrow157 · 20/11/2011 23:36

'children have more vitamin K in their blood when they are 8 days old'

That is not true. Babies are unable to store vitamin K in their bodies before they are born. Vitamin K is not passed on in breast milk. Babies are naturally deficient in vitamin K. We give them vitamin K at birth because of this, as without it there is a small but significant risk of them bleeding to death. Babies also have a longer bleeding time than adults. So I'm afraid to say the above statement is bollocks.

As for circumcision - it is something that people do as they believe it is in their child's best interests to do so. Whether it is or not is debatable (it does reduce the risk of penile cancer for example but the incidence of that is low in the first place) and I am not going to get into that debate. I don't think it's right to compare it with someone beating and kicking a 4 year old for an hour because they spilled something on the floor, someone locking toddlers in a room filled with excrement and throwing them some bread every 2 days... that is child abuse, carrying out a medical procedure because you think it is beneficial for your baby (even if it turns out it wasn't beneficial) is not child abuse.

Whatmeworry · 20/11/2011 23:36

Of course it's abuse Whatme and that's why it needs to be made illegal

Bullshit.

shineynewthings · 20/11/2011 23:36

Yes. I agree with female circumcision.

DamnBamboo · 20/11/2011 23:39

Memoo get over it.
You fucked up, didn't read properly, started a fight where there wasn't one and sounded aggressive in the process of doing so. But now it's over so just forget it.

Perriwinkle · 20/11/2011 23:40

shiney you are deluding yourself if you do not think there are millions of men who have not suffered terribly due to circumcisions over the years. My own DH is curcumcised and the exterior of his penis is rough and weathered - not at all as nature intended it to be. He was circumcised at the age of 8 and like billions of men was circumcised at a age where he had no chance to experience sex as it was supposed to be - with a foreskin which carried out a vital anatomiocal purpose in the sexual context, not to mention generally in providing a nerve rich protective sheath for the penis.

You can function without many parts of your body but would you find it necessary to remove any part without adequate justification?

Why can people like you just not agree that bodies are made the way they are for a reason and that there is no need to cut any bits off.

As far as I'm concerned it is immoral to get into an argument about whether non essential ritual or non ritual male genital mutilation is "better" or less invasive than female genital mutilation. Both is immoral and wrong and both is abusive.

OP posts:
WorraLiberty · 20/11/2011 23:41

I'm not saying we shouldn't speak out about real issues of child abuse or poverty etc, but it really doesn't do any long-term harm, so why get upset about something that people have been doing for centuries?

Because it's wrong no matter how many centuries it's been going.

We give birth to our children but we don't own them.

If when they are an adult, they decide to have a piece of their skin removed then that's totally up to them because it's their body.

No-one has the right to remove something that can not be put back...not matter how long it's been going on.

Perriwinkle · 20/11/2011 23:46

sallysparrow157 there are grades of abuse do you not agree? If levels of abuse had to be to poor Baby P style proportions before we did anything about them where would that leave us?

Why can't people just abide by the rule that no part of a new born baby's body has to be cut off before a problem presents itself?

Just because something has happened for centuries doesn't make it right and it doesn't mean that something shouldn't be done to stop it. This is the 21st century now and the USA was not a primitive culture the last time I looked.

OP posts:
RealLifeIsForWimps · 20/11/2011 23:48

Interestingly, circumcision for non-religious reasons was popularised in the 19th century as a cure for masturbation- it was a deliberate way of reducing the sensitivity of the penis.

Now of course it's about hygiene, except that's rubbish as it's only unhygienic to have a foreskin if you don't wash, just like it would be unhygienic not to wash your vagina, but no-one starts lopping bits off that.

DioneTheDiabolist · 20/11/2011 23:51

YADNBU.

Hopefully this abusive practice will be make illegal soon.

HalleysWaitress · 20/11/2011 23:52

op - of course yanbu. it is barbaric not to mention unnecessary- oh wait but such terrible things happen to all these millions of non circumcised british men right?

shinynewthings - i find your posts quite alarming i really do. how can you really argue the benefits of slicing skin off a nb baby? plus the fact that it can have long term consequences and carries considerable risks.

Whatmeworry · 20/11/2011 23:56

IMO wanting to make a practice illegal that has been done for millenia by Muslims and Jews is just a form of racism and intolerance.

If you don't like it, don't do it. Sorted.

shineynewthings · 20/11/2011 23:57

I didn't say they had Vitamin K in their blood when they are born, although most do in very low levels. About one in 10,000 or so are born without any Vitamin K in their blood at all... My understanding was that at around 8 days they start producing more vitamin k.

You're free to prove me wrong, and I will eat humble pie. I read it a long time ago - should have known better to assert something here without a full back up of medical references etc this is MNSmile

Going to bed, but I maintain more or less everything I said and I still think YABU O.P.

Hate awayGrin....night alls!

Primafacie · 20/11/2011 23:58

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, still chortling after suggestion up thread that the human body is perfect "just like God intended" (or words to that effect).

I don't know where to start - piss and shit, myopia, appendix or skin cancer?

DamnBamboo · 21/11/2011 00:01

Whatme what the fuck has racism got to do with this?
Really, you are the first person to say this.
I don't give a fuck who someone is, where they come from, what religion they follow, what colour their skin is... cutting off a part of another defenseless, persons body just because you can IS child abuse.

It's fucking pathetic calling people who think it's wrong racist!

DamnBamboo · 21/11/2011 00:04

They used to perform bloodletting and trepanation millenia ago because they thought it would help, should that still be allowed?