To not want to circumcise my son?

[SkiBunnnnny]

I have a 10 day old baby son. Being from the UK it would never normally cross my mind to have him circumcised. However, I am living in Canada where the practice is more common (but not as common as in the US) but on the decline.

DH wants to have him circumcised as he is half Jewish (so DS is 1/4 Jewish) but I feel like I don't want to put DS through an unnecessary medical procedure for purely cosmetic reasons. DH also thinks it is cleaner but I think this is irrelevant in the 21st century when we have indoor plumbing and can easily wash ourselves every day. I also feel that it is not our body to make a decision like that about, if he wants to get himself circumcised in the future he can but he can not get himself "de-circumcised" if he is unhappy about it in the future (DH doesn't believe that any circumcised men wish that they weren't).

My question is: AIBU to force my opinion or is DH opinion more valid since he is male?

Bessie WTF is so complex about understanding that it's wrong to mutilate little babies' genitalia?

Bessie, I agree with you about Solidgold and I'm an atheist.

OP, YANBU not to want your son circumcised, but equally your husband INBU to want him done. The only way to resolve this is for you two to agree. This involves deciding which of you cares more strongly about the outcome. Only the two of you can do that. Good luck.

For the record, I'm British/Canadian and circumcision is a massive non-event, so don't pay attention to the hysterics and name calling on here.

To play devil's advocate, I would advise you to have your son circumcised immediately. This opinion is based on both cultural influence and experience with sons/husband.

I had both sons circumcised after birth (insisted upon being allowed to give birth in my home country, and it is commonly done to newborn boys there). In the months before the birth of my first, my British husband spoke with my 3 brothers and multiple male cousins and friends, all of whom are circumcised, and none of whom wish they weren't. They have/will have had all of their owns sons circumcised as well.

I love my British husband, but deep down I wish he were circumcised. It really is cleaner. In addition, my sister works in a care home and told me about what happens to the foreskins of elderly gentlemen who cannot clean themselves properly and need to be cleaned there by attendants.

If my next is a boy, he'll be circumcised as well.

My husband had to stop using his "don't take it off it it isn't broken" argument after his wisdom teeth, which he also retained (mine were removed as soon as they were fully grown, despite being "healthy" at the time) suddenly became problematic and painful.

Both parents need to agree on this; and as someone else said no such thing as half Jewish. Your son is not Jewish as his mother isn't Jewish, so I think yanbu and your dh should respect your view.

Why can't circumcision be a decision your DH places before your son when he is much older and of an age to decide? Like 16 or 18?

Because it can't be undone. But it can be done later.

EmilyAgain do you have your appendix & your tonsils? Some countries used to routinely remove these too, but most now don't for a complex range of issues, one of which is inflicting pain on a person unnecessarily.

I really, really don't agree that circumcision makes a penis cleaner. Why don't we chop of our labia and ears? Both require more 'careful' cleaning and when elderly, might require an attendant to do it...

You should really just get together with a man who washes his dick if you like a clean penis. Do you think circumcised homeless men with no access to soap and water have wonderfully sparkling clean dicks? Like its a magic spell?

The ignorance tied up in this is astounding.

Christ almighty it is not 'cleaner' most of us who have reached adulthood have worked out how to wash our gentlemanly attachments.

Also if I go ga-ga in a Nursing home, a few flecks of knob cheese would be the least of my worries.

Ffs I worked in nursing homes for 10 years, if someone is too old and ill to clean their own penis you do it for them.

The same as you wash under women's breasts to stop them getting sore.

It's no big deal, you still have to wash the circumcised ones too you know.

Haven't read thread but YANBU. DTS isn't circumcised and neither is DSS. We discussed it with DSS (long story, I was taking care of him as a newborn) Originally DH wanted it but changed his mind. Never understood why he wanted too since he isn't. Men.

I don't believe in genital mutilation. I just couldn't put my innocent, trusting babies through it, just too pointless for the pain.

I wonder if the the lack of widespread 'recreational' circumcision (ie not religious or medically necessary) in the UK compared to the US is anything to do with doctors not profiting from the procedure here? If a paediatrician does a dozen a week it'd soon pay for the golf club membership.

Or is that being overly cynical?

Emilyagain, it might be in your part of the country (I'm guessing you are midwest or east coast) but it isn't all that common here anymore (West Coast). It is only 22% here in California and continuing to drop and NV, OR and WA are lower than us. By the time babies being born today are middle aged I see it being a lot lower than it is today. Nationwide only about half our boys are circumcised now which is down from almost 80% a decade ago. That is a big drop and I see it continuing to drop.

Thank goodness!

Wolf, in states where medicare does not pay for circ, the rates are usually quite a bit lower. I'm guessing that is because it no longer becomes a routine thing there, parents have to choose it and pay for it.

Interesting - I hope it dies out, it's anachronistic and just plain weird.

I don't agree with it, but that's my personal opinion.

From a medical consent POV I think your NO would trump DHs yes anyway, so you do get a say and it would go your way because of how consent works iirc. It's ok for one parent to consent if both agree, but if there is any disagreement that the professional is aware of, it should go in favour of the point of view of the opposing parent unless it is medical necessity.

Abitwobblynow is correct about circumcision reducing transmission of HIV, but condoms reduce it far more effectively! There is a case for doing this when living somewhere where obviously condoms are not used often enough (wrongly I know) such as Africa. But the OP is in Canada. I cannot therefore see any reason to circumcise, religious / ethnic tradition stinks.

I realize that we will never agree on this topic, but I would really welcome your input on the following question, which has been a source of confusion for me since arriving in the UK:

I have a friend in the UK from a non-UK and non-US culture, in which boys are also routinely circumcised. She and I were recently discussing the fact that she is NEVER disputed when voicing her own cultural preference for circumcising all baby boys, while almost every British mother is happy to tell me why I am wrong. I'm not trying to be combative in asking this, but is it possible that, in British society, it is more acceptable to voice disagreement with certain foreign cultures, but less acceptable to disagree with others? Why is this?

My friend is also rarely disputed when she talks about her culturally dictated dietary requirements. However, many people have no problem telling me that food from my country is "disgusting", even beginning a conversation with me just to say that. I can't imagine someone going up to my friend and beginning a conversation with her about how they feel that the foods or method of food preparation in her home country is "disgusting", EVEN THOUGH many people who are friends with us both will freely say things like this about her dietary customs behind her back. Also, she is more outspoken "in person" about these issues than I tend to be. She herself thinks it is funny that she can "get away with" saying more (a direct quote from her).

I don't think it's a British thing, I think it's a political correctness thing. Rightly or wrongly, some people will treat certain cultures with over the top respect OR disdain out of fear, not genuine tolerance. Genuine tolerance would be going 'well that's your culture but I disagree because of XZY,' just as people are doing on this thread about religious reasons for circumcision.

Circumcision is such a heated topic that when you throw in a cultural belief someone isn't knowledgeable about, they can fear being labelled a bigot and just blindly agree. IMO that's the bigoted action! We can all have our beliefs, cultures, religions etc etc.

Of course the reverse is while one culture may be left alone, another culture that does the exact same thing but is misunderstood or gets bad press (I'm thinking Islamic cultures but I'm not very savy if that's a bad example) just because it's another bat to beat the dead horse with.

Starting conversations with 'Food from your home country is disgusting' is not only rude but just plain..Weird. Bad social skills there!

FWIW, I agree with SGB that it is child abuse.

If you cut the tip of your baby's finger off, it would be child abuse. If you cut off your baby's ear, it would be child abuse. If you cut the hood of a baby girl's clitoris off, it would be child abuse. It therefore follows that if you cut off your baby boy's foreskin, it would be child abuse.

There isn't any other way to put it, for me. Technically, I am Jewish because my mother's mother's mother was Jewish. But anyone trying to cut the foreskin off any of my three DS's would have to kill me first.

My Uncle wasn't circumcised, as my Nan disagreed with it. My Dbro wasn't circumcised because my Mother feels it is barbaric. And my DS's weren't circumcised because as far as I'm concerned, it's child abuse.

Acceptance into a community that cuts bits off their baby, well, they can keep their acceptance and shove it up their arses as far as I'm concerned. I want no part of a community that says that you have to mutilate your baby DS's to be a part of it.

Nobody could persuade me that heritage and belonging is worth mutilating my children for.

If my DS's choose at a later date to be circumcised, then that's their decision. But no way was I making a unilateral, non reversible decision to cut bits off my baby (!) when they weren't old enough to make an informed decision themselves.

You wouldn't join a religious group that you had to cut your baby's ear off to join, would you?

So why continue to be a part of this legalised child abuse where a group says that you have to cut off your baby's foreskin to join?

Can't quite get my head around the difference!

The reason people are speaking about certain food preparation methods being disgusting has nothing to do with foreign cultures.

If you are talking about Halal, I refuse to eat Halal meat, because it would be hypocritical of me to protest about the Welfare of animals when they are transported live because it causes them suffering and to stay silent about the cruelty towards animals of cutting their throat and letting them bleed to death.

That IS inhumane and barbaric, and yes, disgusting.

And I will be outspoken about it. It has no place in a civilised society.

And obviously, I feel the sane about Kosher meat too.

Circumcision and Kosher meat slaughter methods make up a huge part of why I am non practising. That and the fact that I don't believe in a 'higher being' at all.

Resolutely atheist with no imaginary friends here.

I'm against circumcision.

To kill one argument in favour, I was virtually the only uncircumcised boy in a boarding school with communal showers and a massive general culture of bullying, and I think it was hardly ever commented on, and even then not negatively. (Possibly because it was considered a bit "gay" to be a "cock-spy." Not that anyone would have used a term as politically correct as "gay.")

In fairness to Bessie, if it is ever reasonable then I think she is probably is the exception for whom it is a reasonable choice. Some of her critics have not taken on board what she spelled out, that for a religion it can be the rules of the religion that determine who can be a member, not some wishy-washy feeling of cultural identification an individual may choose to have later in life.

Also, I may be wrong about this, but I think the argument that someone could choose to do it later in life may be invalid. I believe that it is much more painful/traumatic to do it as an adult. (Not sure why this would be true, but I know someone who had tonsils out as an adult and it was far more traumatic than it usually is for children, so I guess it is possible that similar surgeries have different impacts at different ages.)