if fgm is now illegal why is male circumcision still allowed?

[southeastastra]

pretty self explanatory by my title, but shouldn't it be a decision made when 18 and an adult?

FGM apologists ?

What do you mean by that ?

My son is going to be circumcised soon for medical reasons. He has to be so it's not something we can decide against but I find the debate over whether circumcision is like fgm upsetting. I don't want him having to be operated on at all. FGM is horrific. It's torture. I am worried about the pain he will go through as it is. I would never take my daughter for FGM.

I'm sorry to hear you son needs that operation Comebackbutler. I hope he will not be in too much pain.
When he is older you will be able to explain to him that there was a need for the operation and it wasn't just an arbitrary whim of his parents.

Okay, then.

My DS (11) was circumcised 40 months ago, for medical reasons, after years of him being made physically ill through kidney infections (the foreskin was too tight and preventing him from fully releasing his bladder - far more common than a lot would think, according to his consultant and surgeon, particularly with a genetically Jewish background - which we have!). 23 months ago, he also had an operation on a teste that wouldn't descend, only for the surgeon to discover - upon opening him up - that he had a hernia which was preventing his teste from not descending. His foreskin would not retract very far from birth, and he was born with the undescended teste. Both of which we were told would "sort themselves out". They didn't. Turns out that his father's younger son... has exactly the same problems (despite the non-Jewish background!). I'm very much a believer in it being an individual's choice - unless it impacts upon a child's health. Which this was doing. Upon my child's health.

FGM...? Being even remotely comparable?! Seriously?

Nope. No way. No how.

There are no medical reasons as to why it is "better" for FGM to happen. Not to my knowledge, anyway.

I have also never met a man who has complained about or been hindered by his circumcised penis.

They will never know if sex would have been better if they had never been circumcised.
They have only ever experienced what sex is like with a circumcised penis.

This is why I'm against circumcising boys unless for medical reasons.
It's not our choice to make.

Comebackbutler - my son hurt for maybe 48 hours after being circumcised. His teste being stitched into place hurt for a lot longer - although I suspect that was more to do with the hernia's discovery and the sorting out that entailed.

Just be aware that he will not want to pee until it's painful. I only wish someone had warned me of this small fact... encourage your son to drink lots so it's not concentrated urine coming out, and it'll sting less, and believe me; it'll look worse than it actually is (more to him, than you, non-oddly enough!).

(I'm Jewish, and still kick myself for not listening to my grandmother and having my son circumcised within the first week of his life - but... I wanted it to be his choice. Until the kidney infections and so forth happened, which - in all honesty, weren't picked up on until he was about 2. We then had to battle with the GP to refer him - and being told that I'm anti-circumcision as "a Christian woman"... yeah... That was an interesting meeting with his very bemused consultant... I don't know if your son is enduring/has endured anything remotely like the pain my son did prior to his op - but I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy, let alone a child. I also know that even though neither op were my son's choice, as his parent, I made the right choice. It took him a month or two to learn how to fully empty his bladder, but once he'd mastered that, he's not had a kidney infection since).

Good luck.

Violets,

There have been many studies showing no difference in either sexual function or feeling in a circumcised man. So, for circumcision are arguments about infection prevention (to women too, harder to pick up an std from a circumcised man), risk mitigation against a later and more traumatic operation and cultural reasons. Against circumcision are the risks and pain associated with any surgery, minimal but non zero,

There is certainly enough doubt in both directions to leave the decision to individual parents and not make ignorant and prejudiced comments comparing it to FGM.

It all depends what you mean by "comparison" doesn't it.

I don't think anyone has suggested they are equal, but they are both forms of mutilation - just that one is very much worse than the other.

Sallying,

Depends how you define mutilation.

Is ear piercing mutilation. Is removing teeth to improve the shape of the mouth mutilation? It is a very emotive word and should be used carefully.

Is ear piercing mutilation?

Yes, of course. Just because it is socially acceptable, doesn't mean it is right to pierce babies ears.

Is removing teeth to improve the shape of the mouth mutilation?
If carried out for a non-medical reason yes.

The point is that removing healthy bits of babies is always wrong.

If an adult wants circumcision, fine.
If an adult wants piercings, fine.

The whole point of this thread is that it is wrong to circumcise babies for non-medical reasons, FGM isn't relevant to this, neither is ear piercing. The issue is purely one of consent.

Itsall,

Parents have the right to consent to operations on behalf of their children. The issue is decidedly not one of consent. The issue is a moral one.

'Is removing teeth to improve the shape of the mouth mutilation?
If carried out for a non-medical reason yes.'

That will come as a shock to the hundreds of thousands of parents each year who consent to have their children's teeth removed so their mouth is not overcrowded. This is cosmetic and not medical. Aside from appearance, one can live just fine with pretty skewed and ugly teeth.

The reference to FMG apologists employs the term apologist in its standard dictionary definition.

Parents have the right to consent to operations on behalf of their children.

Operations that are medically necessary, yes.

That will come as a shock to the hundreds of thousands of parents each year who consent to have their children's teeth removed so their mouth is not overcrowded. This is cosmetic and not medical. Aside from appearance, one can live just fine with pretty skewed and ugly teeth

AFAIK orthodontics are only carried out on the NHS for medical reasons? If course the issue is complicated by the fact that your teeth are very visible, and "ugly" teeth can affect your mental health, and of course "skewed and ugly" teeth are harder to clean which is likely to impact on future dental health.

Itsall,

Circumcision is legal and parents have the right to consent on behalf of their sons. I assume that is not in dispute. So consent is not an issue.

There are a LOT of private orthodontists carrying out procedures to ensure that children grow up to have decent looking mouths. Are you against these?

For some cultures, circumcision is very important, so maybe the mental health argument is at least as important as having a good looking mouth in the British/American culture. At the end of the day they are both equally cultural imperatives, rather than medical imperatives.

At least circumcision has some medical benefits.

That will come as a shock to the hundreds of thousands of parents each year who consent to have their children's teeth removed so their mouth is not overcrowded. This is cosmetic and not medical.

Of course it's medical. It can be done free of charge on the NHS.

Orthodontic treatment is most commonly used to improve the appearance and function of misaligned or crooked teeth.
Teeth that are straighter and better aligned should be easier to clean, and may reduce strain on the muscles and joints of the jaw.

www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Orthodontics/Pages/Whenitshouldbedone.aspx

You'll need to try better than that if you want to divert attention from the subject of the thread.

At least circumcision has some medical benefits.

and some medical and emotional risks

Circumcision is legal and parents have the right to consent on behalf of their sons. I assume that is not in dispute. So consent is not an issue.

If there is no medical need it should be illegal.

There are a LOT of private orthodontists carrying out procedures to ensure that children grow up to have decent looking mouths. Are you against these?

As already stated "decent looking mouths" also assists with good dental health in the future, and helps with self-esteem etc. It is also generally not carried out on very young children.

At least circumcision has some medical benefits.

It may have some minor benefits, but these are at least equalled by the risk.

"Routine circumcision may offer a number of potential benefits, such as reducing the risk of some types of bacterial or viral infections. However, most healthcare professionals now agree that the risks associated with routine circumcision, such as infection and excessive bleeding, outweigh any potential benefits"
www.nhs.uk/Conditions/circumcision/Pages/Introduction.aspx

Orthodontic treatment is most commonly used to improve the appearance and function of misaligned or crooked teeth.

The improved appearance of your teeth or jaw might also help boost your self-esteem and self-confidence

Funny how you decided to omit the second line from the NHS website.

In addition, a lot of orthodontic treatment on children is private, and entirely about appearance.

I have addressed the substance of this thread in many different ways. An appropriate analogy is directly of relevance.

'and helps with self-esteem etc'

If you are a religious Jew, circumcision sure as hell also helps with self esteem. This really is a 'it is fine to mutilate for UK cultural reasons but not for any other.

In addition, a lot of orthodontic treatment on children is private, and entirely about appearance.

Again, orthodontistry is not carried out on young children/infants. It does not start until the majority of the adult teeth start to come through, an age at which most children are well able to understand what is happening and can choose to consent or not.

'"Routine circumcision may offer a number of potential benefits, such as reducing the risk of some types of bacterial or viral infections. However, most healthcare professionals now agree that the risks associated with routine circumcision, such as infection and excessive bleeding, outweigh any potential benefits"
www.nhs.uk/Conditions/circumcision/Pages/Introduction.aspx'

'Summary
Male circumcision reduces the risk that a man will acquire HIV from an infected female partner, and also lowers the risk of other STDs,
penile cancer, and infant urinary tract infection. In female partners, it reduces the risk of cervical cancer, genital ulceration, bacterial
vaginosis, trichomoniasis, and HPV. Although male circumcision has risks including pain, bleeding, and infection, more serious
complications are rare.
In April 2007, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) held a consultation with external experts to discuss the potential
value, risks, and feasibility of circumcision as an HIV prevention intervention in the United States. Since the consultation, CDC has
further analyzed its own data, as well as the research of others, and published studies on circumcision among heterosexual men and
MSM and cost-effectiveness of the procedure. CDC has also consulted with experts on the ethical issues surrounding circumcision. In
August 2011, CDC released draft recommendations that outline the benefits and risks of male circumcision. After a public comment
period and a formal peer review, final recommendations will be made.'

www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/prevention_research_malecircumcision.pdf

'It does not start until the majority of the adult teeth start to come through, an age at which most children are well able to understand what is happening and can choose to consent or not.'

I can testify from both personal experience as a child and knowing many people whose children undergo orthodontic treatment, that they are bribed, cajoled and not really given any meaningful choice about the decision. The adult decides on their behalf and gives them a fait accompli.

If you are a religious Jew, circumcision sure as hell also helps with self esteem.

I'm fairly sure that most 8 day old babies do not suffer from self-esteem issues. If a religious Jew wishes a circumcision they can get one when they are Gillick competent.

larrygrylls
How about YOU stop selective quotations.

From the NHS site:

Risks of circumcision

As with all types of surgery, circumcision has some risks. However, complications from circumcisions carried out for medical reasons are rare in England.

Bleeding and infection are the most common problems associated with circumcision.

Other complications can include:

a decrease in sensation in the penis, particularly during sex
damage to the tube that carries urine inside the penis (urethra), causing it to narrow and making it hard to pass urine
removal of too much of the foreskin
accidental amputation of the head of the penis, which is very rare
a blood infection or blood poisoning (septicaemia)

Problems with circumcisions carried out for religious or cultural reasons may go unreported.

Circumcision is not carried out on boys born with a specific birth defect of the penis that affects where the opening of the urethra (urinary tube) is found. This is because the foreskin is used to reconstruct the urethra.

Sallying,

Where was I being selective? I was quoting from the US CDC, to which I produced a link, not the NHS website.

It is interesting in your link that they said the side effects were rare in England.