To think circumcision for baby boys should be illegal if not done for medical reasons

[Tyarami]

I saw a thread on here a couple of days ago and it got me to wondering why on earth circumcision is still legal for infant males despite FGM being banned.

To me there is no difference, both practises are barbaric unless of course the circumcision is medically necessary. I'm talking about the parents and doctors who allow and inflict this because of cultural tradition.

Why is it ok to do this to an infant male even though FGM is illegal, what is the difference really? To me there is none and would be interested to hear from others about their perspectives.

AIBU to be of the opinion that parents and medical professionals should be prosecuted for inflicting this on infant boys who obviously cannot consent, because of cultural conditioning.

I do agree that it should be done with anaesthetic

Bollinger 2010 is one study - extract here but study behind a paywall
scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?cluster=2080524914623258410&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3D90t0BzxQxaQJ

Also in this study but same issue
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15534340/

ODFOD.

And here - an average of 20 deaths per year over 10 years in one hospital. Of course some of this is correlation rather than causation or where causation cannot be proven.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/30066572/

And frankly one baby is too many.

Locally, in Australia’s hybrid public/private health system paeds surgeons are, as a body, against newborn circumcision. They are concerned about the pain and it’s lack of medical necessity.

However, they are the ones who fix the botched ones done in the community so there is a private service, offered for those who insist on doing it for religious/cultural reasons but offered after 6 months.

The six months is to mitigate any adverse effects from the GA they feel is imperative to reduce the baby’s pain. J

*its lack, not it’s.

But I do feel it’s ignorant and discriminatory to prohibit people from practicing their religion without even making a genuine effort to engage with how it all works and why.

Forgive my ignorance but isn't the excuse for fgm given as 'for religious reasons' when we all know it is to control women. What has removing a foreskin from a baby got to do with his ability to practice his religion?

Totally agree. Nobody should cut off or interfere with any part of a child's body unless it is medically necessary to cure an immediate medical emergency which puts the child's health in jeopardy and which medical experts recommend.

Anything else is physical abuse. And that includes ear piercing. I don't care whether it's 'cultural'. If you're piercing or cutting your child's body while they are too young to consent that's abuse.

Couldn’t agree more. If it’s not medically needed, I don’t think it’s vastly different to FGM

SinkGirl I don't think asking someone to cite the source for the statistics they're quoting warrants a "oh do fuck off dear".

I also think it's perfectly reasonable to query whether the Bollinger study, the source of the "100 deaths a year" statistic, published in "Thymos: Journal of Boyhood Studies" is quite a reliable as something published in a reputable medical journal.

Your last link is the best study I found and it cites 200 deaths over 10 years (across the entire US - not one hospital, I think you're misunderstanding the reference to "same hospital"). It makes very clear that the link is not causal and the majority of the deaths were in boys with underlying health conditions.

Thehop that's an interesting view.

Given that circumcision is unlikely to become illegal in the uk any time soon, would you want to legalise fgm to achieve equality in law?

I assume you're aware of the different types of fgm, what age it's done, the thinking behind the practice, the incidence of complications, the impact on birthing etc.

We're not allowed to crop puppy's tails or clip their ears......... But we can cut off a part of our son's penis.

Bit weird when you think about it. If I had a choice between the tip of my ear and the tip of my genitals being clipped, I know which is pick.

Good luck with that

But I do feel it’s ignorant and discriminatory to prohibit people from practicing their religion without even making a genuine effort to engage with how it all works and why.

Really? You really think that it's ignorant and discriminatory to stop FGM taking place whilst we talk about it? Righto... I'm sure the girls being subject to it right now will respect your position. Not.

We don't need to engage as to how it works and why. It's fucking horrible. That's all we need to know and do know. That's it.

I think that people should be free to practice their religion but only on themselves, not on their children.

I have never understood the religious requirement. Isnt it a bit like saying to god, 'hey, you missed a bit'?

GnomeDePlume

Yes that!! it's like saying 'we have to cut that skin off his dick cos you left him imperfect..." When God was supposed to make us all perfect in his image. Isn't chopping a body part off pretty much saying that God got it wrong? And isn't that heresy? Contradicting the will of God, who can do no wrong?

Yes it should be made illegal, but it won't be as long as religious belief and practice is still given such an elevated position.

Well sure but this is where things get complicated.

All schools in the uk have to have an act of collective worship, by default that is Christian in nature. Schools can apply if they have good reason to do a collective worship of a different religion. Eg some schools round here apply to do Jewish instead.

It is not allowed to ditch it, as far as the law goes. (although in practice many do).

To an external eye. Most schools in my neck of the woods are religious. How do they pick them? By the religion of their parents. These kids are way too young to know if they believe, what they believe. This is indoctrination.

I raise this only to the consent point.

In the uk decisions are made based on the parents beliefs all the time.

I'm not saying it's the same as getting a bit of you chopped off as a baby.

But maybe a life long feeling of shame around sex, as an example.

I agree that circumcision is pointless and in some cases causes harm.

But when it comes to arguments of consent, and children. We do stuff as well, in the uk. But it's our norm, so we don't notice.

Circumcision is male norm across a lot of the world. Men are not shouting to stop it, in the main. Women were shouting to stop fgm.

I think it's up to men about this tbh.

And the consent thing. If it's part of your culture you're never going to say, hang on.

Fgm was part of the culture and attitudes to that has changed hugely. Change has to come from somewhere. And its one thing giving informed consent for an operation for your child who has broken it's arm, or for necessary dental surgery. It is totally different to giving consent for your child to have a medical procedure that in some cases, albeit a very small number, has had a negative life changing effect, or/and is totally unnecessary.

www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/moral-landscapes/201501/circumcision-s-psychological-damage

Some men are are advocating for change though. And in Australia there’s been a huge cultural shift meaning that only 9-11% of boys are circumcised at birth, with most of those for religious reasons.

If circumcised men are happy with the status quo, why aren’t they circumcising their sons?

@BigFluffyCatWhiskers are we back to the FGM analogy? Really?

In any case — I never said how I feel about circumcision because I am conflicted. The OP seemed to want to protect male newborns by putting a stop to non-medicinal circumcision. I’ve been trying to explain why that’s going to take a lot more engagement and empathy than simply “making it illegal.” You’re talking about a deeply ingrained religious ritual that takes place mostly in private homes. How exactly would you plan to enforce that kind of law?

I can tell my words have fallen on deaf ears and I won’t have time to be on MN for the next few days so I won’t try to convince you anymore. But years from now, when you’re STILL wondering why ritual circumcision is happening, think back to this thread and maybe then you will begin to understand the complexity of how to go about trying to reduce or eventuality eradicate this practice you so abhor. It would be so nice if this issue was really as simple as it feels to many of you, but the sooner people educate themselves and start working that angle the more likely it is you will actually achieve your goal.

@Joe2019, female babies don’t have foreskins. I think you are, like many posters, conflating FGM and ritual circumcision.

It would be so nice if this issue was really as simple as it feels to many of you, but the sooner people educate themselves and start working that angle the more likely it is you will actually achieve your goal.

You haven’t really explained the complicated part though. Just lied about it not being painful and insisted it’s not a surgical procedure. I’m open to nuance but your agenda is obvious.

Actually @RoyalMail you are patronising and missing the point, but then you know that. Both are mutilation of the genitals. Fgm is done as a method of controlling women and can be extreme, see above post explaining the different types. Male curcumcision which as you know is removing the foreskin is done for aesthetic reasons and is still mutilating a small baby in an unnecessary procedure. The analogy is there. In my opinion they are both wrong and it would be very simple to legislate against male circumcision just as we have for fgm. At the very least, if not already and I don't know because I havn't checked, it should be a criminal offence for anyone other than a qualified medical professional to remove the foreskin from a male child. Hope that's clear enough for you.

Is it just the English that go around trying to stop other cultural and religious views?

Racism, ironically, given the accusation.

I think that more men are starting to question why they were circumcised even if it was done ostensibly for medical reasons.

Procedures performed on male genitals are trivialised. Vasectomy is described as 'the snip'. Circumcision may be performed by a non-medical person.

This leads to anyone raising concerns being seen as making a fuss about nothing eg the high percentage of men who experience long term pain post vasectomy is not widely known.