Teenage boys get anaesthetic for small op- why the bias against birth?.....

[kangers]

My friend told me about a teenager who had a VERY small nick in his foreskin to loosen it. He was allowed a general anaesthetic (at great expense to the NHS) and was under for less than 5 minutes (5+ staff involved, drugs, space etc). I think he has that right, but my friend pointed out that he would have had no pain with a local anaesthetic, and it seemed a little over the top. Plus the (male) surgeon was very sympathetic- far moe so we thought than many midwives/ anaesthetists can be to women giving birth. My friend and I compared this to the treatment of women who seem to have very few rights to pain relief in childbirth. We talked especially about the trouble getting epidurals in the night, and the numerous stitches we both endured with just gas and air. Not sure what the answer is, but is there sexism going on here or iis it me?

OK. Strange to mention him then.

It is not about the boy.

she has used him as a comparison.

to a woman in far greater need of pain relief and yet not getting it.

Why him ? and not her ?

Well I guess that depends on how great his need was. I don' suppose you have ever experienced having your foreskin cut ? So how can you judge?

And he is a child so not unreasonably it might be hoped he'd be more protected from pain where possible.

And unless you can guarantee that that particular HP involved would not have been as generous to any mothers he might have been treating you cannot compare the two.

I think the comparison with the boy was just to get the general debate going which has since moved on. As others have said, it is more about having the OPTION for pain relief available - should it be policy that on every mat unit there are always a minimum of two anaesthetists so that if one is in theatre there is another available for epidurals. Could there be a new qualification that midwives could do which would allow them to administer it where appropriate? Just random ideas but I agree with the general principle discussed here that childbirth seems to be viewed differently in terms of the level of pain, indiginity and discomfort that is permitted to sometimes be endured - also as someone else suggested further up, perhaps it would be useful to consider the pre and post partum pain separately so there are fewer issues about effect on the baby / arguable escalation of intervention etc

I don't need to have had a foreskin repaired to be able to know that it would be a great deal less traumatic than the pain I endured in my labour.

I don't believe that a child ought to be protected from pain more so than a person of any age. There is no need for any person to have to experience pain if they choose not to.

I think that one can compare the two because there is overwhelming evidence that many women are not treated as generously by anaesthetists, obstetricians and midwifes. That is the whole point of this thread. You can be as objective as you like, its happening and its wrong.

The comparison is ridiculous anyway because anaesthesia for a planned op is completely different to reactive anaesthesia/analgesia in childbirth.

I mentioned this thread to a male friend who had emergency surgery on his 'mighty staff of justice' and it was done under local and bloody hurt apparently because (I'm told) numbing a penis is very difficult.

Similarly a woman having planned surgery - an ELCS - will have different perspectives on the availability of pain relief.

I totally agree onedge that pain releif should be available to women when they need it. No argument with that. And very sorry if I irritated you on a subject which clearly means a lot to you. Very sorry indeed It was not my intention. I just felt the OP seemed a little snitty - I have a 14 yr old and I'd have more than a little to say if someone proposed chopping bits off his penis without pain releif! However..... irrelevant to the arument.

FWIW though I had a minor op a few years back - I had a fatty lump removed from the side of my belly. I begged for a local as I was terrified of going under but they wouldn't give me one as the amt of local needed would be too much for me because (beleive it or not!) I was too thin .

"it would be useful to consider the pre and post partum pain separately so there are fewer issues about effect on the baby / arguable escalation of intervention etc" Yes. There can be few women who go into labour expecting no pain at all - it's part and parcel although obviously pain relief should still be available where essential and where there are no medical reasons not to offer it. But there is no reason I can see why stitches for example should not be performed with good pain relief.