GP not being very helpful regarding Circumcision

[Debster7808]

I went to see the GP recently at the first check-up after DS2 was born, and I said that because DS1 was circumcised (-he was born in US, where it kind of gets done as a routine just after boys are born-), we wanted to get DS2 done as well, while he's still a newborn. I was really surprised when the GP tried to talk me out of getting it done, which means that I'm a bit lost as to where next to turn to get this done. I can understand that circumcision isn't available on the NHS, which is fine, but if I want to go private, don't I need a GP referral? Should I just seek a second GP's opinion?
Anyone have any experience of getting their boys circumcised in a culture that generally doesn't do it?

Popbiscuit, it isn't absolutely true that there are no complications in every case, sometimes they are, and certainly in our case it wasn't easy, DS did not take very well to general anaesthetic he was very sick when he came around after the procedure, and also he was scheduled to go home with us that same afternoon, but was unable, reason was a bleeding nerve where stitching was done, so it was the job to stop the bleeding first, hence we had to stay the night so surgeon could keep an eye on ds.
It is not good generalising and advocating in ways "Oh it's nothing it is a easy thing to do" when clearly it can have complications, and I certainly would not advise doing it anywhere else but in controlled/hospital environment where any arising issues can be dealt with.

Popbiscuit Why have you had your boys done when there is no medical justification to do it? Why is it routine?

I'm afraid that the cynic in me takes the view that doctors in the US and Canada perform unnecessary medical procedures (and not just on babies, but that is an issue that I could on at length about in another thread) just so that they can make some money.

The NHS is funded by the tax payer and that is one of the many reasons our doctors will nor perform surgery if there is no reason to do so.

I've clicked on all the links and all the videos that people post on these threads and since I live in a country where it is done so often and so routinely (usually not for religious reasons) I can say that my experience is NOT like any of the articles and videos that have been posted. The experience of most North Americans who have circumcised babies is most likely NOT like the horror movies that get posted over and over again here.

OP has asked a genuine question and nobody deserves to be attacked for asking. Someone must have an idea that might be helpful ?

Popbiscuit Why?

I don't think you fully understand that the idea of chopping off a part of a baby is so alien to most of us. It is barbaric and unnecessary.

Would you carve a tattoo on a baby?

I recognise that you think it does no harm, Popbiscuit, but I'm still baffled why an entire nation would do something like this for no other reason than "it does no harm".

I am genuinely interested, btw, not trying to get at you much .

My answer to the WHY question is that my Canadian (middle class, Masters educated) DH felt quite strongly about it (I was open minded). Almost all Canadian men of his generation are circumcised, he's never had issues with it (or it!), he wanted his sons to look the same...
Our GP did not push it or counsel against it either way and we did have to pay for it as it's an elective procedure and not covered under OHIP (taxpayer funded).

What's the harm in waiting until he's three?

Or better still, until he's old enough to understand the risks and benefits, and decide for himself whether he wants it done or not?

Why perform any procedure on anyone that has no benefit?

None of the links I posted were anything other than lists of FACTS about newborn circumsision.
And one article about a baby who died because his parents thought it wa a harmless,routine procedure.

They are not inflammatory,but,they DO remind me of horror story's,yes....

My DS2 has had many operations on his penis, including circumcision. Next week we start the on the same course on DS3 as he has the same condition. Obviously these are all essential for medical reasons.

No surgery is pain-free, nor without risk of complications.

Everytime I send my children down to theatre, it breaks my heart. Why on earth would anybody choose to put their child through this?

But why did he feel strongly about it?

There are lots of private clinics who circumcise young boys for around £150, our local mosque website has links. I wonder why you would do it if you don't have a reason to?

Of course no procedure performed on the human body is without risk of complications.

Our Doctor's office uses the Plasti-bell method so babies don't have to go to an operating theatre. They use a local anaesthetic.

I think this is very interesting reading wrt circumcision. It seems that quite often it is unnecessary even for what are considered medical reasons because people worry about their son's foreskin not retracting at an early eg which is actually quite normal. (obviously a different story if it actually causing problems)

"A narrow non-retractable prepuce in boys is within the normal range of development and usually causes no problems. The prepuce usually will spontaneously widen until complete retractability is obtained. About 50-60 percent of boys at age ten do not have fully retractable foreskins.17 This is normal.17 After puberty, the percentage of boys with full retractability rapidly increases spontaneously."

I don't know popbuiscit, maybe in Canada it is a norm, but over here it is not, I am not going to wear my judgy pants, because I am not in full possession of all the facts nor your circumstances, but in my humble opinion this procedure should only be carried out when necessary, and not on the peril of a parent nor for any aesthetic reasons.
I do believe it should be strictly reserved only for medical reasons and preformed in controlled environment so to prevent whole practice going underground, IMO.

Because they are bloody Stupid, Boysindahood.

I find it so sad that a parent would choose to mutilate a baby.

Why would an adult choose to be cicumcised unless there was a medical need for it though MrsMic? There is no way of knowing whether there will be a medical need for it when they are just born.

I am a man (no surprises from the name) - circumcision is mutilation. It is unnecessary and like any surgery, has long-term risks. It is of no benefit whatsoever, unless the foreskin is too tight / damaged.

Even dogs have more rights than little baby boys it would seem.

Remember the time when they would chop off tails of dogs just for "aesthetics"?
This practice is outlawed.

Yet you still see some parents who wants to chop off their babies foreskin to make it look nice and tidy.

It doesnt. I know men who has had their penises circumcised. They dont look nicer. They are harder to erm... stimulate. And the men themselves say they dont think they have the same level of sensitivity as their boyfriends penises. Clearly, in my circle of multicultural, and "multi-sexual friends", this is a topic that has been openly discussed.

...and no medic will ever recommend it unless it is really necessary (which you wouldn't know until puberty).

OP - If anyone circumcises their child without medical necessity, they are putting their child at risk by performing unnecessary surgery - it makes no difference that you 'think' it is more hygienic, it is not. Would you remove a girls labia ? An Israeli friend of mine flatly refused to have her sons circumcised. There is always a choice even if it is the norm in your culture.

OP, Popbiscuit, if that's what's the norm in your country, get it done there. It is not, and hopefully will never, be the norm here.

MrsMic, I'm utterly against it even if the 'religious practice' excuse is used. Sod being PC.

And FWIW my DB had to have it done aged 6 for medical reasons. Even though it took place at one of Scotland's top two children's hospitals he suffered severe haemorrage.