Circumcision

[softmusk]

i am 37 weeks pg not sure if having boy or girl but if we have a boy dh wants him to have a circumcision i not sure. what age is best to be done and how do i go about having it done

my DP had to be circumcised a couple of years ago, for health reasons. He was about 34 at the time. He spent 2 weeks in agony and much longer until a complete recovery.
Maybe it's a good thing to get it done at birth (with anaesthetic...) to avoid problems later in life.

Only a small minority have problems, though. Most live their lives healthily, foreskins intact . . .

point taken - although try telling that to my DP

ds1 was done when he was 2 and a half. Godawful mess the surgeon made of it - butchered him.

One of the worst experiences of my life when he was a baba. So glad he can't rememebr it.

My FIL was circumcised at 39 for health problems as well - he has diabetes and kept getting nasty UTIs. But it only affected him for about a week. He's tough, tho!

Still has no regrets about not being circumcised at birth or not having his sons circumcised.

the point being podkin, if agonizing for 2 weeks for an adult, why do it with no pain relief to a newborn baby? They can't even have calpol as they are too young.

Let them choose at the age of 16 if they want to have a bit of flesh cut off with no aneasthetic. The only good reason to do that to a newborn is they can't turn round and knock you out for doing it.

As I said, 'maybe..with anaesthetic...' As it happens I wouldn't consider it for my ds anyway -as you say, he can make his own mind up when he's old enough...

Sorry podkin, just realised that looked like it was aimed at you, and it wasn't, it was just a general comment.

s'ok

BTW expat, my DP is a bit of a wimp - unlike your well 'ard FIL.
I am sure it didn't hurt that much... mind you it did look a mess...yuk...

Thanks for the link Crunchie. Luckily my baby went to sleep so I've been reading it all this time. What a classic. Totally polarised. No common ground.

I have to say I'm still with aloha. What passionate, eloquent posts.

I'm exhausted from reading . Now I need coffee.

Happymumof2, SackAche, Spidermama, I'm with you. IMO should only be performed if there is a medical reason. I am very live and let live, but not on this one, sorry. To me it's a human rights issue and it is just wrong.

Apparenlty, pod, FILs wasn't very pretty, either. That would have been 20 years ago, and he was actually in hospital for a couple of days afterwards. But yeah, he's a tough Scotsman.

sackache - it carries on being done like that because it isnt a big deal. Really. All the men can remember it, they know it was OK for them. I am not sure why they do it at that age, but would guess that it may be the latest age to be sure that the result will look good. Apparently it does not look so good if it is left later, that is why it is not left until older.

happymumof2 - my sons are tough. Theyve shot airguns, and Im giving them knives for Christmas presents. They survived.

i would like to thank people for there points of views and experiences this will help when me and dh have a talk about the matter, and i am not a stirrer just busy life heavily pg with 13 month dd

the thing is, though, that it does reduce sexual feeling. I mean how could it not?
I had a boyfriend once who had it done at 18 for medical reasons and he said that this was the case. yes it certainly made a difference - obviously.
there was an interesting article about in in the Guardian a few weeks ago that you might be interested in softmusk.
I mean I do understand if there are religious reasons but I don't think you can get away fromt he fact that (for new borns) it is basically a medically unnecessary operation that will have an effect on sexual function later.
article here

thanks

Sorry softmusk, I thought you might be a stirrer just because you didn't come back and post any more, very judgemental of me, sorry.

Nightynight - can't figure out if you are joking about the airguns and knives things! My dh once gave me a meat cleaver for Christmas, I've often thought about 'circumcising' him with it a few times!

Harpsichordcarrier - my bro had it done as a newborn (he was premature in fact) and he has not suffered sexually because of it. From what I gather, it helped him pull loads of women and judging by his 'ahem' faithfulness in his current relationship, it certainly hasn't put a dampner on his sex-life.

Rhubarb (can't quite bring myself to call you CRSEIH...)
my ex-bf said that it did reduce the sensation in the ?? head of the penis (sorry can't think of the technical term for it), because it was more exposed all the time. He was sexually active before and after and he was absolutely gutted at the difference it made to his sex life.
(sorry bit graphic)

Here is a link to a video of the procedure with a plastibell. DH is circumcised (routinely done in North America in the 70s because it looks nicer...) so I contemplated having DS 'done' until he was born then I heard him cry in the bath. I just can't bear the thought of causing any pain.

Please forgive me if this falls into the category of stirring...

Well, perhaps when done to a newborn, they cannot compare before and after so to them it makes no difference!

The whole notion of cutting a bit of my sons penis off for absolutely no medical reason makes me feel sick.

It shouldn't be anyone elses choice but his, when he reaches adulthood. I find the idea that it is the parent's choice and the parent's decision abhorrent.

And just beacuse it's in the bible doesn't mean we should accept it. The are a lot of things questionnable things written there that we have successfully challenged over the years - perhaps this should also be one of them?

Sorry, not read the whole thread but my mum sadly told me that my bro had to be circumcised as he kept getting infections and his foreskin wouldn't come back to be kept clean. From what I gather it's quite easy and much easier that getting repeated infections.

Oddly enough this is not something I wished to know about my big bruv. Thanks mum....

Message withdrawn