Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
General health

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Where to arrange a circumcision

277 replies

dawnharvey68 · 25/02/2007 21:49

If we have a boy, we plan on having him circumcised. But it's proving exceedingly difficult finding someone to do it where we live.
My husband was born in the USA where pretty much all boys are circumcised routinely before they leave the hospital and it seems strange here that it is so difficult to arrange such a simple thing.
I'd be interested to hear if others found it as difficult.
It seems quite a common problem in the UK, finding someone who will perform a newborn circumcision, so I a support group for those trying to sort it out:
health.groups.yahoo.com/group/babycircuk/
All I have been able to find so far is that if you are in the south of England/London area, you are particularly well served:
Luton: www.circumcision-agency.com/
London: www.circumcisions.co.uk/
London: www.theportlandhospital.com/
London: www.samedaydoctor.co.uk/links.aspx
Reading: www.circumcision-uk.com/
UK Mohels: www.lubavitchuk.com/services/religious/mohellist.shtml
www.mohel-circumcision.co.uk/
www.londoncircumcision.co.uk/
plus probably others that would appear on a search.
Does anyone know of anyone else that will perform them?

OP posts:
bubblerock · 26/02/2007 00:17

If it aint broke, don't fix it! Leave the poor mites alone!

SaucyMoo · 26/02/2007 00:20

well ofcourse not but believe it or not i know people who have waxed their dds forhead when they were newborns so they dont get hairy when the grow up-im sure they would thank them for it when they grow up!!

Actually in some countries when babies are born they do a special type of baby massage on girls which minimises hair growth on arms, legs, face etc....i wish someone did that on me

VeniVidiVickiQV · 26/02/2007 00:20

All my brothers have been circumcised. They think its great. They werent so happy at the time, but, they had to have it done for medical reasons. We had DS checked out too because it looked like he may have needed to be circumcised too. However, we went to our GP, and saw an everyday, common or garden urologist, who decided it wasnt a necessary operation on balance. (Factoring post-op complications, infections, general anaesthetics etc).

So yes, it can be done for medical reasons, but, if it hasnt caused you a medical problem in the first place, why get rid - most men go through life without a hitch.

Same way alot of folks go through life with an appendix without a hitch.

fireflyfairy2 · 26/02/2007 07:38

Why doesn't it surprise me that you know people who was their babies???? The circles we move in, eh?

fireflyfairy2 · 26/02/2007 07:39

Wax their babies!!

mm22bys · 26/02/2007 08:36

I think this whole thread was started as a windup. Why advertise circumcision in a country where thankfully the mutilation levels are so low?

If someone is misguided enough to circ their sons (except for faith reasons) then they can do the research and find the mutilators for themselves....

NotQuiteCockney · 26/02/2007 08:39

Two notes/corrections:

  1. Circumcision became a normal practice in North America as a way to prevent masturbation. Kellogg (yes, that Kellogg) was one of its proponents. Do I need to say how well it works?
  1. Female circumcision is not, and afaik has never been, a religious practice. It is a cultural one.
Judy1234 · 26/02/2007 08:55

I think it's mutilation without the child's consent, yes. Obviously it's nothing like as bad as removal of the clitoris and other FMG practices which are so widespread in some countries like Somalia but it's still mutilation. Yes, there may be a few supposed advantages but there is no good medical reason for it in the UK. parents do lots of things which they suppose are in the child's interests but sometimes they are wrong. Just because you love a child doesn't mean you are always the best person to decide what is done to it.

tissy · 26/02/2007 09:13

Xenia, there can be medical reasons for doing it, but "health and hygiene" are not medical reasons. You can wash, you can use a condom, or be monogamous, you don't need a circumcision!

Working in hospitals, I'm afraid I have seen babies seriously ill from botched ritual circs (though most are competently done).I kind of understand people who do it for religious reasons, but do not understand those who do it for cosmetic reasons. It's worse than ear-piercing for babies . I've also seen men (both young and old), who have been circumcised, with seriously unpleasant tackle. Circumcision does not keep you clean, washing does. In most cases, it is perfectly possible to wash under the foreskin. My dh is intact, and I have no complaints!

chirpygirl · 26/02/2007 09:29

'When the foreskin is removed, the head of the penis becomes less sensitive due to its repeated friction against clothing.'

Didn't intend on posting on this thread but read this out to my DH and he can't understand why this is used as an argument FOR circumcision.

quietmouse · 26/02/2007 09:35

is this a joke thread?

'support group for those trying to sort it out'

expatinscotland · 26/02/2007 09:36

Yes, and then trawling for places to get this done in Scotland so you can advertise those, too.

Nice.

mm22bys · 26/02/2007 09:38

Yep, this thread is a windup. Have just searched on the OP's past contributions to Mumsnet. Yes this is "her" first thread....

Is anybody else suspicious of "her" motives?

eldestgirl · 26/02/2007 09:40

DS2 had to be circumcised at 1 year old due to a hypospadias repair and (SHUDDER) I NEVER want to go through that again. He was in a lot of pain afterwards. Routine circumcision on a newborn? I hope it's very hard to procure in the UK.

quietmouse · 26/02/2007 09:50

my son is nearly 8 and my GP has been urging me to have him circumcised since he was 3. I have fought hard not to allow it and cancel his operation, which was meant to take place last July. He has no problems since then and even if he has the odd infection - so what? it can be treated. Women got infections all the time, we don't normally go cutting off any part of them because of it, do we?

When I saw the consultant after I had cancelled the operation, he actually said to me "I wish more parents were like you and actually questioned and researched things"

Why would you do this to a healthy newborn baby? Why? I don't understand.

mm22bys · 26/02/2007 09:59

I agree QuietMouse. The vast majority of us spend from the moment we know we are pregnant doing the best we can to make sure our babies are born healthily, and would be devastated if our newborn babies had to have medical treatment. Why then do so many parents volunteer to put their healthy children under a knife? It so does not make sense to me.

Elestgirl I am sorry to learn of what your son had to go through, how awful for you all. I hope he is recovering well now....

quietmouse · 26/02/2007 10:02

I haven't read whole thread so sorry if this has already been mentioned - but the baby that died recently - his parents will have to live with the fact that he was born healthy and died as a result of their choice to circumcise him. How will they live with that? I know I couldn't

expatinscotland · 26/02/2007 10:05

I had a hard time dealing even when my babies had their newborn vaccinations.

I cry when they're ill.

I can't imagine submitting them to a surgical procedure for non-medical/faith reasons.

quietmouse · 26/02/2007 10:06

my dd was seriously ill as a newborn and it killed me having to consent to her having procedures which were to save her life!!

I just can't get my head round this, sorry.

Judy1234 · 26/02/2007 10:06

Interesting. I'm not in favour. I'm not Jewish or Muslim either. in the US most babies have it. In the UK I think you'd find 30 years ago 100% of boys at boarding school had it - it was almost a class thing and the working classes didn't have it but I don't think any boy should have it forced on them when they are too young to decide.

On the other hand shouting at your children ever day as some parents do may dothem as much damage as losing that big of skin so we all do things to our children we shouldn't and affect and damage them in various ways. I don't think it's the worst thing you can do but I do think it's something we've never had a proper child protection debate about. I bet the NSPCC wouldn't want to appear non PC and allegedly guilty of religious discrimination by lobbying for it to be outlawed for example.

If I were of a religion which said the small finger of every baby should be removed or perhaps the ear lobe would those in favour of male c equally accept my right to remove that part of my child's body? Mind you parents have a right to bring up children as vegans or on a burger diet or whatever so may be it's not so different.

expatinscotland · 26/02/2007 10:14

It's different in that, if when the child becomes an adult and desires to become a meat eater, he can.

But if he wants his foreskin back, well, that's permenantly gone.

Judy1234 · 26/02/2007 10:50

True. Mental damage to children, bad parenting at home etc though may not be so easily reversed even with counselling but I'm wrong anyway because two wrongs don't make a right so just because we allow a parent to feed an 8 year old up to 14 stone or denigrate a child every day for 14 years doesn't mean it's also right to chop bits off a baby's penis which God never intended. It's a bit like those neck rings on the giraffe people in Burma - once your neck is stretched it's hard to get it back again.

bambi06 · 26/02/2007 11:05

ru in london[se?]] i think i still have the number of the g.p that did ours on religiious grounds in kenley [i think]he was lovely and also did the service.you can go to his surgery or him to you

quietmouse · 26/02/2007 11:08

I think this is a wind up

wannaBeWhateverIWannaBe · 26/02/2007 11:11

I'm sorry, but I can't really even see why religion should be a good reason to mutilate a newborn baby.

in some religions people used to be stoned to death, but this is no longer acceptable practice, not even on the basis of religion, so IMO neither should circumsision be.

It's barbaric, and I really cannot see any justification for doing it to a healthy newborn baby. if that makes me guilty of religious discrimination, then so be it.