Where to arrange a circumcision

[dawnharvey68]

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?

it's not, sorry

Not really the same thing SM.

Scar can be airbrushed out if he wants to be a model.

i agree quietmouse

Can anyone answer my question? I still don't understand what the 'religious' reasons for circumcision are, those on this thread who have had their sons circumcised for 'religious' reasons have only stated medical benefits when questioned.

the reasons i listed were the medical reasons for circumcision which are from an islamic scholar. a lot of things in islam are commanded but not a lot of people know why. So this scholar has given his medical reasons as to why.

No its not from the quran directly but as a muslim you dont just follow the quran you follow the sunnah (these are the practices and teachings of the prophet muhammad (pbuh)). Circumcision is a ritual sunnah and as a muslim its an important custom that takes place on the birth of your son. i hope that makes things clearer?

oh come on guys are you going to nit pick at everything....50 years ago you couldnt airbrush scars..its only a recent thing..anyway its besides the point-i completely understand why people wouldnt circumcise their sons, maybe you guys can try and understand why they would for religious reasons? i dont mind trying to explain my religion to other people at all, but i dont really expect to have to justify my beliefs on MN on a thread about circumcision!

Thanks Saucymoo. I guess that explains why I remain unaffiliated to any kind of organised religion. There's no way I could live my life, let alone allow an operation on my child for the reasons you list. That said, I make no judgement on you.

Wasn't M*d (sorry don't know if it's offensive to name him or not) born without a foreskin, and so Muslims practise circ to be like him?

if it's about cleaniless then it's a ridiculous reason. The penis is not difficult to keep clean. You simply pull the foreskin back and wash underneath it

sorry saucymoo i still can see no reason to subject a baby to this at all,The only reason i think it would be right is for a medical reason, as quiemouse says ,we do have soap and water.

Come on, give Saucymoo a break. I too cannot subscribe to the 'cleanliness' rationale but she has explained herself adequately. Although we may not share her beliefs, she has done what she believes to be right.

Exactly - I truly have no issues with people who choose as a resultof religious beliefs to circumcise.

However - people practising in these religions will generally have access within the faith community to information regarding where to get the procedure done.

Obviously people who want the op done for cosmetic reasons wont have easy access to information - and that's why the OP was trying to organise a resource. Personally I think it should be hard in these circumstances to get the cicumcision done. The fewer places the better since it's such an unnecessary cosmetic procedure.

no, I don't understand it for religious reasons. just because it's done in the name of religion doesn't make it any less barbaric.

unless it is done for medical reasons it is, IMO, barbaricand should be made illegal.

and I see no reason why I should respect someone's need to mutilate their perfectly healthy child just because God says so.

lots of people don't adhere to everything about their religion, I certainly know of many muslems who drink, and I also know some who have not been circumsised.

thanks clarinsgirl! i think i have said all i can on this subject but just to answer the question prophet muhammad (pbuh) circumcised himself i think-am not 100% sure on this but he def wasnt born without forskin! All the prophets in the past Abraham, noah etc were circumcised....oh and when circumcision was prescribed by the prophet, it was said in the same sentence as cutting your nails and getting rid of pubic hair. Hygene plays an important part of a muslims life..unfortuneatly not all smell of roses-lol

Spot on, pooka!

When I married my muslim husband I accepted Islam. Even though circumcision is really common in my family, I found it very upsetting getting my son done.
We waited until he was nearly two and they do it for religious reasons on the nhs where I am.
It was just awful having to put him through an operation but of course he was fine and soon recovered.
I can see there may be some advantages but I wouldn't do it if I hadn't made that commitment to dh and Islam.
He was done carefully and professionally but it still looked like a dogs dinner for a while
Don't think it should be done willy nilly (pardon the pun)

The pain of the operation isn't the issue. It's whether we can take decisions for a baby. He might want his foreskin when he's 18. It has implications during sex and their are pros and cons about the effects - less sensitivity etc. Should we make those decisions for people?

It's not in the Koran. Presumably female C isn't in the Koran either. May be both male and female are cultural practices and in some countries both are done and in many female is regarded as abhorrent but not male and I bet there are muslims also who take an interpretation which says neither is needed in Islam. It's probably a stricter requirement of Jewish law.

"Many African Muslims believe that female circumcision is required by Islam. In fact, no form of genital modification and mutilation is mentioned in the Qur'an, but only in disputed hadiths. Clerics supporting female circumcision rely on a single disputed hadith and another hadith which was discredited by the consensus of scholars as forged. In Saudi Arabia (Hijaz), where Islam originated, female circumcision has never been practiced by the locals before or after Muhammad. Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, never allowed the procedure to be performed on any of his daughters. Most scholars believe it is practiced more as a result of ignorance and misconceived religious fervor, than for reasons of true religious doctrine. Many Arab Muslims interpret different passages as being in opposition to female circumcision, and believe the practice to be un-Islamic.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_circumcision"

I'm not sure that I agree that "the pain isn't the issue". I just can't get my head around "volunteering" my dses for a painful and unnecessary operation unless they needed it.

Why isn't that cruelty?

I'd be more bothered about them having an arguably "deformed" penis for the rest of their life which has implications for their sex life.

Inflicting unnecessary pain on a baby would be my first concern.

I hadn't realised circumcisions could go wrong until I went out w/a bloke whose penis actually curved a bit downwards.

We didn't go out but for a few months.

I am uncomfortable with some of the expressions used in this thread. My ds may well need a circumcision. I hope it doesn't come to that (it certainly isn't a choice I would make for him), but if it does, I doubt he will be "mutilated" or "deformed".

And to imply an equivalence between male circumcision and female genital mutilation risks trivialising the latter, which iscompletely unacceptable IMO. Because males are circumcised with no lasting ill-effects. Is that ever true of women?

Can we leave female circumcision out of this? It is so not the same thing. I doubt anyone will come on here in defense of that (horrific) practice.

Sorry. I must have expressed myself badly. I agree with you.