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

circumcision yes or no

387 replies

morocco · 16/03/2003 23:18

My 5 month old has a tight foreskin and doctors here recommend circumcision but Im really not keen. I spoke to docs in the UK and they said to wait and see but then I started worrying about whether it would be traumatic for him to be circumcised at say 4 or older and whether it might be better to just go ahead now. Has anyone been through this with a child of this age/older? All advice gratefully received

OP posts:
threeangels · 17/03/2003 00:12

Hi morocco - I've always had my boys done right after birth but I remember a child I had in one of my day care classes who had it done at age 3. He started having all kinds of infections so their doc recommended him having it done. As far as I know it was fast and he suffered no problems afterwards other then it being sore and tender for a couple weeks. I would say have it done now while hes small if you think you might want it done. At least he will not aware of anything. Good luck

Holly02 · 17/03/2003 03:14

Morocco my ds was done at 3wks by a doctor who performs them all the time, using a plastic ring device so there is no trauma involved at all. DS was absolutely fine. If you are going to have it done though, as threeangels said it is best to have it done sooner than later.

My dh had to be circumcised when he was around 4 or 5 due to recurrent infections, and my uncle also decided to have it done when he was in his 40's because he'd had similar problems for years. There are different methods of performing circumcisions now, so it doesn't have to be traumatic but it would probably be best while he is so young. Have a chat to your dr about it.

robinw · 17/03/2003 07:12

message withdrawn

Tissy · 17/03/2003 07:58

Sorry to be blunt, but it is QUITE NORMAL not to be able to retract a 5 month old baby's foreskin. If, as I guess, you live in Morocco, a muslim country, you will be advised to go for a circumcision. It is the norm there, for religious reasons.Also, I imagine you will be paying for the privilege.

Please trust the UK doctors, they do know what they're talking about. If your son needs a circumcision for medical reasons when he's older, then it can be done. Don't put a baby through surgery "just in case".

Ghosty · 17/03/2003 09:57

I agree with Tissy. I have recently taken my 3 year old to the doctor as I was worried that he had a tight foreskin. As it happens the doctor managed to retract it and said there was no problem but he did say that often the foreskin won't be able to be retracted until the age of 4. Please think about this morocco ... if you are not against the idea anyway then best to go ahead now but if there is any doubt in your head DON'T do it until he is older and you are sure it is for medical reasons.
BTW I know someone who was circumcised at the age of 17 for medical reasons and although it was sore and tender for a couple of weeks he was not traumatised by it ...

Jaybee · 17/03/2003 10:11

I agree with Tissy and Ghosty - my ds' foreskin was very tight - this was noticed by a doctor at the six week check after he had had a hernia op at 4 months. He was referred to a specialist who advised that 'natural fiddling' once he was out of nappies would probably take care of it but to keep an eye on it for infection. Unfortunately, it didn't get any better and he had to be circumcised at 4. Personally, I would wait to see whether this is really required. Threeangels/Holly02 - were your ds' done for religious reasons?

Holly02 · 17/03/2003 10:38

Jaybee I had it done for a few reasons, mainly because I had read a lot of literature in support of circumcision, and I have also known some uncircumcised men who have experienced on-going problems with infections, etc. Also, most of the men in my family were circumcised - my brother, father, cousins etc, so it seemed the norm to me. These days circumcision does not have to involve surgery and can be done with minimal discomfort, as in ds' case. Of course it is up to the individual but I did it because I believed it was best for my son.

Furball · 17/03/2003 10:46

Hang on, Hang on. I was under the understanding that a 5 month old foreskin was SUPPOSED to be tight and should be left well alone.

There are several myths about circumcision, which was actually introduced to stop masturbation! Also the western world believed it was necessary to stop cancer of the penis. They have now concluded that cancer of the penis is really rare anyway.

Anyway here's a Website that should answer any of your questions - All topics are on the right hand side hald way down.

threeangels · 17/03/2003 12:11

Hi Jaybee - They were not done for religious religions. Here they pretty much do it because it's the normal thing. There is a smaller % who decide not to for whatever reasons. I think to most it just comes automatic.

threeangels · 17/03/2003 12:24

Jaybee - I guess I will take that back about it not being religion. The bible does talk a lot about it starting in Genesis 21:4 and throughout it. I guess many of us don't think about it (including myself) as starting from religion because it's so natural to have it done and the majority are having it done. At least most here.

mum2toby · 17/03/2003 12:54

Why would it be the 'done thing' to put a baby boy through unnecessary surgery to remove aprt iof the penis that is there quite naturally!!!??? I find that ludicrous.... cirmcumcision should only EVER be performed because the child will suffer medical problems if it isn't done!! IMO.

I wouldn't get a dogs tail docked unless there was a medical reason for it never mind putting my son through all that!!!

threeangels · 17/03/2003 13:04

The US is quite a large country and the majority are having it done. My ds had it done 3 days after leaving the hospital. Only had a little pain from a numbing needle and that was about it.

mum2toby · 17/03/2003 13:07

Threeangels - if you don't mind me asking.. WHY???
And you don't really know what pain was caused. I can't see any possible benefit of it!!

hmb · 17/03/2003 13:08

As an adult, problems with retraction can be sorted out by a frenectomy (sp??) where the tissue that attaches the foreskin to the penis is cut, and the foreskin is then 'freed'. A full circumcision is not always needed.

threeangels · 17/03/2003 13:10

I think most of the time if a father hasnt been done then the son most likely hasnt either. I have worked in day cares for about 15 yrs and I would say that from my memory there may have been only 1 or 2 not circumsized (from memory). I know this because I worked with infants - 3yrs. Thats a lot of children and I doubt their parents were intending to put them through any pain purposely. Theres reasons behind everything we do. Well, almost everything.

mum2toby · 17/03/2003 13:10

Agree HMB. Also, if a man wants it done then that's HIS choice. Why take that choice away from someone!!
It almost like subjecting your child to cosmetic surgery, coz unless there is a medical reason it is purely cosmetic.

threeangels · 17/03/2003 13:14

Mum2toby - Well I'm going on what the doc said. He said there was pain from the needle to numb and they didnt feel the procedure. Yes it was probally sore for a couple weeks but it did heal.

sml2 · 17/03/2003 13:34

morocco
my two sons were circumcised at age 4 and 2, which is the normal age in Algeria. (Please note that this is Berber tradition by the way, it predates Islam) What is the normal age in Morocco? Age 3 - 5 is normal in Algeria which I think is much preferable to having it done when they're tiny babies. But I agree with whoever pointed out that doctors in Morocco would be more likely to recommend circumcision. If you're not keen, then definitely hang on and see if it turns out to be necessary - it wasn't traumatic at all for my sons.

breeze · 17/03/2003 13:44

Have to agree with Mum2toby on this one, personally, I wouldn't put my ds through any kind of surgery unless it was needed.

aloha · 17/03/2003 13:51

IMO circumcision without medical reasons should be made illegal. It is tantamount to child abuse to cut bits of skin off a baby for no good reason. If it has to be done for medical reasons then it should be done in hospital with appropriate pain relief and sedation. Would you like someone to hack off a bit of your body just because they preferred to look of you without it? It's just not fair. I can't imagine letting anyone loose on my son with a knife without very, very good reason. And I don't care what anyone thinks. I'm on the side of the babies here, not pointless and outdated traditions.

mum2toby · 17/03/2003 14:03

Oh well put aloha!! I was trying to be polite about it, but what the hell.... you are right. It should be made illegal. In some countries baby girls have their clitoris' cut off!!!! Is this ok too.....

It's horrifying that mothers and fathers out there are still allowing this to happen.... there is NO justification for unless thee is a valid medical reason!!!!!!

Jaybee · 17/03/2003 14:09

Here here - ds HAD to be done - the consultant said that it was one of the tightest he had seen but even so, I still waited to be sure that natural playing and fiddling wasn't going to sort it out. He had a GA and I cannot understand why anyone would let it be done unless it was essential and under a GA.

Bobbins · 17/03/2003 14:11

I was with someone who was circumcised for three years. I read up a lot about it. Apparently it reduces some of the sexual sensation. This idea that its more clean is nonsense, surely you just make sure you wash properly. The foreskin has got to be there for a reason. I wouldn't be happy about having my son circumcised. I agree, unless its medically necessary you should leave well alone.

jasper · 17/03/2003 14:45

Let someone take a knife to your baby's willie?
Please, no.
How would anyone ascertain a baby boy had a tight foreskin? I thought you were supposed to leave it alone.

I recently came across this webpage on circumcision and breastfeeding

Do those in favour of routine circumcision think God/mother nature made a design fault in baby boys which should be corrected with a scalpel? Intuitively it is a piece of nonsense.

Lil · 17/03/2003 17:50

mum2toby - whether you agree with circumcision or not please DONT compare it with female circumcision. There is no comparison, and trying to make one just muddies the water. Female circumcision is totally barbaric and designed to remove all sexual feeling so that woman do not stray from their husbands. Women tear open when they give birth and the pain andscarring is beyond belief. Circumcision on the other hand, has its roots in hygene in hot climates and leads to no bad side effects when older (in fact studies show it reduces the chance of infection and carrying clamidya!). Men that have been circumcised (Royalty!/Americans/ muslims/jews) have no problem with it at all, and all want their sons to have the same. I can't see any circumcised (no make that mutilated) women saying the same...