circumcision yes or no

[morocco]

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

lisalisa - with regard to anaesthetic for babies, I was mainly thinking of at least an anaesthetic cream, which can be applied to the penis and would dull the feeling enough for the baby not to feel any pain. I wasn't thinking of a general anaesthetic, as I know that can be quite risky itself.

(I hit 'post message' before I was finished )

Lisalisa would you be allowed to use a topical anaesthetic on your baby to make it less painful for him?

Lisalisa - I too was not referring to a GENERAL anaesthetic. I think that would be a tad excessive and not once did I imply that! I was talkng about a local aneasthetic. I hardly see a drop of wine as sufficient.

well lisalisa I'm not jewish- not religious at all in fact, and would never circumcise my boys, but I have to say I agree totally with your post!! If I had to choose one or the other I'd circumcise rather than vaccinate ds2 (ds1 was vaccinated unfortunately won't be getting hos boosters though).

Now reading that loads of people are going to think (and would be quite happy to say) that I am a terrible mother, that I'm putting my child at risk, and their child at risk (quite how if the vaccinations are so bloody wonderful always confuses me but still) and it'll be judge judge judge. Never mind that I've talked through the decision with the HV who says she would do the same in my position and my GP accepts my decision as informed and in the best interests of my child. It'll still be judge judge judge.

And reading the posts that is what a lot of this thread appears to be. Without understanding other people's position and choices you can't leap in and accuse them of cruelty. Without understanding religious teachings you can't either- you may not agree with it - in your situation and for your child- but you can't understand the importance of following that procedure to someone of that religion.

So why not stop judging and accept that people living in different circumstances make different decisions to you. They're not wrong - they are different. Very few decisions are totally black and white/ right and wrong. In their position who knows you might just have made the same decison as them.

Rant over- phew.

I beg to differ fallala "I honestly find it hard to believe you could really love a child you would inflict a wound upon for no good reason (and yes there is no good reason for general or ritual circumcision" "I cannot - do not - understand how circumcision is compatible with love". "I certainly do not understand how a loving mother could inflict pain and injury on a baby if it wasn't for their immediate and medically proven benefit".

BTW the "you's" in that post are a collective you to people who have been judgemental! Not aimed at a specific individual!

Jimjams were your ds's problems caused by a vaccine? If so I understand why you feel so strongly about it.

I took ds this morning to be vaccinated against Meningococcal C, primarily because the vaccine is free now for children and adolescents. But do you think I could stop myself worrying about the potential side effects?? I just prayed that he'd be ok and then I took him. As it turns out he's just fine and had no reaction whatsoever. But I know how tragic it must be for the few who have experienced serious side effects.

Crikey, how did that get there??. I agree utterly and totally with your post jimjams. I am pro-vaccination but utterly respect the choice you have made for your children. I am really flummoxed by the way some people don't seem to be able to understand the importance and value of religion in other's lives.

Didn't see that croppy, apologies
Lisalisa did your son get a local anaesthetic of any kind?
Please someone correct me if I am wrong, but I understand some babies get it done with NO anaesthetic (no cream, no injection) as it is considered not to be painful. Do adult males likewise get it done without anaesthetic and is this how it was decided it isn't painful?

I am genuinely seeking to understand this subject as at the m oment I can't get my head around it (pardon the pun)

That's all I want to know too Fallala. Good question. I asked a similar one before, but nobody is volunteering an answer.

1. Why can't the Jewish ceremony be done with a local anaesthetic?

2. How do people know if it's not painful!!?

well the vaccination stuff is kind of irrelvent to circumcision, I was just saying we shouldn't be so quick to judge other people's decisions- especially when we know jack all about their lives!

Fallafa I think adults have it done under anaesthetic- but I have no idea. I do the know the snip is given under local! I have no ideas about babies- may depend on where and why it's being done and by whom.

Exactly croppy and I'm an atheist- so if I can see it- why can't others!

croppy this has been covered before, it has nothing to do with not understanding the importance of others religions. The religious argument hold no water because there are things people do to their kids in the name of religion/culture which I am sure NOONE here would think were justified on the basis of religion. Please allow those of use who are horrified at the idea of removing part of a baby's penis for no good reason to hold our own opinion and not be asked to suspend all reason for the sake of someone else's religion.

Fallala- you have misunderstood- this is not an argument about the rights and wrongs of a religious practice. This is about judging people without knowing anything about them or their lives. We are talking circumcision- not ritualised torture- circumcision. To get so judgementalabout someone else's decision when you don't know anything about the background to that choice is frankly wrong.

And to repeat- I would not circumcise my boys (my choice) but I hate to see such appalling judgments coming when from people obviously have no idea what circumcision even involves.

Well Fallala I just think that a large part of the world's populations are circumcised ; Australians, Americans, Muslims, Jews etc and it really does not seem to be a big deal to them. I think it is perfectly possible to differentiate between religious practices that inflict serious life long damage on innocents and those that don't and I don't see that circumcision fits into the former category.

AS I say I'm an agnostic but reading Lisalisa's posts I can clearly see how important her faith is to her and how important in turn circumcision is to that faith.

Does anybody ahve the answer to my questions?

Message withdrawn

Nooooooooooooooooo Lisalisa you have really horrified me. I was quoting Aloha in response to Fallala who said that contrary to my earlier post, Aloha had never said that women who circumcised their children loved them less. A view that is complete anathema to me, I assure you.

Message withdrawn

mum2toby

I think but may be wrong that the religious circumcisions (whatever faith) don't use anaesthetic- although I think they may apply cream etc afterwards to help the healing.

i think it is painful (the procedure), but I'm not sure that's the argument. I think it heals quicklySomething being painful doesn't make it abuse or wrong or whatever. I think the argument is more complicated than that.

If you re-read lisalisa's post you will see that her daughter apparently found her vacciations more painful than her son found his circumcision. So probably painful? Yes? Unbearable traumatising pain going on for months and months? No.

And again- stop judging stop judging stop judging.

I loooovvve the vaccination bible lisalisa- it should be given away in the Bounty Bags!!!! This is why I am trying to defend your circumcison choice- I am so used to being judged by people who no nothing about the vaccination arguemnt, haven't even read and 8th of the stuff I've read, don't live my life every day- and yet they judge judge judge!

So I am very used to being on the receiving end, and I hate seeing others in that position!

Jimjams - I'm not sure if the 'don't judge' part of your post was aimed at me!

I hope not coz as far as I was concerned I asked a couple of valid questions to help me to TRY to understand. I wasn't aware that that could be contrued as judging someone!

Message withdrawn

mum2toby

sorry I thought I read some judging stuff earlier from you- but I didn't check so sorry if I was wrong- your last post wasn't- it wasn't really directed at you though- just generally to the judgers! Now I sound like someone from Blackadder- "how do we know you're not a gloater?"

lisalisa- ds1 is autistic. In his case I think antibiotics played a big role but obviously I started reading up about vaccinations. He almost certainly has a th2 type immune system which tend not to do very well with vaccination. This is inherited from his fathers side (choc a block with autoimmune diseases). As ds2 shares 50% of his genes with ds1 I figured that he has a big chance of having the th2 type immune system as well. Therefore he would be at increased risk of eczema, asthma, diabetes and yes autism and the rest. So I decided no vaccinations unless he has a real risk of catching the disease- may give tetanus when he's bigger, playing in dirt, at risk of puncture wounds and won't be so affected by mercury! Not sure though- may not.

DS2 is (touch wood) much healthier than ds1. He shakes off illnesses (they knock ds1 for 6), no eczema- real problem for ds1, definitely not autisic (he's 14 months now). He's been in contact with nasties like whooping cough- no problem. I'm training to be a homeopath so that helps.

The irony is I come form a totally scientific background- PhD in Biology. Marched ds1 off for vaccinations- thought they were one of the greatest medical advances ever. How wrong I was- when I actually read the research papers I was horrified. This is another reaon why I never judge in situations I know nothing about. I used to and had a pretty big wake up call. Anyway having an autistic son I get judged just about every time I set foot outside my front door. When I look at myself 5 years ago I had no idea, no idea, I thought I did, I threw out opinions for Britian, but absolutely no idea at all. It's been a learning experience! It's quite easy to live a nice easy life with nice normal children and choose between nice normal schools and have lots and lots of opinions about subjects that don;t affect you in the slightest- just if you were actually living those people's lives your opinions may be somehwat different.

"you" being used in the collective sense again!

Why did you make your decision?

Nicola3-you didn't use rude or disrespectful language in your post, granted, but neither have you really answered my questions/ addressed my specific points. You referred to "true Christians", implying that there are Christians who aren't true. I asked if you would class me as one of these, and you haven't answered, so I guess you would.

You said I must read the bible to find out if I am going to hell, and you said it should be read as a whole document. Why? It was written at different times by many different people, most of whom were not aware of many of the writings that had gone before.It wasn't written as a whole document, why read it as one?

I'm afraid that I can't accept that every word in the bible is FACT- even if the whole lot was the result of inspiration from God to all of its separate authors, it has suffered too much in the translation over the years. I have several different bibles at home... King James, NIV, Good News, NEB?.... they are all different. If the bible can only be interpreted one way, why have so many different bibles? Which one is the right one? Biblical scholars have written whole books on how a certain passage can be interpreted- are these people wasting their time, or is there really something to discuss?

My point is, how I live my life, and how I affect the lives of those around me now is more important than what is going to happen to me after my death. The bible does give clear instructions about how to live your life- you can't get much clearer than the 10 commandments. If I have difficulty wholeheartedly accepting a concept which I can't understand, is God going to condemn me, if I've lived an otherwise blameless life? (I'm not claiming I have, by the way!).

I suppose that the difference between us is similar to the difference between lisalisa and her non-orthodox friends- we are really on the same side, aren't we? Or do I not count unless I'm "saved"? As a fairly ordinary, well-intentioned C of E Christian, I have nothing against Born Again Christians. I'm saddened that the reverse doesn't seem to apply.

Most of the world's major religions agree more or less on how to behave- humility, charity, kindness, etc.. They mostly agree that there is only one God, so why is it so difficult to accept that these religions may all be paths to the same God?(I'm not necessarily aiming this remark at you, by the way).

This has been a fascinating thread, and I hope that it continues to develop. I apologise if I upset you with my flippant remark about " going to hell". This actually stemmed from a rather uncomfortable CU meeting in my first week at University, when someone told me I was going to hell unless I was saved. I wasn't at the time aware how diverse the different branches of Christianity can be.