Muslim DH, just had DS. I don't want to circumcise

[LittleMissRayofHope]

I don't want to do it.
I don't see the need or point.
As far as I am concerned it is a completely unneeded surgical procedure that removes a part of my sons body without his consent.
DH does want it done though.

There is a likely split up on the near horizon as well and I'm worried that even if I refuse he could just do it during contact one time. He is on both cert and as its a private procedure he wouldn't need my consent would he?

I don't blame you, I'd not do this either. And it's fine that you changed your mind, it's hard to know before you have tiny little baby with you how you will feel.

Don't do it.

"
Hakluyt - I think fairly clear in the context of a possible divorce that I didn't mean a ring or cash, but some other aspect of her DS's upbringing - eg schooling, religious education, etc."

Don't see it as much better, frankly.

I can only conclude that the majority of posters on this thread don't know what "circumcision" means - they seem to be treating it like a haircut. It is unnecessary, painful and irreversible mutilation of a child's genitals. For no reason. How can that EVER be acceptable?

And I speak as someone from a Muslim background and all the men in my family are circumcised and I still think it's barbaric and should be illegal.

Did you not know he was Muslim when you married him?

whattodo what do you mean by that? Because of his religion he gets the right to mutiliate their children because, hey, that's more important than children's' human rights?

FFS, this is not a compromise situation!

No he doesnt, but by marrying him OP is condoning it, and has as such put her child at risk for mutilation.

She would not have had to risk her own child, had she taken a stand on this before involving herself with this man.

Whattodo90, what do you suggest the OP does now? She can't change the past now that she has the benefit of hindsight.

Not everyone considers it mutilation this is a cultural opinion. often circumcision brings health benefits. All the men in my family are circumcised for medical reasons.
You have a multicultural dilemma that comes with being in this kind of relationship. Neither of you are wrong or right interms of the best interest of the child.

Circumcision brings no health benefits to a healthy boy. There are conditions which may require circumcision. There are also conditions which may requir the removal of t appendix. Nobody would advocate prophylactic appendectomies.

I don't want to do it DH does

I don't see the need or point DH does

As far as I am concerned it is a completely unneeded surgical procedure that removes a part of my sons body without his consent This is your opinion, because of your cultural background. DH doesn't agree.

You had a conversation about circumcision before you conceived - you agree to it. You are the one who wants to change your mind, not DH.
If it was the other way around, about another issue, and DH changed his mind about something you feel strongly about after you DS was born, how would you feel?

I think the posters who are using words like "mutilation" are being very emotive, and clouding your judgement. Many, many men have this procedure done all over the world with no ill effects whatsover. My DH certainly doesn't consider that "his genitals were mutilated". I think that's a horrible thing to say.

Herminone - it sounds as if the posters know exactly what's involved. For my part, I've seen my own DSs' at close quarters, and dozens of others.

As for whether or not it is a compromise situation, if the OP wants to bring up her DS in a "War of the Roses" environment, then that's fine, but otherwise some sort of compromise will be needed with DH, and this seems to be significant for him (as it was for me).

You don't have to be held to it.

There are health benefits in regards to circumcision but that is not the point if this thread. The thread is about the cultural differences to circumcision. Using emotive language like mutilation doesn't help. My father and brother had it done for medical reasons are they also mutilated?

As for the appendix argument if it was a simple operation like circumcision and it was part of my husband's culture or religion to remove it than I would agree particularly with a family history of serious appendix complications. Obviously appendicetomies are not carried out routinely as it is a serious operation.

Mutilation is an emotive term, but even if you called "unnecessary surgical removal of the foreskin" the same arguments against it exist. I don't think culture or religion are sufficient reason to remove part of the body of a child who can't consent to it.

Circumcision for medical reasons is a completely different situation, and there is no comparison. Many things that are done for medical reasons would be considered very wrong if done for cultural/religious reasons by a religious or cultural representative.

Except there are adult men who do feel that they have been mutilated by circumcision. There is a growing movement to have it outlawed.

If it's so great, then when the OP's DS is an adult he can choose it for himself, as with any other optional surgical procedure. Until then, OP is well within her rights to want to protect her DS from unnecessary, irreversible surgery.

The point is thwt we should not perform non medically required surgery in people who are unable to give consent. That's really should be the end of the discussion.

We pierce the ears of babies all the time, without their consent. Is that "mutilation"?

I don't use the word mutilation to describe circumcision. But we should not price babies' ears either.

"We" don't pierce babies ears "all the time", you might and you might know people that do, but I certainly wouldn't. Piercing ears is not as bad an unnecessary procedure as circumcision, but still falls under carrying out an unnecessary procedure (that results in a permanent change) on a person that can't consent.

If piercing ears and circumcision are ok, what about piercing other parts of the body (tongue, lip, nose, eyebrow for example)? Tattoos? Branding? Where does it become not ok, and how do you draw that line?

I wouldn't pierce a baby's ears, but lots of people do. I just wondered how many of the posters here who consider circumcision to be mutilation have children under 18 with pierced ears.

neither of my children have pierced ears and I wouldn't have them done without their consent either. DD doesn't want hers done just yet (she is 11). I also wouldn't circumcise my ds as it is not a necessary operation

I know very few people who have babies with pierced ears so 'we' certainly don't do it 'all the time'. The only children with pierced ears I know have asked for them to be done

There are men who are not happy being circumcised now they are adults but these tend to be men from western cultures when it was done for aesthetical reasons only and are influenced by ac culture that considers it unnecessary. I have never met a Muslim man who considers it a mutilation. It is an important part of the culture and faith.
I understand that in western culture faith and cultural values are not important but in other cultures they are fundamental.
At the end of the day circumcision has benefits if done for the right reasons. It is a sad issue to destroy an otherwise happy relationship over this.