Wow; it's only circumcision..

[Chloejp91]

Before I get killed, I'm not suggesting it is only circumsion, that's just the title of this thread.

I'm due in less than 4 weeks and I'm having a boy. I'm definitely going to circumcise him. It's part of my culture and my partner's culture so it's going to be done. I just feel sad that it's seen as such a bad thing, where there are some benefits to it.

Anyone circumsised/circumsizing their sons?

"many things cause pain and sometimes that pain is justifiable. If my DH tells me that he is happy that it was done to him and he can't remember the pain and it will be done with anasthetic in any event then I am happy with that."

what things are justifiable other than medical necessities?

are you sure it will be under anaesthetic? as far as i know the risk for babies is far to high to give them anaesthetic.

It is done with local anasthetic.

SVH78 Yep.

I think anyone who could look at their own newborn baby and decide to arbitrarily cut a bit of them off is quite wrong in the head.

Once he had DS DP was also horrified that his mother could have stood by and watched that done to him.

so your baby will suffer no pain at all?

hmm, no answer to that one.

Tolalola - it is not arbitrary if there is a reason for it. Just because you do not agree with that reason does not mean that you are right and we are wrong.

Iloveitwhenyoucallmeboo - from what I understand it will be minimal pain or as one doctor has described it to us "virtually painfree". We are satisfied with that.

i wonder SVH78 if you would be willing to undergo similar with local anaesthetic and decide if it was 'virtually painfree' (what the hell does that mean?) before deciding to inflict it upon a child with no voice or choice in the matter?

Yes I have seen the video - but I have also seen the procedure performed in real life and it is not at all like the video links that have been posted here - people are very good at scaremongering and showing horrible examples of things. I agree that the video links that have been posted are horrendous, however, the reality of the procedure that we have chosen is far from the links posted.

Some information on circumcision pain relief here:

circ.org

"what things are justifiable other than medical necessities?"

Vaccinations, for one. There is no immediate medical necessity for them yet I imagine you believe that the long term protection is worth the short term pain?

And there are some links below showing reputable studies saying circumcision DOES protect from STDs. The first one cites a study in the New England Journal of Medicine and the second one is a link to the World Health Organisation. These can hardly be claimed to be unscrupulous or biased organisations.

www.healthcare-online.org/healthcarea-auto/can-circumcision-prevent-the-spread-of-herpes-hpv-other-stds/

Study coauthor Thomas C. Quinn, MD, professor of global health at Johns Hopkins University, says that choosing circumcision, whether it?s the parents of an infant or an adult male for himself, is and should remain an individual decision.

?But the critics need to really look at the benefits versus the risks,? he adds. ?By now a large body of evidence has shown that the health benefits clearly outweigh the minor risk associated with the surgery. In our study, we didn?t see any adverse effects or mutilation. We?re recommending supervised, safe, sterile environments?not circumcision out in an open field with rusty instruments.?

www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/index.html

There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%.

It wasn't my son's circumcision that I witnessed. My DS is not yet born.

The baby was a week old and cried slightly when the injection was done but not at all during the very quick circumcision procedure.

HouseofBamboo - this link also has info on pain relief

www.circinfo.net/anasthesia.html

"I'd rather my son used a condom."

I am sure you would but you won't be there to check (I hope) and condoms do occasionally split, anyway.

condoms negate the need for circumcision as a means of HIV prevention.

and cirumcision doesn't prevent HIV anyway.

i wonder if there are stats on the incidences of HIV infection in circumcised men that have not used condoms.

and then stats for HIV infection in men that have used condoms in every sexual encounter.

doubt it but would be interested to know.

ILoveIt,

Easy and glib answer. Very few people use a condom ALL the time, including long term relationships. STDs are always a threat to sexually active youngsters and anything that can reduce this risk should at least be considered carefully.

"STDs are always a threat to sexually active youngsters " erm, why are we focusing on sexually active young people? STDs are a risk to anyone who is sexually active regardless of age.

very few people use a condom all the time, i agree but if i could chose to be permanently disfigured and never wear a condom or choose to always wear a condom with a view to preventing HIV i know which would appeal both for the pain factor, permanent disfigurement and the remaining high risk of HIV.

put it this way, men who are circumcised still need to wear a condom to protect against STD's so why circumcise in teh first place?

I do know that as a matter of fact, the baby did not appear in any discomfort and was fully healed 4 days later.

Imarriedafrog - what procedure did your son have?