Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sure with any medical procedure there are risk. I don't know the frequency of the symptoms that you discussed - but apparently it doesn't happen enough for the medical community - such as pediatricians - to have a MASS outcry against it. When the general concensus of our educated doctors vote against it in mass quantities, then I would consider circumcision a terrible thing.
Here are position statements of various medical associations in English-speaking countries where routine infant circumcision was popular. You will now note the United States is the only country that continues with the practice despite the AAP statement:
2003 British Medical Association
“The BMA does not believe that parental preference alone constitutes sufficient grounds for performing a surgical procedure on a child unable to express his own view. . . . Parental preference must be weighed in terms of the child's interests. . . . The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefit from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it. . . . Some doctors may wish to not perform circumcisions for reasons of conscience. Doctors are under no obligation to comply with a request to circumcise a child.”
2002 Royal Australasian College of Physicians
“After extensive review of the literature the RACP reaffirms that there is no medical indication for routine male circumcision. The possibility that routine circumcision may contravene human rights has been raised because circumcision is performed on a minor and is without proven medical benefit. . . . Review of the literature in relation to risks and benefits shows there is no evidence of benefit outweighing harm for circumcision as a routine procedure.”
2002 Canadian Paediatric Society
“Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed.”
2000 American Medical Association
“The AMA supports the general principles of the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics.”
1999 American Academy of Pediatrics
“Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision.”
Australian College of Paediatrics
“The Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons has informed the College that ‘neonatal male circumcision has no medical indication. It is a traumatic procedure performed without anaesthesia to remove a normal functional and protective prepuce [foreskin].’
There's your mass outcry from physicians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2
Teeg26, Great post - rational and logical. I agree with you that it is a personal decision and that there's pros and cons. I also would leave the decision to my husband for the same reason as you stated.
If a friend of mine asked me my opinion on this matter I would be inclined to state reasons for and against it. But there are those who are so against it that they don't see ANY pros to it at all. Some anti-circ. advocates (as this thread illustrates) see it as a form of mutilation (making it imperfect, crippled, damaged beyond repair) and that any argument that supports the "pros" is erroneous, misguided, and irrelevant - ignoring the fact that there just might be some truth on BOTH sides. It's a personal option as you said and one that - thankfully - is not going away anytime soon.
Medicine is advancing every day, but we can't yet grow new parts and reattach them. There is no way, surgically or therapeutically to repair these anatomical parts, ergo the penis IS damaged beyond repair.
Circumcised penises are crippled in that they cannot create a seal against the labia creating the optimum environment for semen and natural lubricants to be retained within the vagina. The penis cannot function as created in this situation. Further the glanz is not protected from external exposure as the foreskin is necessary to protect it. Therefore the penis cannot perform two functions for which it is designed to complete, ergo it is crippled.
Perfection or imperfection is an aesthetic judgement and cannot be empirically quantified.
As to whether the choice will be taken away or not, William Stowell is not the only person planning to sue. Other young men are waiting until they reach majority to do the same thing. Given enough lawsuits and you won't be able to find a doctor who will dare do the procedure. The legal risks will be far too high and rising:
In 1991, a hospital in Atlanta, GA, agreed to pay $22.8 million because of negligence during a circumcision. Also in New York City a boy received $1.2 million for a circumcision error, and in Lake Charles, LA a family received $2.75 million after a boy's penis was burned during a routine circumcision.
This is just the latest:
Quote:
The day after birth on February 15, 2007, an infant at Sarah Bush Hospital had a standard circumcision procedure performed by Dr. Sherif Malek. However, what should have been a forgotten memory for the boy became a lifelong nightmare. Due to negligence, Dr. Malek severed the entire [glanz][sic due to robocensor-jason_els], commonly termed the head, of the infant's penis. Today, Jerry A. Latherow of Latherow Law Office on behalf of plaintiffs Boy Doe (the infant) and his mother, Jane Doe, filed a complaint for compensation for damages against Sarah Bush Lincoln Health System, Inc, 1000 Health Center Drive, Mattoon, IL, and Sherif Malek, D.O. in the Circuit Court of Coles County, Illinois. -PRNewsire 07/18/07
Here are position statements of various medical associations in English-speaking countries where routine infant circumcision was popular. You will now note the United States is the only country that continues with the practice despite the AAP statement:
2003 British Medical Association
“The BMA does not believe that parental preference alone constitutes sufficient grounds for performing a surgical procedure on a child unable to express his own view. . . . Parental preference must be weighed in terms of the child's interests. . . . The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefit from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it. . . . Some doctors may wish to not perform circumcisions for reasons of conscience. Doctors are under no obligation to comply with a request to circumcise a child.”
2002 Royal Australasian College of Physicians
“After extensive review of the literature the RACP reaffirms that there is no medical indication for routine male circumcision. The possibility that routine circumcision may contravene human rights has been raised because circumcision is performed on a minor and is without proven medical benefit. . . . Review of the literature in relation to risks and benefits shows there is no evidence of benefit outweighing harm for circumcision as a routine procedure.”
2002 Canadian Paediatric Society
“Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed.”
2000 American Medical Association
“The AMA supports the general principles of the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics.”
1999 American Academy of Pediatrics
“Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision.”
Australian College of Paediatrics
“The Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons has informed the College that ‘neonatal male circumcision has no medical indication. It is a traumatic procedure performed without anaesthesia to remove a normal functional and protective prepuce [foreskin].’
There's your mass outcry from physicians.
Medicine is advancing every day, but we can't yet grow new parts and reattach them. There is no way, surgically or therapeutically to repair these anatomical parts, ergo the penis IS damaged beyond repair.
Circumcised penises are crippled in that they cannot create a seal against the labia creating the optimum environment for semen and natural lubricants to be retained within the vagina. The penis cannot function as created in this situation. Further the glanz is not protected from external exposure as the foreskin is necessary to protect it. Therefore the penis cannot perform two functions for which it is designed to complete, ergo it is crippled.
Perfection or imperfection is an aesthetic judgement and cannot be empirically quantified.
As to whether the choice will be taken away or not, William Stowell is not the only person planning to sue. Other young men are waiting until they reach majority to do the same thing. Given enough lawsuits and you won't be able to find a doctor who will dare do the procedure. The legal risks will be far too high and rising:
In 1991, a hospital in Atlanta, GA, agreed to pay $22.8 million because of negligence during a circumcision. Also in New York City a boy received $1.2 million for a circumcision error, and in Lake Charles, LA a family received $2.75 million after a boy's penis was burned during a routine circumcision.
This is just the latest:
Jason_Els. With all due respect, my eyes glazed over when I saw this post - I didn't even read it - it's like bringing an elephant gun when you are going rabbit hunting. I can take quotes from anywhere and support ANY theory. It's pretty obvious you are anti-circumcision, you've made that vehemently clear.
Are there any guys out there that had it done later??
I'd really like some actual opinions from people that have experienced doing it later on in life. Obviously it was painful, but I want to know why you did it and was it worth it afterwards.
Can we please move on from all the articles etc....that's not really the type of info I was looking for. I do know how to use google.
Finally, Charles Wallace, I do see the many parallels of female and male circumsicion. Thank you for bringing that into the thread.
You're welcome. It was an eye-opener for me too, and initially my reaction was, "Oh, no, they're nothing alike! FGM is brutal mutilation while circumcision is...uh...THEY'RE NOTHING ALIKE because...uh..."
The more I thought of it, the less difference I saw. Hope that helped shed light on some aspects of the debate.
I was thinking about the one difference between male and female circumcision, being the intent to remove sexual pleasure/arousal for females. Do you think we can lump this into the social norms/religious beliefs? Because in many cultures, females are viewed as less than males whose sole purpose is to bear children and take care of the family. Though the intent to remove pleasure/arousal would be deemed cruel in America, perhaps it is not so in places where female circumcision is the norm.
Viewed this way, female and male circumcision would be exactly alike.
I think that's a major reason it's done, particularly to ensure female chastity. From a purely pragmatic standpoint, it would tend to be effective. That's an understatement. In a culture that places a premium on virginity (and one can see why, with HIV being such a concern), infibulation/Pharaonic circumcision is visible evidence that the woman is a virgin. (Let me say for the record: YIKES!)
I'd really like some actual opinions from people that have experienced doing it later on in life. Obviously it was painful, but I want to know why you did it and was it worth it afterwards.
Can we please move on from all the articles etc....that's not really the type of info I was looking for. I do know how to use google.
But thanks for your input anyway.
I don't know if this helps at all because it's probably too culturally different, but a friend of mine from Istanbul told me that circumcision at age 12 is routinely done in Turkey. They don't tell you about it beforehand, but allow the circumciser and some other folks -- male relatives, if I remember rightly -- to surprise you. In my friend's case, I think he was walking home from school at the time. They held him down on a bed and it was done without anaesthesia. You weren't allowed to cry or scream because it was basically held to be a rite of passage into manhood.
Jason_Els. With all due respect, my eyes glazed over when I saw this post - I didn't even read it - it's like bringing an elephant gun when you are going rabbit hunting. I can take quotes from anywhere and support ANY theory. It's pretty obvious you are anti-circumcision, you've made that vehemently clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommabear2
...when the general concensus of our educated doctors vote against it in mass quantities, then I would consider circumcision a terrible thing.
I think you've made it vehemently clear that no matter what evidence you're presented with, even evidence which you say would change your mind if you saw it, your mind is decided and no fact, no ethical or medical opinion, is going to sway you. I, however, think that when it comes to deciding upon any surgery that informed expert opinions are valuable. It is now very clear to me that we are approaching this subject from two different perspectives. You are arguing from an emotional mindset and I from a medical and ethical mindset. I do not think it will be possible to reconcile these.
I think you've made it vehemently clear that no matter what evidence you're presented with, even evidence which you say would change your mind if you saw it, your mind is decided and no fact, no ethical or medical opinion, is going to sway you. I, however, think that when it comes to deciding upon any surgery that informed expert opinions are valuable. It is now very clear to me that we are approaching this subject from two different perspectives. You are arguing from an emotional mindset and I from a medical and ethical mindset. I do not think it will be possible to reconcile these.
Uhhh dude, not to insult you, but I think that was COMPLETELY CLEAR to the rest of us about 5 pages ago. But thank you for your comment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Are there any guys out there that had it done later??
)
But thank you for your comment.