Conference moira::parenting_v3

	OK folks, this is one of THOSE topics. :-) 

	Please keep it calm and don't use loaded language.

Tracey 
Parenting co-mod

     My wife was with him when they circumcised our eldest son. She says:
    Yes, the hurt, *but* for a very brief time, at least while they do the
    actual circumcision. Josh cried for about a toatl of 60 seconds, and
    then just lay there cooing and looking around. He never cried when his
    diaper was changed. They do put a sort of dressing on the tip of the
    penis, consisting of gause and petroleum jelly, and you will need to
    change this till it's healed, but it's not hard to do, and Josh never
    seemd to mind. They sometimes don't pee for quite a few hours after the
    circ is done, due to mild swelling, but, again, never seemed to cause
    discomfort to him. And they are often quite sleepy for the next 12 to
    24 hours after the circ, as it is a trauma to them, however brief. 
    
    Does it need to be done? No. Will there be any harm if its not? No.
    Will there be any harm if it *is* done? Extremely unlikely, although it
    is minor surgery, and with it go the possiblities of complication of
    minor surgery (mostly infection, but these are very rare). Basically it
    is not even so much of a recommended procedure, and is certainly not
    standard. I'd ask my OB, if I were you, since he's the one who will do
    the circ. (*not* the pedi). 
    
    Culturally, I'd say, is where the biggest factors come in. Is it
    culturally correct for a boy to be circ'ed in your family/ethnic
    heritage? If yes, are you able/willing to go against that?. Does he
    have brothers who are/aren't circ'ed? Some people worry about teasing
    in the teenage years (you know, group showers in boys gym classes) if a
    boy is not circ'ed and his friends are. 
    
    There are many factors to consider. But, it is clean, safe, sanitary,
    and, judging strctly from teh amount of crying our son did, not painful
    for very long at all. It's just not medically or hygenically necessary.
    Get all the facts, and base your decision on that.
    
    --dave--

    re: .2
    
    There is also some type of dressing that you don't have to 
    change.   You do have to put bacitracin (I think) on it at
    diaper changes, but you don't remove the gauze, or whatever
    the stuff is, until it falls off on its own at which point the
    wound now longer needs dressing.   Very easy to care for.
    
    Carol  

There is also a discussion of this in Parenting V2, at note 216.  See note 
7.11 on how to get to Parenting V2.  

That's not to stifle any discussion here.  I get the impression that attitudes 
toward circumcision have changed quite a bit in the last few years.  As for 
the "kidding in the locker room" angle, the base noter might want to get some 
statistics from her ob/gyn or hospital on what percentage of male babies are 
circumcised these days.  Also, check with your health insurance or HMO.  
Circumcisions are not routinely covered by all medical plans.

Clay

    Hi,
    
    When our son Joshua was born we had decided that since Daddy was not
    then he would not.  I have not found that it any harder to keep clean. 
    I (we) felt that whatever way Dad was the  baby should be.  That way
    when baby sees Dad undressed, he would not have to wonder why he is
    different?
    
    I have heard (not to discredit any previous replies) that is does hurt
    a lot and the babies scream.  
    
    I think that this is a personal decision between Mom and Dad to be.
    
    I hope this helps you.
    
    Denise
    

	I made the decision to not have my son circumcised at birth
   ....I couldn't deal with the pain he'd go through ( I had witnessed 
   one by accident in the nursery with my first :^( )

	But, I was lucky enough to have the 1 in 100 boys that really 
   needed one.  By the time Josh was 6 months old we noticed that he would
   "balloon" up when he urinated.  He had a condition called Phimosis, 
   meaning the opening was too small and caused backflushing of the urine.
   So---at 1 year old ( we had to wait until he was old enough for the 
   doctors to be comfortable with general anesthesia), he had to be 
   circumcised.   Never again for us.  Any future boys will be done at birth.
   Recovering at a year old was very painful for him.
   
 
   Just lucky, I guess...

   Good luck!

   Nancy

    We did not say that our son did not scream....he did. Loudly. *But*
    only for approx. 60 seconds, and then it was as if nothing in the world
    was wrong.  Without getting real gross and technical, they use a round,
    hollow instrument which goes over the tip of the penis, and under the
    foreskin. It then clamps onto the foreskin only, so the cutting only
    gets near the foreskin, and never even close to the penis (the metal
    instrument is "in the way"). The baby howls till the clamp is on, and
    abruptly stops. The clamp deadens all sensation to the foreskin, sort
    of like an anesthetic...actually clamps off nerve fibers in teh
    foreskin. So the cut is never even felt, and doesn't produce tons of
    soreness later, as it's just below the line where the clamp was, and
    where the nerves were crushed. It *does not* affect sensation in the
    boy's penis itself. This is how the doctor explained it to my wife,
    since she watched, and was curious. It is also why they don't cry too
    much after wards, although you'd think with such a cut they would. Any
    soreness they have is from the excessive handling, mostly.
    
    I, too, have heard the "go with how the boy's father is" train of
    thought, and it was one of the reasons we've had our boys circ'ed.
    
    --dave--

    I was surprised at the feeling I got from the nurse who taught our
    prenatal class - she and the doctor who was a guest one session seemed
    to be not in favour of the procedure, however, they were telling us
    that it was our decision (outside of social or religious reasons), but
    that we should remember to keep in mind that it will be a decision in
    the interests of the child, not the parents.
    
    I decided to leave the decision up to my husband, since he has been
    one of the unfortunate few who has had to have it done as an adult
    (AND had complications with the procedure!). What made him decide not
    to have it done is, first; he is the only male in his family to have
    had problems, secondly, the videos we saw that evening happened to show
    both an uncircumsized and a circumsized newborn -- it made him decide
    that in this case, if we do have a boy, it will in fact BE different
    than Daddy.
    
    - Monica 
    

    re .4:
>>toward circumcision have changed quite a bit in the last few years.  As for 
>>the "kidding in the locker room" angle, the base noter might want to get some 
>>statistics from her ob/gyn or hospital on what percentage of male babies are 
>>circumcised these days. 
    
     For what it's worth - the day I went home from the hospital there were
    five boys leaving the nursery. The nursery nurse told me that none of 
    them were circumcised. I suspect this was an unusual day but it helped
    validate our decision not to have Andy circumcised. This was nine
    months ago. 
    
    re: .0
    It's a tough decision - just remember that there's not a right and
    wrong - just what's right for you and your family. 
    

    
    Our boy was born in June of 1990 and he was circumcised.  My husband 
    was against it only because of the pain.  I was for it only because of
    how he might feel in the locker room and the pain of having it done later 
    in life.  
    
    I'm far from an expert, but newborns shouldn't remember the pain
    when it's done at two days old, but at two or twenty years old he would 
    certainly remember it for a long time.
    
    Stuart's pain was over in a day or two, it was a little inconvenient to 
    clean for a couple of weeks, but I'm glad we did it now so we/he
    doesn't have to worry about it ever again  
    
    There wasn't any religious factors in this for us and my husband is 
    circumcised so it's individual choices.
               
    Tricia 
    

From what I've heard, with children who are born these days, it's probably
more likely that they'll get teased in the locker room if they are circumsized
than if they aren't.

As for the "look like daddy" issue, a response I've heard which sounds pretty
convincing to me is that the difference between *any* preadolescent boy's
penis and *any* adult's penis is much more obvious than the difference 
between a circumsized and an uncircumsized penis -- that the little boy
isn't going to look like his daddy, regardless of whether he's circumsized.

    re: -1
    
    Dave, the OB did your sons circ!!  I have never heard of that.  I have
    had both of my boys circumcised and the procedure was done by a pedi. 
    It was with 2 different pedi's from different pediatric groups.
    
    As for the childs discomfort during the procedure. There is a lot, I
    think most of it stems from the fact that they are uncovered and their
    arms just fly all over the place.  They are scared, most of them had
    just been in the womb 24 hrs before and after they are born we wrap
    them up nice and tight.  Then all of a sudden there is a strange voice
    taking to them, they are stark naked (my 1st son urinated all over
    himself), and somebody is making them hurt.  Hey, I'd be angry and cry
    too!! 
    
    After all this, we are still glad we made the decision we did.  The
    choice is yours, don't worry what every one else is doing.  Do what you
    feel is right for YOUR baby.

    
    I witnessed a circumcision at a "bris" (a religious ceremony where the
    circumcision is done--and then celebrated).  The baby was 8 days old
    (this is part of the ritual--the baby must be exactly 8 days old).  The
    circumcision was done by a pedi. who moonlights as an adjunct rabbi! 
    The circumcision was done in the home.
    
    First, a cloth napkin was soaked in some Maneshevitz (sp?) wine.  Then,
    the napkin was put into the baby's mouth and the baby sucked on the
    napkin.  Then, the circumcision was performed.
    
    There wasn't even a peep from the baby.  A few minutes after the
    circumcision, the baby fell asleep.  When he woke up a few hours later,
    he was fine--no crying, no nothing.
    
    That's the way I'd do--and will do it if I have a boy.
    
    BTW--the American Medical Association stopped recommending circumcision
    a few years ago and just recently--started recommending it again. 
    There's some medical reason for the recommendation--but I forget what
    it is.  Anyone know?
    
    Bonnie
    
    

    I have two sons.  The first is almost seventeen, and when I had him I
    was made to feel that "that's the way it's done!".  The GP who
    delivered him told me that if the baby was a boy, there would be a $50
    extra charge because of the circ -- I never questioned it.
    
    My 2 1/2-year-old, however, has not been circumcised.  My eyes have
    been opened over the years, and it feels refreshing to actually have a
    say in what's being done to my child.  I was just reading about the
    circ question in American Baby magazine last night.  More and more,
    people are making their own decisions, and I think by the time Chase is
    in a locker room, he'll find that he looks like a lot of other kids!
    
    My husband was totally against it (mainly because it would be somewhat
    painful), and as it happened, the baby was in Neonatal Intensive Care
    for several days, and there was no way we would have subjected him to
    one more procedure.
    
    I'm due in July.  If it's another boy, he'll look just like the last
    one!  FWIW, my OLDER son thinks I made a terrible decision, and that
    his little brother looks "funny" ...
    
    Whatever decision you make will be the "right" one for your family!
    
    Dale

    My son was born on July 27, 1990.  He was not circumsized because
    of a minor medical problem that could either correct itself or would
    have to be surgically corrected at 1 year of age.  The surgical
    procedure would require use of the foreskin for grafting purposes.
    My son is now 7 months old and it looks as though his problem has
    more or less corrected itself, but we still have to wait until he's
    a year old to have him circumsized.  Yes, we will have it done at
    that time.  Why?, you may ask.  First of all, for religious reasons
    and secondly, I feel it's cleaner.
    
    Lori B.

    My husband was dead set against circumcision, so I set out to prove him
    wrong. I was brought up believing that the only boys that _didn't_ get
    circumcised, were different, that's all.

    Any way, I read everything I could get my hands on, trying to find
    medical evidence that circumcision is necessary.

    Nothing I read would back me up. The more I read, the more amazed I was
    that this procedure is strictly a cultural thing, not medical at all.

    I talked to my pedi and gyn and neither of them would say that it was
    absolutely necessary. The only thing that was brought to my attention,
    was the fact that in very rare cases, the uncircumcised boy may be
    prone to urinary tract infections more than a circumcised boy. That's
    it.

    Needless to say, Daniel is not circumcised, but you know... to this
    day, I wonder if I will regret my decision years from now. But, I guess
    that would be the case, even if we _did_ have Daniel circumcised.

    What's "in" today is "out" tomorrow. Make the decision between you and
    the baby's father. Those are the only people who should be involved in
    the process.

    By the way... The pedi would have done it, if we requested, _not_ the
    gyn. The pedi takes care of the baby, the gyn takes care of the mommy.
    
    Good luck,
    Norma 

>    By the way... The pedi would have done it, if we requested, _not_ the
>    gyn. The pedi takes care of the baby, the gyn takes care of the mommy.
 	
    	I was told that the OB would do it because they were surgeons and
    the pedi wasn't. 

    re: .17  Yup, that's what I was told as well.   My ob-gyn performed
    Jason's circumcision; his pedi said she didn't do them.
    
    cj/

    My OB did them as well as the PEDI so I had my choice.  But my OB said
    she didn't like to do it, so I chose the PEDI.  Now he says he doesn't
    like to do them either, but who would!  Poor baby!  I'm glad I didn't
    have to be in the room when they did Chase (2 days old).  He used a bell
    and a string, when I first heard of it I said WHAT!!  But it was a little
    plastic thing that goes over the tip and then a piece of string that
    wraps around and then it just falls off when it heals.  No cleaning
    fuss.  I'm happy with my decision to get it over with right away, and
    would do it again. (Our reason: to be like daddy and no infection
    worries)
          

    
    It depends on the state regulation...In Mass, circumcision has to be
    done by a physician that carries surgical malpractice insurance
    (when done in a hospital).
    Most pediatricians are not surgeons, thus do not carry the necessary
    insurance. So, the OB's do the circumcision, since they are surgeons.
    
    Eva.

    Thanks, all who wrote saying their OB did the circ.! I knew we were not
    crazy! I am 110% positive the OB did our eldest son, as my wife was
    right there watching the whole thing. But that was in NY state. I'm 99%
    sure it was the OB in Mass., as *he* came to talk to us about it, and
    *he* came in to tell us everything went fine, even though we didn't
    actually see it.
    
    It's the one defiance of the "pedi gets baby, Ob gets mommy" rule.
    
    --dave--

    I consider it mutilation.
    
    Of course, my earlobes have been "mutilated" (pierced) - but that was
    my decision, at age 14, and there's some chance that they'd grow back
    to a nonpierced state if I wanted to reverse my decision.
    
    As one of my grandmothers loved to say, "if you see something <insert
    deity> didn't put there, sew a green button on it."
    
    Leslie

    re .13
    
    Apparently some study indicated that partners of uncircumcised males
    were more likely to suffer cervical cancer.  I have my doubts.
    
    Anyway, I am one of those uncirced males who had problems when a
    baby.  The Dr made a small incision in the foreskin to open it up a 
    bit and that was the end of the problem.  The same thing was done for
    adhesions (all when i was a baby).  I have never had a problem in *my*
    memory.  I understand that a lot of Drs when presented with tight
    foreskin or adhesions take the circ approach as being a simple once
    and for all solution rather than the "let's fix just the problem" ...
    like doing a full mastectomy when a lumpectomy will do just as well.
    
    Stuart

   My husband is one of 6 boys, none of them circumcised at birth.  Over the
   years 3 of them have had problems, 2 resulting in circumcisions at an
   later age.  It's very painful as an adult, so they say.

   My two boys were both circumcised.  My husband thought it was best even 
   though he isn't.

   Both circumcisions were done by the ob.  I also had no problems with the
   dressing, my first boy's was done two days before I left the hospital and the
   gauze pad was already off.  In my opinion, the umbilical cord was alot
   harder to deal with.

   joan

    I have been attending some Prenatal Classes at the Hitchcock Clinic in
    Nashua NH.  One (titled "The Doctor is in") discussed this topic.  Here
    is some of the info that the Newborn Nurse told us:
    
    - The "delicate" procedure is done at 2 days old.
    - The baby is strapped onto a contoured table (naked)
    - Baby can not remember operation or pain at later date
    - Baby cries because it is cold & doesn't like being stretched out like
      that after being in the tuck position for so long.
    - More babies are having this done at Memorial Hospital in Nashua than
      aren't.
    - They haven't had any problems/infections after procedure is done.
    
    FYI - just heard that a friend of mine's sister had her baby done at a
    later date after much grief from friends/relatives and it cost $800.00
    somewhere in NJ because they considered it to be plastic surgery! The
    baby was only 2 months old!
    
    Good luck w/ decision.
    Sonia

    Both of my sons have been circumcised, and we're glad we did it.  Part
    so they'd look like dad, but mostly to avoid ANY possibility of it
    needing to be done when they could remember it.  Also, the locker room
    stuff was a concern.
    
    The OB did both of them.  With my first, no prob, he cried some, not a
    big deal, REAL easy dressing that fell off when the circ was healed. 
    With my second one, he screamed for about an hour afterwards, and the
    nurse made a very *LARGE* point to make *SURE* that I realized just
    WHAT I had put my poor baby through and was quite clear in letting me
    know that she thought I was a rotten mother.  I had more problems with
    her than with either circ.  
    
    Also, both boys have what is sometimes referred to as a short-circ,
    where they don't remove as much of the foreskin as might normally be
    removed, so there's some 'extra' skin, but not as much as a
    non-circumcised boy.
    
    ....I couldn't imagine a boy/guy having to go through that and
    _remember_ it!!
    
    Good Luck!!
    Patty
    
    p.s. I agree, the Umbilical cord was much worse to deal with

    According to my husband (hematologist/oncologist), the chances for
    cancer of the penis exists only among non-circumsised males.  Also,
    the rate of cervical cancer for female partners of uncircumsised males
    are probably greater (the data is not very certain).
    
    He also pointed out that not much cancer of the penis is seen these
    days and that given the possibility of any of the above, why not
    circumsise?
    
    

    We didn't have our baby circumcized.  I didn't have a strong feeling
    on it either way but since dad did, I left the decision up to him.
    Now I do have a strong opinion on it and feel good about not
    having him circumcized.  I've seen lots of naked baby boys since
    I've had Eric and it's been about a 50/50 split on circ'ed vs un.
    
    The pedi would have done it.  He asked if I was going to have
    Eric circumcized, I said "no", he said, "Good, I hate doing them".
    
    Donna

    
    re. 28
    
    I find your reply very biased. 
    My brother was circumcised when he was 8 after he had several
    infections. And that hurt like hell. Now, my parents are Chinese,
    they didn't believe in circumcision at birth until they went
    through the ordeal with my brother. Now, I know, that my
    brother wasn't an isolated incidence since there are a lot
    of urinologists in Hong Kong that specialized in circumcisions.
    So, if there is a chance that my son (I don't have one) has to 
    be circumcised due to medical reason, doing it at birth seems to be
    a better way. 
    
    Eva.

My grandfather died of cancer of the penis.  He was uncircumcised.  When I
was pregnant, we debated for a long time about circumcision.  We finally
decided *not* to circumcise.  I have never regretted it.

We called the American Cancer Society.  According to them, hygiene was never
taken into consideration with the studies of uncircumsized men.  Hygiene
apparently plays a very important part.

All you have to do to clean an uncircumcised penis is to pull back the foreskin
as far as it will go (which is about nil, when they are infants) and splash
some water on it.  That's it.  By the time our son was 2, he was pulling back
his own foreskin, and I was pouring a glass of water on it when he took a 
bath.

I consider circumcision unnecessary.  I don't believe in putting my children
through unnecessary pain, so if we have another son, we will not circumcise
him, either.

      Carol

    
    I find it interesting that there are so many people worried about
    the pain of a circ.  Considering all the pain that a child goes
    thru during the process of growing up I would consider the pain
    of a circ. to be a moot point or at most insignificant.
    
    As far as 'keeping clean':  Yes this help prevent problems, but it does
    not guarentee that all will be well for a lifetime. I'm sure most
    if not all of the examples of older circs shared in this note were
    not the result of poor hygiene.
    
    There is no right or wrong answer to the question
    
    Doug

    Both our boys are circumcized for religious reasons, though we had
    the procedure done in the hospital rather than on the eighth day
    as I'm told we should have.  The pedi did it both times.  Neither
    boy had any problems at all, either during or after.
    
    Steven cried quite a bit during the procedure -- I didn't watch
    but I could hear him from my room, and I was a bit upset until the
    next day, when they brought him in for his pre-going-home bath
    (where they check to make sure you won't do awful things like
    using soap on the baby's face when you bathe him) and he screamed
    bloody murder.  I mean, people from other rooms were coming to see
    what we were doing to this poor kid.  The crying during the
    circumcision was nothing compared to it . . . 
    
    --bonnie

    RE: .22 Mutilation?????  A little melodramatic phraseology, huh? 
    
    
    RE: .26 I'd have been in that nurses face as well as writing a letter
    to the hospital administrator.  
    
    RE: What's with all the set hidden notes?
    
    
    Weel, we had our son (now 4 days old) circ'd.  The reasons were- 1) we'd
    rather have it don now then later 2) so he'd be like dad.  
    
    A side note- there was a guy where we lived who sued his parents for
    having him circumcised. (It takes all kinds)
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike

>    
>    RE: What's with all the set hidden notes?
>    
Shall we just say that religion strayed a little too far into the subject
matter.

>    
>    A side note- there was a guy where we lived who sued his parents for
>    having him circumcised. (It takes all kinds)
>    
I'd have been a little perturbed if I had been ... not sufficient to sue
my parents ... but I can at least understand ...

Stuart

    Just a side note to one added earlier:
    
    - Memorial Hospital in Nashua has the Pedi doing the "delicate"
      procedure.  I was told that none of them "enjoy" doing it - but who
      would?
    
    
    
    Sonia
    
    
                               

    
    >I'd have been a little perturbed if I had been ... not sufficient to sue
    >my parents ... but I can at least understand ...
    
    Or more likely you would not have known any different and been
    indifferent after the fact.

    .37>> Mutilation?????  A little melodramatic phraseology, huh?
    
    Cutting off a body part which is not diseased, malformed, or dangerous
    to the organism in any way?  Without the informed consent of the
    patient?
    
    Shall we also remove tonsils and appendix of the neonate as a matter of
    course?  They can get infected in later life too, and it's *d@mned*
    inconvenient to have _those_ operations as an adult.
    
    I'm not talking about corrective surgery here, just the equipment that
    comes, in good working order, with the "base system."
    
    Leslie

    
    >Or more likely you would not have known any different and been
    >indifferent after the fact.
    
    Considering how I feel about unnecessary medical and pseudo-medical
    procedures, no ... I don't think I'd feel indifferent ... resigned
    to the fact it was done maybe, but not indifferent.
    
    After all is said and done, evolution has changed the length of toes,
    the height of the body, stopped hair growing over much of the body ...
    if the foreskin wasn't considered "necessary", surely it should have
    evolved away by now!
    
    Stuart

    re: .42
    
>    After all is said and done, evolution has changed the length of toes,
>    the height of the body, stopped hair growing over much of the body ...
>    if the foreskin wasn't considered "necessary", surely it should have
>    evolved away by now!
    
    Maybe it's like your appendix, no known function, but still there.
    
    Bob
    

re .-1

>    
>    Maybe it's like your appendix, no known function, but still there.
>                                      ^^^^^

I think you've said it in one .... just because we don't know exactly
what it's for doesn't make it useless and therefore a candidate for
routine surical removal without just cause like infection.

Maybe, since we don't know what we are here for, long term, we should just nuke
ourselves anyway, we'd save generations to come a lot of agony!

Stuart

    
>   Shall we also remove tonsils and appendix of the neonate as a matter of
>   course?  They can get infected in later life too, and it's *d@mned*
>   inconvenient to have _those_ operations as an adult.
>    Leslie
    
    Surely you're not comparing a Tonsilectomy (sp) or Apendectomy (sp)
    with a Circ! 
    
Re: Stuart-
        
>    Considering how I feel about unnecessary medical and pseudo-medical
>    procedures, no ... I don't think I'd feel indifferent ... resigned
>    to the fact it was done maybe, but not indifferent.
 
    I guess you'd have to be there see how meaningless to the affected
    individual this topic really is.
       
>    After all is said and done, evolution has changed the length of toes,
>    the height of the body, stopped hair growing over much of the body ...
>    if the foreskin wasn't considered "necessary", surely it should have
>    evolved away by now!
>    I think you've said it in one .... just because we don't know exactly
>    what it's for doesn't make it useless and therefore a candidate for
>    routine surical removal without just cause like infection.
    
    I think its pretty obvious what it is for. Protection. Cloths have taken 
    over this function. We no longer live a lifestyle which requires this
    protection and there has been no evolutionary event that would promote
    such a change.
    
    Doug
    
     
    
    Stuart
    

Doug,

>    I guess you'd have to be there see how meaningless to the affected
>    individual this topic really is.
>       

Of course it is meaningless after the fact ... unless someone comes up
with a mechanism for regrowing removed tissue.  As I said, I do not believe
in unnecessary surgery - never have, never will.  I see routine circumcision
as unnecessary surgery ... Many of the problems of the foreskin amongst
uncircumcised males can be solved with less radical surgery.  If I had been
done, I would probably still take this view.

>    
>    I think its pretty obvious what it is for. Protection. Cloths have taken 
>    over this function. We no longer live a lifestyle which requires this
>    protection and there has been no evolutionary event that would promote
>    such a change.
>    

Clothing has provided protection that hair was there for before too ... hair
has evolved away ...  And anyway just because clothes provide additional
protection does not mean that we should just simply do away with the foreskin.

I wouldn't go so far as some and say this is mutilation, because undoubtedly at
the time the procedure was started there was a perceived need.  I do not
believe that there is still that need today, but heritage plays a large role
as can be seen by some of the responses here ... whether the choice is for
ehtnic/religious reasons, or whether the choice is simply "to be like dad".

So, as with so MANY of these things, there are really only a few basic
arguments pro and anti the issue and if after presentation of the arguments
one way or another one hasn't evoked a change of mind, then we'll all have
to agree to disagree.  Evoking emotional cries like "Mutilation" and 
"Barbarism" is only going to make people ignore the facts and harden their
stand.

My last comment has got to be that it is interesting the number of doctors
that actually don't like performing the deed .... that must say something.

Stuart

    re: .48 and the last comment.
    
    I don't find it that "interesting" or telling at all.  I suspect
    that there's a lot of things that doctors and nurses "actually don't
    like" to do...but do, since they are either requested by the patient 
    or are medically necessary (drawing blood, urine samples, episiotomies,
    etc, etc.).    
    
    Carol 

    Stuart:

    My previous note was meant to show that some of the arguments in the
    not against Circ. are emotions and not logical. For instance, comparing
    a Circ. to the removal of an internal organ, or because it is
    mutilation 'without the consent of the individual', ect...

    It was also to answer the question of why there is a foreskin, and that
    is, in a primitive environment, it protects a rather sensitive part
    of the body from abrasion.

    The only rational arguments for/against in this note have been based
    on health issues, not emotions. Rational arguments are the ones that
    matter, not the emotional ones based on 'shadow logic'.

    Agree to disagree? I thought that was a prerequisite for notes
    participation :-)

    Doug.

    re .49, previous
    
    There's another point: what kind of reaction would a doctor get
    if he or she said "I like to do circumcisions"?  It sounds a bit
    kinky, doesn't it?
    
    		-John Bishop

    
    I did not see the "hidden" notes, but I suspect they were a reply to
    the suggestion that to circumcise is to "mutilate."
    
    Please be sensitive to the fact that in the Jewish religion, it is a
    terrible sin to leave the foreskin on--and as a result, most Jewish
    boys are circumcised.  To call this "mutilation" is to insult a
    religious ritual, and I don't think that is what "valuing differences"
    is all about.
    
    For those of you who think that a circ. causes a baby undue harm and
    pain, I will again reiterate what I said in an earlier note.  I
    attended a "bris" (the Jewish religious ceremony where the circ. is
    done 8 days after the birth, in the home) and watched the whole
    procedure.  The baby was given a cloth napkin that had been dipped in
    Maneshewitch (sp?) wine--the baby sucked on the napkin for about a
    second.  The moil (a combination pedi./rabbi) then performed the circ. 
    The baby did not make one sound--not a peep.  If that baby was in pain,
    you could have fooled an entire room of adults.  The baby seemed
    oblivious--went ot sleep for 2 hours--and when he awoke, breastfed very
    happily, thank you.  The "baby" is now 4 years old and does not look
    "mutilated" to me.  He is a happy, well-adjusted pre-schooler.  I'm
    sure that all the millions of circumcised men in this world would not
    consider themselves "mutilated" either.
    
    With advanced medical technology and knowledge, circumcision is one of
    those things that appears to be optional--although the AMA has recently
    begun recommending the procedure again. 
    
    Let us not be zealots and pretend to know what's best for someone else.
    If someone suggested to me that I not circumcise, I would take
    offense--as I would feel they were insulting my religion.  When a
    non-Jewish friend asked me my opinion on circumcision--and what she
    should do with her newborn boy--I was able to have a discussion with
    her based on what I know medically--and socially.  She decided not to
    circumcise.  We are still very good friends!
    
    Bonnie
    
    
    
    

    If a doctor said they liked doing them, I'd think they are not
    only kinky, but sadistic.
    
    What impressed me about the doctor saying, "Good, I hate doing
    them" is the fact that he said anything at all.  He could be
    indifferent and not comment as would probably be the case in many
    procedures (or he could push for a parent to have it done).  
    He didn't just say, "Oh, that isn't an enjoyable procedure for me 
    to perform", he stressed that he *hates* doing them.  That is a bit 
    stronger than what I'd expect.  
    
    Donna
    

    Doug and I have been engaging in some conversation out of notes on
    this because I was intending to not write another reply here but
    someting in his last note here I felt deserved attention.
    
    The one thing that came out of that discussion, leaving religion out
    of it, was that I see surgery, even as minor as a circ as a "drastic"
    procedure, and that he does not.  Bonnie's reply describing her
    attendance at the ceremony and the baby not crying at all lends
    credence to the idea that it isn't.  Others have probably seen it
    done and heard the baby howl its lungs out ... to them it is drastic.
    
    The point is that it is a polarized issue.  There really is no sense
    of half-way ... either you believe in it or you don't (except
    for drastic medical reasons requiring it).  You believe it's drastic
    or you don't.  You believe it's a sin not to or you don't.
    
    Doug rightly pointed out that the facts get clouded by the emotions.
    The facts are that
    
       . there is inconclusive evidence of health problems in uncirced
    males
       . there is inconclusive evidence of health problems in the female
    partners of uncirced males
       . there is inconclusive evidence that cleanliness of the penis
    may prevent these health problems
       . there are religious and ethnic requirements to circ
       . there are generation pressures and peer pressure requirements
    to circ (to be like other boys or like dad)
       . there is inconclusive evidence that babies may or may not suffer 
    pain from the procedure
       . there are no reported problems from having the procedure done
       . problems like unretractibility of the foreskin do occur (#s
    unknown)
    
    
    The emotions are numerous.
    
    I still don't believe in it, because I believe it's a drastic procedure
    to fix something that ain't necessarily broke, but at least now I do
    understand why others do believe in it, including Bonnie who indicated
    that it was considered a sin not to (you learn something new every day
    for I didn't realize how deeply embedded the requirement was ... and I
    think you'll find that a lot of people don't).
    
    So, has anybody got any real FACTS to add to this discussion ?  I think
    we've run the course on emotion.
    
    Stuart

    RE: Leslie-To compare a circumcision with an appendectomy or a
    tonsilectomy (In my opinion) is ridiculous.  The fact is that 
    there are good reasons for doing this as a preventitive measure.  
    That does not mean that everyone should or should not get it done, to
    each there own.  I think to call it "mutilation" is being very
    melodramatic.  
    
    Mutilate-To cut off or permenantly destroy a limb or essential part of.  
    
    
    You decide.
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike 

    Re. .55: Appendectomies are usually not preventative but tonsilectomies
    are frequently done under the guise of "preventing" future infections.
    In fact, my parents were wise enough to refuse to do a tons. on me and
    as a result I hardly ever get a cold (I can't even remember the last
    time I had one!) because my tonsils stop invading viruses. They may get
    a little swollen but that's it and the pain goes away quickly.
    
    As for circumcision, I was the cause of the hidden notes and all I'll
    say now is that there's way too much unnecessary surgery in this
    country from circ. to cesarean sections to hysterectomies. 

    RE: .56 "way too much unnecessary surgery done"
    
    I agree 100% with this, we've (our family) have had some experience
    along these lines.
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike

    re .55
    
    >The fact is that 
    >there are good reasons for doing this as a preventitive measure.  
    
    
    Mike,
    
    The fact you quote is not a fact at all, it is an opinion.  And
    we all have opinions, and we aren't expressing them very humbly at
    times, myself included here.  
    
    Let's stop debating whether the act is mutilation or not ... quoting 
    dictionary definitions is not going to make anyone change the way they 
    feel about it ... they'll just look for another word to express the same 
    feeling.  That's the whole point ... some people *feel* it's *like* 
    mutilation ... others like me feel that if something ain't broke why fix 
    it (and this isn't your ounce of prevention either.)  All you are trying 
    to do is to tell us we cannot or should not feel as we do.  But we do
    feel that way.  
    
    If you think we should change our mind, show us HARD facts.  Conversely, 
    for me to change your mind, hard facts are needed, and to be honest, apart 
    from those I summarized in .54, I don't know of any other *facts*.
    Maybe it's time we found out more facts, or just accept that some
    people believe in the procedure and others don't.  And to those that
    haven't decided, show them the facts as we know them and let them decide for
    themselves without blasting them with emotional arguments.  
    
    Stuart
    

Stuart, most of what you put down as facts are true.  However, I disagree
with a couple of them:

<<<< Note 749.54 by KAOFS::S_BROOK "Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME!" >>>
<
<       . there is inconclusive evidence that babies may or may not suffer 
<    pain from the procedure

The procedure is painful.  That is why the baby Bonnie watched was given
a drug (alcohol).  From what I have read in this and earlier versions of
PARENTING, if I was going to have my son circumcised, I would ask a Jewish
(moll?) to do it.  They seem to do it with the least amount of discomfort
and pain for the baby.

<       . there are no reported problems from having the procedure done

Actually, in a very small number of cases there is a problem.  The adult
performing the circumcision can botch the job and hurt the penis.  Again,
in the normal circumcision there is not a problem afterwards, but there is
always a risk.  In the book that Shellie looked at when we were considering
whether or not to circumcise, there were several photos of botched jobs.

         Carol

    OK ... let's reword this
    
    . there is inconclusive evidence that babies may or may not suffer 
    considerable pain from the procedure (after all it is usually
    performed without anaesthetic)
    
    
    And the other one was based on the satisfactory performance of a
    circ.  Botched circs will happen ... to make it a meaningful and
    useful fact I wonder what the numbers are.  (We seem incredibly
    devoid of solid numbers to attach to any of the so called statistics
    that everybody gets so worked up about when discussing this topic)
    
    Stuart

    Hi Stuart, I see nothing wrong with how I presented the information. 
    Sorry if you do.
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike

    What is wrong is entering opinion as fact.  What more can I say ?

    Ah, but it is not opinion.  There are substantial preventitive reasons
    for the procedure.  Just because you do not see them as such does not
    make them invalid.  You are making the mistake of presenting your
    judgement as fact.  There are risks of infection, this cannot be
    denied.  Anyway, enough of beating this dead horse.  Different people
    with ifferent interpretations.
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike

    
    C'mon folks.  I can't believe you are argueing whether or not the
    "procedure" is painful or not.  OF COURSE IT HURTS!  My goodness,
    you're cutting off a piece of skin from a body part--a rather sensitive
    body part.  I would think it hurts a lot.
    
    I am NOT OF THE SCHOOL who believe that infants feel no pain.  If I had
    a baby that needed surgery, I would INSIST that some medication be
    given for pain.  The same goes for a cicumcision.
    
    Yes, the baby I saw get circumcised was given a drug (wine=alcohol). 
    And it worked!  That baby felt no pain--or if he did, he certainly
    didn't care!  In my opinion, that's the way to go.
    
    One nit:  regarding a circ. as being "unnecessary surgery"...it isn't
    surgery.  It is illegal to perform surgery in a private home (ie: even
    if a woman is laboring in her own home--if a c-section is necessary,
    she's rushed to the hospital--and appendectomies or tonsilectomies are
    performed in hospitals).  A circ. is considered a "procedure," and
    therefore, can be done in a private home, or anywhere for that matter. 
    A circ. is not surgery.
    
    Bonnie
    
    

>    
>    One nit:  regarding a circ. as being "unnecessary surgery"...it isn't
>    surgery.  It is illegal to perform surgery in a private home (ie: even
>    if a woman is laboring in her own home--if a c-section is necessary,
>    she's rushed to the hospital--and appendectomies or tonsilectomies are
>    performed in hospitals).  A circ. is considered a "procedure," and
>    therefore, can be done in a private home, or anywhere for that matter. 
>    A circ. is not surgery.
>    

The legal definition of surgery has not really got a lot to do with the
technical term, except to distinguish what people think should be done
where.  After all the laws vary depending on where you are.  Surgery is
performed outside of hospitals very routinely in parts of Canada and
Europe and legally -- sometimes it's not exactly advisable to do so, but
that's another matter altogether.


Mike, you still don't get it do you ?  Never mind.


Stuart

In all the circumcision ceremonies I've knowingly attended, the wine was given
to the baby after the circumcision.  The baby has always cried, generally
starting well before the incision is made, usually while he's being undressed.

    
    In the 1 circumcision ceremony I attended, the wine was definetly given
    beforehand.  I think this is the way to go.
    
    If I have a boy, I will definetly try and get the same "moil" my friend
    used.  And hope for the same results!
    
    Bonnie
    
    

    re: .65
    
    Strange, I read the "Mike, you still don't get it do you?" and
    think the EXACT opposite (i.e. Stuart, you still don't get it,
    do you?).  
    
    My perception is that the "con" contingency see this as a black/white 
    situation and are rather condemning of those who chose circumcision 
    while the "pro" contingency recognize the "greyness" of the decision
    and are stating why THEY personally chose circumcision for their 
    offspring.   The "pro" group also seem to routinely mention that what
    is right for them, may not be right for others.   But having chosen
    to circumcize my son, I guess my perception may be skewed.   It is 
    interesting (to me, at least) that the 2 noters with the strongest
    opinions against circumcision have daughters only (to the best of my
    knowledge).
    
    Anyways, it is clear that neither camp is going to sway their opponent
    by further bantering.   So perhaps it might be of most benefit to the
    basenoter, to call a ceasefire and allow people to enter the opinions,
    experiences, and "facts" and let her decide!
    
    Carol  

    
    SURGERY  n.  The medical diagnosis and treatment of injury, deformity,
    		 and disease by the cutting and removal or repair of 
    		 bodily parts.
    
    

    
    The medical profession does not consider circumcision to be "surgery." 
    It is called a "procedure," and hence, in the United States, can be
    done outside of the hospital.  It can also be performed by someone
    outside the medical profession (ie: a moil) and done in a private home.
    
    Medically speaking, a surgical procedure can only be performed in the
    hospital or doctors office (for minor surgical procedures), in the
    United States anyway.
    
    

    re .68
    
    Have you really read what I wrote, because it sure doesn't sound like
    it ?
    
    My comment to Mike was based on his expression of opinion as fact.  He
    was trying to indicate that there were known preventive benefits from
    circumcision.  Any published information I have ever read has indicated
    that the studies for the problems related to not circumcizing were
    inconclusive.  Therefore, to state that there are known preventive
    benefits is not fact, but opinion.
    
    While I am anti the procedure, I thought I had made it clear in earlier
    notes that if you choose to have it done for religious or ethnic
    reasons, then I have no argument - you must live up to your beliefs.
    If you must have it done on medical grounds, then so be it (although
    not all problems actually require circumcision).  Now, for those who
    do it for fear of generation / peer pressure (to be like father or
    other boys), my only question is, are you happy that that is a valid
    reason?  (In my family it wouldn't ...)  If you are happy that it is
    a good enough reason to submit your baby to surgery, then so be it.
    
    Now, that only leaves those who do it as a "preventive measure". 
    Again, if you choose it for that reason, fine, although I'm not
    convinced that the reason is totally valid.  At one time, it may
    well have been.
    
    So, to me, the bottom line is that if you can decide from these things
    that you want to do it, then so be it.  I am not making a judgement on
    anybody because they choose to have it done, please understand that.
    I am sorry if it sounds that way.
    
    Stuart

    Hi Stuart,
    
          You don't get it either....I guess that means that each one of us
    is as pigheaded as the other :').  Here is an olive branch.
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike

    Also re .68
    
    >It is 
    >interesting (to me, at least) that the 2 noters with the strongest
    >opinions against circumcision have daughters only (to the best of my
    >knowledge).
    
    It is interesting isn't it ... that thought had occured to me too, but
    my decision that if we ever had a son that he wouldn't be circumcised
    was made LONG before we had our first daughter!  (And now, the discussion 
    is academic because we have no intention of trying for another ... !)
    
    >Anyways, it is clear that neither camp is going to sway their opponent
    >by further bantering.   So perhaps it might be of most benefit to the
    >basenoter, to call a ceasefire and allow people to enter the opinions,
    >experiences, and "facts" and let her decide!
    
    This isn't really a battle in the sense that you are implying, I am
    just trying to ensure that if someone looks at this issue they see
    the fact/opinion distinction.  Obviously for someone who has decided
    to do it, then, lacking hard facts, nothing will change their mind.
    
    As I've said before, I wish there were some hard facts out there on
    this subject ... there are just lots of inconclusive studies, opinions
    and emotion.

    Hi again Stuart,
    
    You were writing .71 as I was writing .72.  I thank you for backing 
    up what I presented as fact in your .71 (sorry but I'm feeling
    confrontational today :'))  
    
    In .71 you said "If you must have it done on medical grounds, then so 
    be it (although not all problems actually require circumcision)."
    
    In .55 I said "The fact is that there are good reasons for doing this
    as a preventitive measure.
    
    I submit to you and the jury that the risk of repetitive infection is,
    in fact a "good reason for having it done as a prevetitive measure."
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike aka Perry Mason :')

    OK Mike, I'll bite this last time ...
    
    >In .71 you said "If you must have it done on medical grounds, then so 
>    be it (although not all problems actually require circumcision)."
    
>    In .55 I said "The fact is that there are good reasons for doing this
>    as a preventitive measure.
    
>    I submit to you and the jury that the risk of repetitive infection is,
>    in fact a "good reason for having it done as a prevetitive measure."
    
    Now, I am not circumcised, nor are my brothers (I have 2), nor is my
    father.  None of us, as yet, have had a single infection requiring
    medical attention, let alone a repetetive infection.  That's nearly 160 
    man-years without problems.
    
    So, as I have said so many times, the evidence of health problems with
    uncircumcised males is inconclusive.
    
    Stuart

    
    
    Wow! A sampling of 4 men out of a planet of billions! That stat aught
    to hold up in court!
    
    What do you have to say to those in this note who has listed their
    family members as having infections and cancers? 
    
    Forgive me, but I must now perform surgery on my finger to remove
    a splinter :-)
    
    Just another brick in the wall ....
    
    Doug

    It is not unlike some doctors may recommend to certain women that
    they get a masectomy as a preventative measure against breast cancer.
    Now to some that is unneccessary surgery, but if the woman has lost
    a mother and sisters to breast cancer she may think it is a good
    idea.  It is a matter of whether you think the potential for a problem
    outweighs having the procedure done.  If there is any chance of
    problems than without it than the procedure can be called preventative.
    It is whether it is necessary/reasonable that is debateable I think.
    	Linda

OK, call me a sucker.  I'll join this (rather pointless) exchange  8^{).

I remember reading that there is a slightly higher incidence of urinary
tract infections among uncircumcised males than circumcised.  Also a
slightly higher risk of certain cervical problems among the wives of
same.  However, the actual risk was not mentioned.  I have the impression
that it was 1:1000 vs. 1:1002 or some other such VERY small difference.
That being the case, there is not a very strong argument in favor of
the procedure for preventative reasons.

However, for those of us who plan on having our sons (should any come along)
circumcised for religious reasons (that includes me), it is nice to know
that there is some (albeit minor) medical benefit.

Dick

    re .52 & .64, especially -
    
    My intent was not to insult any religion or individual, but to state
    how I feel about the practice of circumcision (opinions were requested
    in the basenote).
    
    For me, tradition (or, "because we've always done it that way") does
    not validate a practice, "procedure", or ritual; I don't feel that
    repetition lends credence or logic.
    
    Valuing differences is, to me, a concept of laissez-faire, not a
    blanket endorsement/espousal/participation in everyone else's belief
    systems and rituals.  I reserve the right to disagree with, or even
    find ludicrous, the practices of individuals, groups, societies, or
    religions.  But I won't interfere with, or try to change, those
    practices unless they threaten me or my family in some way.  So.  This
    relates to circumcision as follows: if I ever give birth to a son,
    don't anybody come NEAR him with a knife!
    
    L.W.

    re .76
    
    Oh come on Doug!  Sure, on a statistical basis, it's pretty crummy,
    but to be honest, I can't say I've heard of anyone personally who has 
    had problems either.  Again that's not saying a great deal either ... 
    after all who goes around shouting that they have a UTI ...
    
    What this does tend to indicate is what most info I've read on the
    subject states .."inconclusive".
    
    Going back to the (only slightly) similar comparison with
    tonsillectomy,  I have had lots of tonsil infections, and I probably
    should have those out, I admit it, but that doesn't mean that just
    because they are prone to infection that they should be taken out.
    I know, it's a more drastic procedure and so shouldn't be compared,
    people are yelling.  Let's go a little more simple ... let's shave off
    everybody's hair and all go around bald.  Everybody is less likely
    to suffer from dandruff, sebbhoraeic (sp?) dermatitis, and head lice.
    We'd save lot's of health care money, we'd save lots on shampoos, we'd
    save lots on electricity for hair driers.  Let's pull fingernails and
    toenails off ...  no more in-grown toenails or hangnails.
    
    Why are we saying here, for the sake of a probable lack of a little
    hygiene, that we know better than nature and do a circ ???  How many
    other things in nature should we "fix"?
    
    Stuart

    Just a word from personal experience. When they instruct you on how to
    care for the circumcision - ask some questions. I assumed that when they
    told me to put petroleum jelly on the end of his penis to help heal it
    - thats all that was needed, and that is just what I did. What they failed
    to tell me was that you need to draw back the extra skin and then apply
    it. I left the extra skin alone and my son developed adhesions from the
    cut to the normal skin. Pulling the skin back after it had partially
    attached itself was a no-fun task. At one point I made an incredibly
    stupid decision on how to assist the skin in separating and almost
    resigned as a father on the spot (of course, this was the day after I
    banged his head on the crib).
    JR      

    
    Sorry Shawn,
    
    No personal attact on you. I entered the note (.76) as an expression of
    the direction this note is taking. I think Dick said it best in .78
    
    

re: .0

>    Any information would be helpful!
    
Are you sure?    :^)


re: .81

Thanks for entering an informative note.  

Clay

<    interesting (to me, at least) that the 2 noters with the strongest
<    opinions against circumcision have daughters only (to the best of my
<    knowledge).
    
Because of my writing style, it may not be obvious, but I, too, have *very*
strong opinions against circumcision, and I currently have 1 son, and will
probably have another.

          Carol dB

    
    I really think this topic has gotten out of hand....why doesn't
    everyone wait a day or two before replying...or just: 
    
    	AGREE to DISAGREE
    
    Everyone has a personal preference (or religious reason) on this
    issue and NO ONE PERSON is going to change the other person's mind.
    
    This yo-yo back&forth replying is getting real TIRESOME!  Just let
    it go!....8*)
    
    

    
    Speaking of disagreements....................................
    
    When I was pregnant last year my Mother-in-law insisted that all boys
    should be circumcised because it was unsanitary not to.  I laughed so
    hard I almost fell off my chair.  I guess her memory has eluded her.
    Neither of her sons are circumcised, and both son's refused to have
    their son's circumcised.....
    
    Rochelle                                      
    
    P.S. I still haven't reminded her of the facts!

Circumcision in the U.S. became popular for the same reason as Graham Crackers
and Corn Flakes were invented:

to prevent masturbation!!!!  (no kidding!)

        Carol

ok. I'll bite.  How do Corn Flakes and Graham Crackers prevent masturbation?

    They don't really,  but both Kellog and Graham were health nuts
    and were very concerned with the problem of 'self abuse' in
    young men. 
    
    They had a theory that proper diet would prevent it - and
    thus the invention of graham flour and crackers and corn flakes.
    
    Bonnie

Speaking of Kellogg (correct spelling, remember the jingle?), my father picked
up a gynecological journal from the late 1800's at a garage sale.  There are
several ads for sanatariums, including one for Kellogg's.  I don't know how
targeted their advertising was (if it was, they obviously wouldn't have
mentioned "self-abuse" in a GYN journal), but at least one sanatarium
advertised that they treated opium addiction.  This was when narcotics
were available over the counter, and many patent medicines contained large
amounts of alcohol and opium.

    
    My son Stephen is almost 3 and has what is called phimosis.  He is 
    uncircumcised and his opening in his foreskin is too small, so when
    he has an erection his penis hurts.  Ideally he will out grow this 
    as he gets older, but I'm not so sure. (The opening is very small).
    
    I'm dreading the possibility of a circumcision at age 3 or 4.  Any
    similar experiences?  I had such a hard time deciding whether to
    circumcise him or not and the day after he was born my OBG. laid a
    real guilt trip on me about wanting to circumcise him so I didn't.
    Not a nice thing to do to a mother recovering from childbirth.
    
    Well, I'm sure he'll be fine.  We are so blessed in everything else
    I really can't complain.
    
    Karin

	I replied earlier in this topic.  My son also had Phimosis.  He 
could not be circumcised at birth (although I wasn't going to anyway) due 
to some other problems he had.  So when we noticed the "ballooning" during 
urination, I mentioned to our pediatrician.  She said he'd outgrow it also. 
She suggested I "pull it back" often to get it to open up.  After he was 
about 6 months old, I had had about enough from that ped. and found a new 
one.  The new one took one look and sent us to a specialist.  The 
specialist took one look and scheduled the surgery.  He even took a picture 
of the condition because he said it was a classic case.  The circ. was not 
a major removal--just a small cut to open up the foreskin.

Bottom line.....Sometimes a second opinion (or third) is worth it.  I would 
think your son would have "outgrown" it by now if he was going to.  The 
first  Pedi. kept telling me if it hadn't changed by a year old it 
wouldn't.

Anyway, that's my experience,


Nancy

    Holy Smokes...(no pun intended) This is QUITE a number of replies to
    one subject!!
    
    From my personal knowledge, I remember being told in school that infant
    nerve endings DO NOT develop until after they are older than 48 hours,
    if this is the case, in theory the Circ Should NOT hurt!  I'd venture a
    guess that what the infant is crying about is probably that he is COLD!
    When AJ was first at home he was extremely lethargic, what we didn't
    know is that he had an infection brewing, and his visiting nurse would
    come to the house and routinely undress him to wake him up, and wake
    him up she did....ususally complete with being pee'd on by my now naked
    son!  Plus she always manage to get him to exercise his lungs-Bigtime!!
    
    In our circumstances I was asked somewhere during my prenatat visits if
    I would Circ the child, if it were a boy.  I answered I would without
    ANY hesitation.  As it turned out, AJ had both bowel and bladder
    problems as birth defects, so circ wasn't performed until he was
    several months old, and then in two or three different stages. (see the
    note on Hypospadeus).  His was done by the Urologist, and at this point
    you can't tell that his circ was done in several stages, or anything
    other than the customary way.
    
    I do have a friend who's son had to have one around age 7 or 8, it was
    Day Surgery, I will never forget the look of fear and pain I saw in
    that child's face when his mother and I walked into recovery following
    the surgery, or the several days of recouperation following.  My
    opinion is to do it, and do it before they are 48 hours old.
    
    Lyn
    (who appreciated all the wide and varying opinions)
    

    >From my personal knowledge, I remember being told in school that infant
    >nerve endings DO NOT develop until after they are older than 48 hours,

today this is thought to be false.  under this belief, open heart surgery 
and other procedures were done with no anesthesia.  there is an eye-opening
article on this topic in a 1990 issue of "Mothering".

the idea makes me ill.

=ss

    re. pain
    
    I don't particularly like to remember it but my daughter showed
    sensitivity to pain from day 1.  She was a premature baby and spent
    over a month in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. 
    
    From the start, she was poked and probed -- IVs for medications and 
    nutrition, hypodermics for blood tests, etc.   These invasive
    procedures clearly hurt her, for she would cry out when they were done.
    Fortunately, her distress didn't seem to last long.
    
    Emily's dad
    
                                  
    
    
    
    
    

    I hear alot of sympathy for those who were circumcised at an age old
    enough to remember it. I was circ. at the age of 12 and I do remember
    it!  It was not a big deal physically. I was sore for a couple of weeks
    afterwards but it was not a big deal. I have suffered more pain during
    dental procedures, (how about some sympathy for that!)  At the time I
    was circ. (mid 1950's) most boys were circ. so I was one of the
    different ones. There were some comments at camp and group shower
    situations..... nothing heavy duty but enough to make me feel
    different, and, that was important to a 12 year old.  So, having it
    done was positive for me because it helped make me 'one of the guys'.
    
    Now the frequency seems to be about 50/50 so no one group will stand
    out for comments.
    
    We decided to have our son circ. at birth in 87 because, yes, then he would be
    'like Daddy' and not subject to the comments I was.  In 87 I was not
    aware that thinking in the U.S. on this issue had changed so much
    against it.  I still would have had it done even had I known about the
    swing away from it. According to an article in the New England Journal
    of Medicine, (May 1990) there is an increased risk of penile and
    cervical cancer (with uncirc. mens' woman partners) for uncirc men.. Take it for what
    its worth, I read it in a reputable Journal. 
    
    For every pro there is a con... this does not seem to be an issue
    which can be undisputably argued EITHER way.
    
    For the people who cry 'mutilation' I think its little different than
    piercing your ears.  
    
    "Hurting baby" it seems a bigger deal to the parents than the baby.
    Our son was unaffected by the post circ. effects.
    
    I agree with the others who have said do what is right for your family
    and you... you won't do wrong no matter which you decide.
    
    Jeff

    I am updating my reply from a few notes back.  My son Stephen had
    phimosis which is when the foreskin doesn't detach.  We went to a
    urologist and he was circumcised last Monday July 8th.  It was
    a day surgery at Children's Hospital and he did great.  He is 3 years
    old and has been so brave.
    
    My problem is it has been over a week and the tip is still raw and
    sore.  How long does it take to heal?  He was potty trained last
    December and now is afraid to go to the bathroom because it might hurt.
    He's had a number of accidents so I got some of the disposable pull-ups
    and said they were special underwear so he doesn't seem to mind.  He
    WILL NOT wear a diaper.  The worst problem is if he doesn't have enough
    ointment on it will stick to his underwear and then it hurts to take it
    off.  I feel terrible for him.  Any suggestions or words of
    encouragement?
    
    Karin

    
    Timothy (also three years old) recently went through this.  As with
    your Stephen, Tim had day surgery (we were in the hospital by 7, out by
    9:30 or so!)..  he _also_ had the rawness for a while; I'd make a guess
    that it was 2-3 weeks worth.  Apparently, releasing the adhessions
    between the foreskin and the tip of the penis is what creates all the
    rawness (it _looked_ SORE!); we tried to keep the ointment slathered on
    pretty thickly along with gauze when possible.
    
    -- John
    

    I know this is late, and I do hope all the *boys* are recovered by now,
    but since AJ's circ had to be done in about 3 stages we had lots of
    experience and can offer "tips of the trade"...
    
    We kept Xerofoam Gauze, which is gauze manufactured with petrolium
    jelly and kept the tip of his little penis wrapped in it.  Now of
    course he wasnt' trained at that point, but I still wrapped it so the
    place where the urined came out (sorry if this is gross) was exposed
    enough.  We also added a layer of Triple Anitbiotic, which is
    Bacitracin, Polymixin and somthing else, before putting the gauze on.  
    Bacitracin by itself would also work just as well I suppose.
    
    The Xerfoam guaze is available at most bigger drugstores, or surgical
    supply house, no prescription needed, in our case the hospital gave us
    enough to get through it.
    
    Good luck!
    Lyn

    The following reply has been contributed by a member of our community
    who wishes to remain anonymous.  If you wish to contact the author by
    mail, please send your message to QUARK::MODERATOR, specifying the
    conference name and note number. Your message will be forwarded with
    your name attached  unless you request otherwise.

				Steve






My son was not circumcised at birth.  The drs. told me (and I'm not questioning
this) that unless it was religiously desired or physically necessary, it's not
as "standard" a deal as it used to be, so it was my choice and I chose not to
subject him to that.

Now he's almost 7.  We've been waiting to see if things would get better on 
their own but at his latest regular checkup, the dr. says the time for waiting 
is over.  The foreskin on his penis is extremely tight (as the dr. put it, it 
doesn't GET much tighter than his !) and we're going to see a pediatric
urologist the week after next to have something done.

I don't know WHAT will be done yet, and won't till we talk with the specialist.
I'm wondering

	1 - does anyone have any ideas of the possibilities ?
	2 - has anyone had to go thru this with their child ?
	3 - what do people think of Dr. Diamond of UMass ?
	    [Note from moderator - please respond by mail to this question.]
	4 - how can I get over feeling guilty that I "caused" this by
		not having things done differently when he was born ??

Any words of wisdom or any actual knowledge someone can impart would be most
appreciated.  I'll post more info if people are interested after the visit
with the specialist.

thanx
a worried mom

    
    I think you have to understand that once in a while, the need for
    late circumcision becomes apparent much much later, as in your case.
    Are you a clairvoyant that you could have foreseen it? I think not.
    So, try terribly hard not to blame yourself for the decision not
    to do it at birth.
    As previous notes have stated, many health professionals hesitate 
    to perform this procedure and usually advise against it, unless there
    is a tradition to follow, or the parents are very convinced it is
    necessary. 
    
    Even with the history of this type of problem in our family (my husband
    and cousin BOTH had to have it done at 25!) my husband decided against
    it for any male children we might have. The chances are still too 
    small.  
    
    Like any surgical procedure for small children, I am sure you are
    greatly concerned; but let your doctor calm your fears -- it is 
    not a terribly dangerous or horrible procedure. From what my husband says,
    it is much more preferrable to have this procedure over with now,
    than have it done to a male who is already sexually active.
    
    Monica
    
    

    First, and foremost, spare youself the guilt.  As someone said
    previously you had no way to know this was going to happen.
    
    Now as for dealing with this at age 7, somewhere in all these replies I
    have entered this, but for an encore here goes:  I have a close friend
    whose son was circumcised at 7, done in one of the Boston Hospital.  He
    was miserable for the day of and a few days later, I won't sugar coat
    that one, but he did well, went on to graduate from West Point, and has
    since married and fathered two children.  Anatomically, you can't tell
    whether his circ was done at birth or at even 18!  it looks the same.
    
    As for the Dr, I have nothing but positive experiences with both he and
    the hospital, please contact me off line, browse through my replies in 
    this note, and the ones on Hypospadius and UTI's.  My son had to have his 
    circ done  in 3 different stages.  There are at least two other noters who
    have dealt with this wonderful man.
    
    I guess this is a case of whatever fears, guilt or anxiety you have try
    above all not to let your son know of them, it will only increase his
    fears and anxiety.
    
    Lyn   

    RE: .101
    
    My son Stephen age 3, was circumcised in July.(see replies .93, .98).
    
    I too felt guilty.  Why hadn't I done it at birth...I should have known
    there would be a problem...etc.  It is such an awful feeling.
    
    Well, Stephen was very brave, and it took around 2-3 weeks to heal.
    At the time it felt like an eternity but now looking back on the
    experience it wasn't so long.  
    
    Just remember to keep the tip moist all the time so it doesn't stick
    to his underpants.  Keep you chin up, the time will pass quickly!
    
    Please send me mail if you have any questions or if you just want to
    talk.
    
    Karin

    Thought I would add a brief note on the subject...
    My son was born 6 days ago, and was circumcized the day after.  I
    talked briefly with the OB that performed the circ... he mentioned that
    he hated doing circumcisions (an earlier note mentioned a similar MD's
    opinion), but the reason he didn't like to do them was because they
    had to undress the baby and then strap them down to a board, which was
    no fun for either doctor or patient.  He also mentioned that his son
    was circumcized, so I figured if it was good enough for the doc...
    
    Stan

For a different (*very* different) perspective on circumcision, see
Dave Barry's column on the subject.  It's note 713 in HYDRA::DAVE_BARRY
(KP7 or SELECT to add to your notebook).

    I noticed this subject and boy did it bring back memories!  
    
    Because my husband is not circumcised (he's from Mexico) and because
    I questioned the process in general, I did alot of research with
    several doctors (including a pediatric urologist) and friends/family
    regarding this.  This was 5 years ago, but at that time the attitudes
    were definately changing about circumcision.  
    
    After all the inquiries and reading I decided against it. 
    Unfortunately 14 months later I was forced to have my son circumcised
    due to the fact that he kept having infections under the foreskin.
    My pediatric urologist said that my son was a one-in-a-million child
    who just happened to be born with a very "snug" foreskin, and for
    that reason was especially prone to infection.  Isn't life funny?!
    I mean we're talking about a kid who was bathed nightly, diapered
    at the drop of a hat, and his foreskin was too tight!!  
    
    Daniel was circumcised on April Fool's Day, 1988......!!!!   :)
    
    (BTW-he was under anesthesia when it was done.)
    
    -Elizabeth