Circumcision

Insanemomof3 wrote: Just curious on this subject! Hope I did this right.

5littleladies replied: I don't have any boys yet and with the way things have gone so far don't know if I EVER will (lol) but dh and I have decided to circumcise any little guys that come our way.

CantWait replied: nope don't agree with it, I don't see the point in it. I've seen way to many videos of it being done. I did a lot of research before we made a decision, and so far it how worked out for the best.

CantWait replied: P.S. Interesting topic, I'm surprised it hasn't come up before now.

MommyToAshley replied: I would say yes. But since I didn't have a boy, I didn't look into it...we knew Ashley was a girl.

mustangmomma1981 replied: If our second baby happens to be a boy. Then yes we plan on having it done.

MomToMany replied: I don't want this to turn into a debate, but I had it done to all my sons. I personally think it's more hygienic and I also think it looks a lot better. That's just my opinion.

Schnoogly replied: As soon as we found out we were having a boy I did a lot of research and decided that it was unnecessary and painful. But I wanted DH to decide because he has the same equipment, and he's circ'd, so I told him to research it first and he came up with the same decision--not necessary, and painful for the baby! IMO because it "looks better" isn't a good enough reason to cut a tiny baby's penis. I understand that many people have religious reasons for doing it, and that seems a better reason to me (though not a great one--many people circumcize their daughters in this world for religious reasons--just b/c your culture does it doesn't make it right IMO)

Also, when Iain was born with his heart defect we wouldn't have been able to circ him anyway--too much risk of infection before and between surgeries. They would have done it at the same time as his OH surgery had we wanted it.

I personally think that if you get it done you should be there with your baby to comfort him. My OB does all the circs and I always see weepy parents waiting for their baby to get circed in the waiting room--if it bothers them that much why do they do it??

I feel pretty strongly about this, sorry to offend anyone. I think too many people get their kids circed without even thinking about it or considering the option of not circing.

mummyof2boyz replied: Both of my sons had it. I am thinking that the doc did somethng wrong with Logan though. He is inverted now. I was reading on it and came across a few sites that said that if they took to much skin off that it could make it inverted. I am hoping he has no trouble as an adult. I am also think he may have a smaller then usual penis. I feel bad. I am going to bring it up at his next DR appt. in Aug. Anyone else know anything about this?

jcc64 replied: I have 2 uncircumsized boys, and one uncircumsized husband. Never had a problem with any of them. I agree with you, Stephanie! BTW, how's Iain's reflux?
Peace,
Jeanne

supermom replied: I have to agree with Schoongly - it's neither medically necessary or makes for more 'cleanliness' although for medical reasons, we did have to have our oldest son done. He had a slight birth defect and they used part of his foreskin to correct it, thereby circumsicing him in the process. However, this was done under general anesthesia, and was done when he was about 18 mos old. The youngest one is not circumsised, and had my DH wanted it done, we would have really had a major discussion on our hands. I don't see how ppl can say that it doesn't hurt, when the babe is crying the whole time they are doing it. There is far more incidence of infection from that, there isn't any special things you need to do for non-circumsised boys, it's not at all difficult to keep 'clean'!

Sure hope I dind't get anyone else riled up, that's just my -

Schnoogly replied:
Well he hasn't been diagnosed with it (though I still suspect a little) but the new formula (Alimentum, hypoallergenic) and my dairy-free diet seem to be helping a lot, so maybe dairy was making the reflux worse. He eats a lot easier now (most days, he still has some off days) and is sleeping better at night, though still hates to nap during the day!
Thanks for asking!!

Steph

Schnoogly replied:
Yes my nephew had a similar problem and was circed at 9 months old. He got constant infections, and the doc told my SIL this was very rare. He was also under a general. In most cases there is nothing you need to worry about as far as cleaning, and it sure is easier to take care of when they're infants--no bandages or ointments necessary!!

Steph

MomofTay&Sam replied: I have two sons and they are both *snipped*. 10 years ago I was not allowed to watch my first son during this process. 6 months ago we did watch my baby being done. He did not cry and it was over in a matter of seconds. I know everyone has their own belief but I feel it is best for my son's. If I have another son I would do it again. That is why it is done early in life, they have no memory. We have alot of Jewish friends who have a *brisk* and thats just part of their life/family. I say to each their own no matter the religion or belief. JMO

Hillbilly Housewife replied: Zach isn't circumsized - I have a problem with the so-called *mutilation* or body parts. I don't have problems with other people making their baby go through it, I just wouldn't put my boys through that, simply because I saw too many videos on it (awareness videos for 3rd world countries) and I am disgusted with the process.

It's NOT painless. Cut the hood of your clitoris off, and tell me that didn't hurt...kwim?

Sorry, I don't mean to offend anyone, but it's not about health. If Zach would have been one of those unlucky babies who have penile infections all the time, maybe then we would have considered it, but we have not had a problem, so it's not an issue. And even if it had been an issue, I would have demanded he get an anasthetic. Wouldn't you want to be frozen, or asleep if someone did that to you?

It's not in my religion to circumsize. My brother is circumsized, my dad is circumsized, DH is not. Those questions from the child about *why does daddy's look different?* wouldn't be raised, because by the time the child is old enough to start thinking of those questions, it would have been a long time since they would have seen those parts. It's great to be comfortable with one's own body, but I don't want to show myself to my son. You know? It's just not MY way.

booey2 replied: We had both boys done and both never cried, they put a topical freezing ointment on them before they snipped. And I would do it again.

msjennbug replied: Our son was circ'd and if we have any more sons they will be as well. We use a mohel and strived to have it done on the eighth day (mohel wasnt in town on 8th day, though).

sara294 replied: If I had had my son first I probably would have circumcised.Thankfully I had my dd,and the 3 years it took TTC ds I started looking more into what circumcision really meant,and exactly what I was cutting away.Despite being jewish and having a muslim dh I am happy to say I have an intact son with no health problems despite dire warnings. Ofcourse the battle will never be over thanks to relatives,but I will prevail and raise intactavists who will be able to protect themselves and their future off spring.
We are currently looking into other religions,because I could not bring myself to raise the kids in religions that require genital cutting.
Sara

Mommieto2Girls replied: Well I am all for it. When I have a son he will been snipped .

paradisemommy replied: ds was snipped and i would do it again. that's all i'm gonna say because i don't wanna get into this debate

on another note - my nephew was snipped when he was about 8 days old - he was a little premature and only 5#s, well being that small - they didn't have much to work with and so consequently, the past couple years he has had infections that were really "itchy" so he is now about 8 or 9 yrs old and had to get recircumcised..my sister said the surgery went well and he came out of it just fine.

Kirstenmumof3 replied: We had our son circumcised and had Claudia been a boy we would have done it now too! When my sister had her baby (he is now 12) the nurses guilted her into not having him circumsised. He had several problems and at the age of 6 he had to have it done! It was the most painful thing I have ever had to witness on a little boy! It was so tramatic for him and the doctor even screwed up! He is fine now! It's not as painful as they say, my DS slept right through his!

Anyway that's just my opinion! But I have another question to ask how many of you that have little girls get their ears pierced?

Kaitlin'smom replied: not that I am gonna have more kids but if I were to have a son he would not be cut, snipped, mulitated, what ever you wish to call it. I just dont want to do it/dont agree with it.

Mommieto2Girls replied:

I had Madison's ears pierced at 9 weeks old.

Kaitlin'smom replied:

nope dont have hers pierced and wont until she wants them, to me thats her decision not mine to make.

supermom replied:
Nods, both of my girls were old enough to know what they were getting when they got their ears pierced.

MamaMartie replied: We have 2 boys and both were circumcised. I left it up to my dh and he felt really strongly about having them done. I probably wouldn't have done it just b/c it seems like it would hurt. But I am glad they were done, and glad that my dh made the decission.

grandpa2003 replied: It is good to see the variety of views and the easy sharing you are doing on this difficult topic. I hope you won't mind an old man's view being added.

I was born in an era when circumcision was almost universal. I grew up swimming naked at the 'Y' and in many situations of up to 100 boys I was unique in being uncircumcised. (My Mom was quite willing to have me done as a baby but the doctor 'forgot')

As has been said, for most males, circumcision is not a necessary procedure. In my case my foreskin was very long and very tight and while not adherent, it was difficult and unpleasant to retract. As a result I experienced a few minor infections which blessedly went away on their own.

I was 19 when my Mom had a little 'heart-to-heart' chat about the subject of circumcision. (My father had passed away when I was fifteen). She expressed a concern because my Dad had had a prolonged infection and had been circumcised when I was twelve. She felt that my fair skin and propensity for skin rashes made it likely that I would, sooner or later have problems and require a circumcision like my Dad. She thus had contemplated having me done at the same time as he got his but as I was away at camp during his surgery she put it off and then had dropped the matter when my father became fatally ill.

She was now anxious that I see about it. While I had no serious objection to joining all my peers who were circumcised long before I was, I found myself nervous and embarrassed and kept putting it off. After a necessary ultimatim she arranged an appointment for me with her doctor. A review of my history and a thorough examination in which my somewhat 'phimotic' foreskin was diagnosed led to a promptly scheduled surgical date.

The surgery and my recovery was unremarkable but quite unpleasant for me as a young man. I also found that there was 'a period of adjustment' for me to get used to being circumcised after so many years with a protective skin covering.

When I married a few years later I found my wife to be a strong proponent of male circumcision and happy that I had been done before we were married! Fortunately my minor difficulties with a foreskin were gone forever with my circumcision. My wife had our son circumcised and I must say that today, my only regret is that I was not circumcised at birth.

I hope I am the first to acknowledge that the nature of my problems was uncommon and most uncircumcised males never experience any difficulties. In my case, however, it would have been a useful preventative procedure.

This is a very personal choice to be made by all parents and still practiced on a majority of North American males (as well as Philippino and Korean males, not to mention all Jewish and Muslim males). While the procedure is not necessary it is also a very minor matter and those of us who have been circumcised are certainly not worse off for it! Best wishes to all in your decisions.

Doug

DansMom replied:
After doing research and talking to men I know who are and who are not circumcised, I decided to leave Daniel intact.

I've found this to be a very touchy subject among my friends, each mother feeling defensive about the decision she has made. Even though I feel strongly that I made the right choice for my family, I also realize that I'm unlikely to influence anyone who has already made the decision or had the procedure done.

I did discuss this with my much younger sister when she was pregnant, and persuaded her toward my point of view, but not her husband. Then they had a girl, so it wasn't an issue.

On ear-piercing, because I had so much fun getting my ears pierced at age ten (and getting a third piercing in my ear at age 12), I would want to let her make that decision when she is a bit older.

victoire2002 replied: We decided NOT to have Aidan circ'd because my husband, as my husband said

"Well, we wouldn't do that to a girl, so why would we do it to a boy?"


When he phrased it this way, I changed my mind and decided that it really was not a good decision for us to circ our boy. If it were for religious reasons, maybe, but we don't have that in our faith, so why do it for aesthetic reasons when it's painful for the baby, and quite possibly removes nerve endings (sensory pleasure!)

DH is circ'd and still doesn't think it's right.

Not to debate, just my opinion.

amynicole21 replied: No sons yet, but I am really opposed to doing it. I'd be interested in any info or links someone could give me on the topic, though. I'm trying to gently "persuade" my friend against it. Of course, it's her choice, I just want her to be as informed as possible. amynicole21@yahoo.com

alice&arik replied: i had arik snipped just because that's what i think should be done. He had it done when he was 2 days old. The doctor said they use some numbing gel. like oragel but different. arik was fine through the whole thing. he wasn't crying when he came back.

Hillbilly Housewife replied: Doug - that was very enlightening, thanks!

For everyone else - I agree that it is a personal choice, and I do not bear grudge against anyone's decision, but I have to agree with the sentence:

[QUOTE]"Well, we wouldn't do that to a girl, so why would we do it to a boy?" [/QUOTE]

I never thought of it that way either - I just figured that DH isn't cir'd, why should his son be any different? Then I read up on the subject:

The foreskin is a protective covering, it's there for a reason - and besides:

Most penile infections are due to OVERcleaning of the area under the foreskin. Smae reason why women who *douche* often are more prone to vaginal infections. The body is made to cleanse itself, and removing the foreskin is akin to remoing part of the labia.....

I'm bored a lot at work, so I read up on all kinds of things like that......

OklahomaSooners replied: it HAS been proven within the medical community that uncircumcised men have more of a chance of contracting a yeast infection AND urinary tract infections. Now, it may not happen to your son, or your friends' son.. but it does happen. My best friend just got back from a medical conference in New Orleans, and circumcision was a huge topic at this conference.

Just because there's a chance your son might not be prone to the infections.. does that justify not getting it done? and comparing it to lobbing off the top of a baby girl's clitoris is a terrible analogy. Last I heard.. the presence of a clitoris did not heighten the chances of a yeast infection or urinary tract infection.

amynicole21 replied: Not trying to start any kind of debate... this is such a touchy subject But here is some info on cleanliness from http://www.nocirc.org/ ...

"One of the most common myths about circumcision is that it makes the penis cleaner and easier to take care of. This is not true. Eyes without eyelids would not be cleaner; neither would a penis without its foreskin. The artificially externalized glans and meatus of the circumcised penis are constantly exposed to abrasion and dirt, making the circumcised penis, in fact, more unclean. The loss of the protective foreskin leaves the urinary tract vulnerable to invasion by bacterial and viral pathogens."

Mom2_my3boys replied: My first 2 boys are both circumcised and this one will be too. I've never thought about not having it done. Too me it just seems like something that should be done.

Maddie&EthansMom replied: Wow! This is always a big debate....kind of like breastfeeding. There is a huge debate on this going on at ivillage. Something like 140 replies so far!

My decision is yes. DH and I have never discussed it and I have never even questioned it. There are no religious or cultural reasons for my decision. It's just personal.

DansMom replied: In answer to Oklahomasooners post, I don't think anyone has to "justify" not removing a natural and healthy part of their child's body. The very idea that one should "justify" not performing a religious identification ritual, one that was co-opted by the puritanical medical societies of the 19th century as a way to inhibit masturbation and adultery, is absurd.

On the contrary, I believe people who have it done might reasonably be asked to justify their decision. They should have a reason that is more valid than that a small percentage of uncircumcised boys might have a yeast infection at some point, or they should unashamedly admit that they are doing it for aesthetic, cultural reasons and not waste time inventing medical reasons.

If we are going to turn this into a medical issue: There is medical evidence that removing the foreskin removes some of the male's sensitive nerve endings, so the comparison to a clitorectomy is not without merit. It is also medically accurate to say that a certain small percentage of normal boys have had their penises destroyed or damaged by circumcision: burnt off, deformed, scarred, bent, etc. I could just as easily counter the justification question with: Just because circumcision accidents happen to a small percentage of boys, how can anyone "justify" taking that chance with their precious baby?

Until recently the medical establishment (probably to keep that extra fee on your hospital bill) has invented numerous medical "reasons" to do circumcisions, from seizure therapy in the 1900's to preventing yeast infections today (cranberry juice works well for me). So many of these medical reasons have been discredited and the circumcision "industry" exposed as a for-profit affair. I don't mean to be combative, but the statement that we should justify the decision not to have our babies mutilated deserved just that, a justification: in my informed opinion, it's a barbaric practice that is medically unnecessary for the majority of boys.

That being said, I am NOT criticizing anyone else's choice!---I really like everyone on this board and hope they like me regardless of how we might differ on this issue. I'm just justifying my own decision, as requested.

A&A'smommy replied: If i had a boy I would definitly have it done! My husband and i feel like it is the right thing to do. Also circumcision has nothing to do with girls when your thinking about doing it to a boy dont say "i wouldnt do it to a girl so why should i do it do a boy" girls dont have a penis they have something totally different. Also when they get to be teenagers consider how they would feel,it may make them less confident with girls, also teenagers are real mean when someone has something different about them especially like that! I knew a guy that wasnt and no girl wanted to do anything with him, they all talked bad behind his back and made fun of him. He was my friend so it didnt bother me actually im not the kind of person who would care. Just consider how he might feel when he gets older and realizes he is different.

grandpa2003 replied:
Normally, circumcision is not a NECESSARY procedure! In our familt though, when the male is not circumcised at birth problems do occur later! My father was not circumcised but needed it as an adult. My mother intended for me to be circumcised at birth but it was 'forgotten'. At age five my foreskin would still not retract (no adhesions but a very long tight foreskin). A painful 'stretching' pocedure was conducted and it worked but by age ten I had had two minor infections which cleared up with mild boracic acid care. In my teens my tight foreskin and a very short frenulum continued to cause discomfort. My mother and fiancee decided to get the matter over and done with. I was circumcised and have never had a problem since!
My daughter, God bless her, chose to have our three week old grandchild circumcised at birth. I fully expect that he will never have the problems that his grandfather and great grandfather had. For our family circumcision for males makes sense, for medical as well as social cultural reasons.
Best wishes to everyone in the choice which is best for them
Doug

momma2jenna replied: I have a daughter, but had already thought on this topic. I've heard that men w/out circumcisions are more prone to infection. Plus, I think most women 'expect' a circumcised man, I would not want my grown child to have to feel self concious about his....thingy.
'course, maybe it's just ME that would expect that, and would be unnessasarily(sp) be trying to protect him???!!!!!

me_n_myboys replied: I am a mom of 2 intact boys and the wife of a circ'd Jewish man. I just wanted to offer up some info that might clear up a few things that I've seen posted.

The claim that circ'd males are less prone to UTI's or infections is not a valid one. Circing your son will not guarantee him a life free of UTI's. There was a clinical study done that found the following:

"The maligned foreskin has won a clean bill of health in infants’ urinary-tract infections.

In a prospective study at St. Louis University of 52 circumcised and 56 uncircumcised infants under 6 months with a first UTI, 72 had clinical pyelonephritis. Yet circumcision status (35 were circumcised) wasn’t significant, while anatomical obstructions were.

Abnormal anatomy was responsible for infections in 40 circumcised infants and 42 uncircumcised ones, says Dr. George Steinhardt. Of the 26 boys with normal genitourinary anatomy, 12 were circumcised and 14 were not.

Structural abnormalities, evenly divided between the groups, included 76 with reflux and 23 with obstructions, the team told the American Academy of Pediatrics meeting here. The rest had triad, valves, or bladder diverticulum." http://www.physweekly.com/archive/97/12_22_97/cu2.html

The circ'd penis is no cleaner than the intact one - and there isn't much involved in keeping an intact boy clean. You simply wash it like you'd wash your pinky finger....soap and water on the outside during a bath. You never force the foreskin to retract - it will do it on it's own and it's perfectly normal for a boy's foreskin to not retract into his teens. AAP's Care of the Uncircumcised Penis http://www.cirp.org/library/normal/aap/

The foreskin is just like any other part of the natural body. We get ear infections, bladder infections and UTI's....what do we do? We treat them with antibiotics or other natural remedies. Plenty of girls and circ'd boys get UTI's and they are treated with antibiotics...same should be done for intact boys. Many american doctors are woefully uneducated on the intact penis and are much too quick to blame ailments on the foreskin..simply because they don't know. Did you know that doctors once claimed circumcision cured tuberculosis and epilepsy?

As far as preventing cancer, the risk of penile cancer is so low for all men that even the American Cancer Society doesn't recommend circumcision as a prevention of it. From their website http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/...nformation.asp: "The consensus among studies that have taken these other factors into account is circumcision is not of value in preventing cancer of the penis.

Proven penile cancer risk factors include having unprotected sexual relations with multiple partners (increasing the likelihood of human papillomavirus infection), and cigarette smoking."

I have seen people post that their baby was not disturbed or crying following his circumcision. Humans have some unique responses to pain and trauma. One response is to withdraw into a sleeplike state to escape the pain. Another is to go into shock. In both reactions, the babies stop crying and seem to be peaceful. But let's think about it....if someone cut your genitals while only using a little numbing cream on you (or nothing at all), do you think it would hurt? I remember getting stitched after my 2nd was born...the pain was unbelievable. If you know of adult men who wish they had been circ'd as a baby because it hurts, what makes you think it won't hurt the baby in the same way? Is it just because they can't TELL you it hurts? Here is an article from a CNN website called "Circumcision study halted due to trauma" http://edition.cnn.com/HEALTH/9712/23/circ...etic/index.html. "The researchers discovered that for those circumcised without anesthesia there was not only severe pain, but also an increased risk of choking and difficulty breathing."

Do you know Dr. Sears? This is his opinion...http://www.askdrsears.com/html/1/T012000.asp "Medical benefits - THERE ARE NONE! Do not circumcise your baby because you think there are some medical benefits. A recent review by the American Academy of Pediatrics looked at all the data from the past decades to see if there truly were any medical benefits. There conclusion - NO. There are no significant medical benefits that make circumcision worth doing."

An excellent article about circumcision going over the history: http://mothering.com/10-0-0/html/10-1-0/10...mcision85.shtml

Every boy is born with a foreskin for a reason - removing it is removing the benefits it provides. What's lost? http://www.norm.org/lost.html

For some interesting, and humorous writings by a man that talks about why some men get uncomfortable about not having their sons' penises look like theirs: http://www.stopcirc.com/vincent/vulnerabil...ity_of_men.html

I'm not writing any of this to upset those that have circ'd their sons. I'm sure your doctors did not tell you that the foreskin has a purpose. I'm sure they didn't go over all the risks and complications that come with circing - that every year baby boys die as a result (I believe over 200 boys died last year) or that some baby boys end up going home as baby girls after the doctor accidentally amputated their penis during the operation. Many doctors just do what they know and circumcision is what they know.

I think we owe it to our sons to thoroughly research ANY procedure we elect to have done to them - regardless of how common it is. Don't take my word for it...do your own research. An excellent library that is very easy to search: http://www.cirp.org/

For those that do the research and still choose to have their sons circ'd, I sincerely hope that you INSIST on adequate pain relief for them, and be with them to comfort them (don't accept the response that you "aren't allowed"). The two most effective pain relief methods are the Dorsal Penile Nerve Block (DPNB) and the Subcutaneous Ring Block (SRB) - insist on them for your son. Do not allow anyone to cut your son's penis without using anything - it's cruel. Please.

I apologize for the length of my post....there's just so much misinformation out there. Wishing for everyone to have healthy pregnancies and healthy babies.

MomofTay&Sam replied: It's a good thing everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

me_n_myboys replied:
I completely agree.

But what surgical procedures with risks, including death, should be based on is hard medical evidence - not feelings or opinions like "I think it's cleaner" or "I think it prevents disease" or "it's just extra skin" - thinking something doesn't make it true. There's no other surgical procedure that you can have a doctor do to your newborn simply because you think it's better. This one is existing solely because doctors are afraid of not giving parents what they want...even though the ones that keep up with current research know better (kind of like the doctors that over-prescribe antibiotics when there's no indication for them).

You obviously have your mind made up. The links and information I posted weren't intended to sway you. However, there are plenty of people that post or lurk on these boards that haven't made up their minds, or aren't so sure about the topic that may find the information helpful. I'm sure you don't begrudge them the opportunity to read and get links so they can do further research for themselves.

MomofTay&Sam replied: Ofcourse I would never begrudge someone the chance to learn, when they are seeking knowledge this is the best place to come. The Internet provides a vast world of knowledge. What you decide to with that knowledge is solely upon you and your DH. My docs actually did ask and outlined everything for us. I was never pressured into anything, nor did I make a decision out of haste or lack of knowledge. I was simply stating that to each is his own and everyone makes a decision on what they feel is right. I personally thank you for taking the time to stress your views on this subject and sharing all the info you did. This is indeed a hot topic and I am sure that everyone will choose to agree and/or disagree. That is what makes this forum stick OUT from the rest, we respect everyones views and do not step on anyone toes in the process. Thanks once again for all the information you have provided. Someone will surely find it useful and a big help.

jem0622 replied: Just wanted to add that circumcision is a very personal and private decision. I don't judge anyone on the matter because it is their decision, not my own.

Noahs_mommy replied: My step-brother wasn't circumsized and when he was five it got infected and they had to do it then. If he'd had it done when he was born, he wouldn't have rememberd the pain. Now he always will. I had my son done, mostly for religious reasons though.

raysnroof replied: Our first three boys were circed. Our last two boys were not circed. I thought I would give a different perspective, as I have seen both sides and even the whole gammut of circing methods. There are three methods used to circ a boy and I tried each method before I finally begged my hubby to let us stop the madness. My first boy had a plasti-bell. It is a doughnut-shaped piece of plastic that slides onto the shaft to give the doctor a guide to go by while cutting away the skin. In a perfect world, the plastic is supposed to slide up and off the penile shaft when the scar has healed. The most common side effect is that the plastic doughnut slides down the shaft and not up. This is what happened to my poor son. The plasti-bell slid down his shaft and his shaft swelled around the plastic. They had to hold Zachary down by all four of his limbs, just as they do when the intubate a child. While he was being four-wayed, the surgeon cut the plasti-bell off. I was not there with him for the circing but I was there in the room when they tried desperately to get the plastic off his shaft. He screamed bloody murder! I told myself I would be wiser next time. My dh still wanted all his boys to look like their daddy so I let the next boy be circed but just not with the Plasti-bell. I was told that the Plasti-bell was outdated and "nobody does that anymore," but the truth is that they STILL do the Plasti-bell, despite the risks. That was nothing compared to what my next son went through, though. I demanded to be there if the circ was going to be done. I said I would sign for it ONLY if the doctor let me be there. The nurse said OK. however, the doctor purposefully did the circ earlier so that I would not be there. He came in with our son and smiled happily as he proclaimed the job was done. He said he "knew" I really did not want to be there and that he didn't really agree with circs anyway. What that meant was that he never clipped enough foreskin off. The method he used is just using a string as a guide to cut the foreskin straight. He pulled the foreskin back, peeling the protective glands away from the shaft so that the nturally sealed skin was then exposed, but he never cut off enough of it. The skin folded back and sealed over with the infection on the INSIDE of the seal. My second son cried for three years with every single diaper change and nobody could do anything for him until "the shaft grew and the skin stetched enough to pull the skin away" and expose the infection so that it could be cleaned out. I will forever be haunted by my trembling toddler's words, "Mommy, don't touch it! IT HURTS!!!!!!" Did I learn and stop circing then? NOPE. Daddy still wanted uniformity in the family and he had a way of forgetting what mommies don't forget. My dh is a great guy but he just didn't remember what the two oldest boys really went through. Along came boy #3. I DEMANDED that under NO circumstances at all would my boy be circed unless I was there and it would NOT be a string or plasti-bell circ. I would ONLY allow the circ that where they use a special metal tool that looks like a plunger. The plunger fits over the head of the penis and the foreskin is cut around the plunger. They had to hunt all over the hospital for one guy from family practice who knew how to do that method and would allow me to be in there with him. I gave him such grief, too. When he didn't do it right, i made him do it again. You read right. I suffered my child to TWO circs instead of one because of a fear that he would suffer from the pain that Alex, our 2nd child, had to endure. By the way, Timothy screamed and screamed and screamed. I don't know how any child wouldn't scream, unless he was so doped up from the mom's labor drugs that he couldn't see straight. They strap the infant down and no infant likes that so they scream at that, alone. OK, so I was a nervous wreck with our 4th child. My dh still wasn't convinced to let nature be. We had a girl and I breathed a sigh of relief just that our child would not have to suffer the pain and side effects and trials of circing. Then came #5. Another boy! Rick never said a thing. I did not sign any papers to allow the circ and Rick never pressed the issue. Child #6 was a boy, too, and I begged Rick to let him remain intact. Rick gave in and said OK. So to wrap up this VERY long story, my boys hadn't noticed their 4th brother but they noticed their 5th brother. Alex got grossed out and said it was deformed and then the other two felt obliged to come and agree. They asked what was wrong with their little brother. I calmly told them that nothing was wrong. In a very unbiased tone, I told them what a circ was and that we had felt that medical procedure was good for them. Them I simply said matter-of-factly that we just chose not to do that with Matthew and Daniel. Know what???? They thanked me for changing my mind and not circing thier little brothers!! I never made it out to sound bad. I was just calm and clinical. I even said that daddy had the same procedure. So much for the theory that you have to look like everyone else, especially daddy. The oldest three boys stodd by what they said and thanked us for not circing anymore brothers! Thanks for listening.
Sharon in KS
Jill of all trades
Master of none
Mom of many
Wife of one

lsjulee replied: Maybe I'm ignorant. But I am very surprised when I come to this thread. I'm very surprised that circumcision is as senstive and influenzing subject as breastfeeding. I mean, in my opinion, to circumcize the boy or not is totally up to personal's preference and decision. Isn't it?

I ever thought about this, but not seriously looking into it. So Sean's not, and An's not. I'd think if really necessary, it would be for health reason. We are not religiously bound for this kind of decision. I couldn't bear to let An go through this. Especially he has very ultimately low pain tolerance.

jcc64 replied: I know this is a very old post- but thank you Sharon for sharing your family's story. I think the vivid details provided a window into what really goes on during a circumcision. I think everyone has an obligation to understand this before making a decision. And whether you're pro or anti- it IS a big decision to remove part of your child's body and should be made consciously.

sunnyH2004 replied: No way. I have a son who didn't have this and if I have another he won't go through it either. If it is there it is there for a reason, not a deformality, but a natural thing that's not hurting anything, so why put a baby through it? I wasn't born in America, though live here now. Where I come from this has never been done or even thought of, but understand that people find this important in some cultures.