DH circumsized at 17, STILL wants to circ any future sons

[Tuckergirl]

So far circumcision has been a moot point in our home because we have a DD. We're starting to TTC #2 at this point so I started reading again, just in case. We're still more likely to have a girl (DH is military and works on equipment that likes to kill the Ys) but I brought it up anyway.

DH is circumcised. I had always assumed that it was done as an infant like most. Turns out that he was intact as a child due to insurance issues when he was born. He had chronic issues due to infection and it getting dirty even though he kept it clean. So at age 17 he was circumcised. As a result he has had both intact and circ'ed sex. According to him, circ'ed sex is much better. It kind of derailed my argument about not knowing what it was like WITH it. He's absolutely convinced that any son we have will be circ'ed as a baby because the recovery is so much faster. I'm not okay with that. I've made the argument that it's not HIS penis and he's claiming that as a parent it's his right to make the decision to have it done then. My argument is that the choice should be the child's when he's old enough to make it - just as my husband made the choice at 17.

*sigh* I REALLY hope we have another girl so I just don't have to have this fight at all. I told him that I would NOT sign a consent form and that most places wouldn't do it without the mother's consent and he told me the discussion was over and he walked away. Ugh.

[Greg B]

It is your son's body and he should make the decision about whether he wants to get circumcised.

Even if your DH had experience that makes him feel that circ's feels better, your son may not agree. And even if it is better for him, it may not be better for his partner...

Parents are supposed to be making medical decisions based on the best interest of their children, not what they find best for themselves and speculate would be better for their child. Your DH has no way of knowing if his circ would have worked out better or worse if he had been done as an infant. It could be argued that he finds it so good because he was done after he had developed fully sexually.

You need to consider the trade offs. RIC causes pain, trauma, puts the infant at risk of complications and infection. And there is no way to make the infant understand why.

Circ when of legal age for consent causes dramatically less pain because anesthetics can be used. since the penis is fully developed, the results are much more likely to be predictable and better. Risk of complications is lessened due to this. And he will understand why it is being done so can cope with it mentally, instead of being traumatized.

Regards

[GoBecGo]

Has your DH considered that sex with an uncircumcised foreskin/penis that is so badly scarred and infected he went on to have it circumcised is NOT going to be the same as sex with a fully operational healthy foreskin? I mean, OBVIOUSLY sex would be better without pain, scar tissue and infection. The best way to avoid pain and scarring is to NOT circ.

It might also be worth talking to PIL's and see if forcible retracting was part of their "care". My dad was circ'd late because his parents forcible retracting of his foreskin made it so scarred it kept getting infected and had to be removed.

[Tuckergirl]

Originally Posted by GoBecGo

It might also be worth talking to PIL's and see if forcible retracting was part of their "care". My dad was circ'd late because his parents forcible retracting of his foreskin made it so scarred it kept getting infected and had to be removed.

That actually crossed my mind too. I'll have to call my MIL and ask. Although given how ticked off that would make DH, I think I'll postpone it til we actually get pregnant with #2 and have the gender ultrasound. No sense in causing a huge fight if we get preggo with another girl.

The idea that it might have been caused by inappropriate care definitely something to look into, though. He's so convinced that doing it as a baby would prevent a hypothetical son from having to go through the long, painful recovery that he did that I don't think he considered that just cause he had infections doesn't mean his child would.

[Gentle~Mommy :)]

Originally Posted by Tuckergirl

According to him, circ'ed sex is much better. .

How much sex could he have had at 17?

I'm sorry for your situation, I think your DH is a little mixed up about the sex being better since he was circ'd. Of course sex is better when you are older and in loving relationships, at 16 he would not have had that.

[jessjgh1]

Sounds like he had an issue... but it is NOT due to his foreskin.
It is most likely due to issues that were caused by misinformation or poor treatment... For example, repeated infections are a sign that something wasn't taken care of correctly. He may have had a simple problem that could have been easily treated- it was misdiagnosed and the treatments simply didn't work or made it worse.

Looking back at old parenting information they used to tell parents to clean out the babies foreskin with q-tips--- -uugh... so perhaps his parents unknowingly followed advice like this-- and this type of 'care' and 'cleanliness' would likely lead to problems, not to mention a possibility to reinforce the negative stereotypes of intactness.

Then there could be issues caused by forced retraction- perhaps sex was uncomfortable for him-- but it shouldn't have been. And circumcision is a very drastic way of handling a problem that he might have had..... It truly is very very rare to need a circumcision.... The best bet is to handle a problem if it might come up in the less invasive way possible-- as there are more alternatives for problems than circumcision--- again, in America, many doctors simply use circumcision as the first 'cure' rather than a last alternative.

I don't know what your options are, it depends on how open your dh will be to talking to you and what he may or may not know happened to him. It sounds like it wasn't necessarily his parents first choice to leave him intact and who knows what information your dh/dh parents had.

There's so many ways you can approach this with your dh... Some of the thigns that run through my mind... I don't believe at all that newborn circ is 'easier' than adult circ. Tell him newborns cannot recieve full pain relief... Remind him his foreskin at 17 probably could be retracted.... it didnt' need to be forcibly retracted and then cut off. Tell him he knew what he was going in for, knew it would hurt, and knew he'd be okay... a newborn just cannot fathom what he's going through... and the pain is there.
MOhter's have to compensate by holding a baby boy differently after the procedure (sometimes making it harder to breastfeed)... it hurts for days afterwards.
He at 17 was potty trained.... a newborn will be peeing and pooping on the cut area.... Then at 17, did he choose how much foreskin was removed? Did he keep his frenulum?

It is not over, you will be this child's mother and you need to feel comfortable with decisions too--- there's just no reason that your dh's expeirence is any indication of a future child's.

Good luck,
Jessica

[brendaziz]

Originally Posted by Gentle~Mommy :)

How much sex could he have had at 17?

I'm sorry for your situation, I think your DH is a little mixed up about the sex being better since he was circ'd. Of course sex is better when you are older and in loving relationships, at 16 he would not have had that.

Well- I for one (and my DH as well) had plenty of 17 and earlier sexual encounters- most of which were w/ eachother- and I can't tell u how often we reminisce about how GREAT sex was back then. It's still great- but there was something a little more spectacular back then.
So don't totally discount the fact that he could know whether or not the sex was in fact "better" b4/after.

That being said- I think u 2 have a lot of discussing ahead of you. This kind of reminds me of someone who had a vaccine preventable disease and then wants to vax their child for it solely based on how miserable they were when they had it. Both are valid concerns.
I def think it is possible for him to come around- but it just may take a LOT more talking/research etc. If you feel so strongly about it just keep letting him know- in a non- judgemental way adn hopefully he begins to see your side.
If he doesn't come around though- try to remember that he feels this way out of the goodness of his heart. He wants to protect him from what he experienced- and there are definitely worse qualities to have in a DH.

Def explore the retracting issue w/ his mil though. That sounds very key in this.

[Tuckergirl]

Originally Posted by Gentle~Mommy :)

How much sex could he have had at 17?

Actually? a lot. I think he probably had plenty of experience to compare with, I just think that the fact that it wasn't as good probably has to do with the issues and care as an infant/child. I'll be getting some answers from my MIL and it might very well not even become a fight if we end up having another girl.

[claddaghmom]

So tell him that when Ds is ready for sexual activity he can get circ'd.

[Gentle~Mommy :)]

To my experience, great sex takes practice and a great relationship. I didn't have any great sex when I was an awkward teen.

I do now though

[kiara7]

If he had to have a toe amputated because of a severe infection, would he then want to amputate your son's toe at birth too?

This logic doesn't hold up once you start thinking about body parts that are not seen as disposable. Unfortunately, our society frequently thinks of foreskin as disposable. But it isn't any more disposable than any other body part. And it's your son's body. He has an inherent right to all of it.

[Quirky]

I had to have my tonsils out when I was in college, because of repeated strep infections.

Does that mean I should have had my babies' tonsils out at birth, on the off chance they'd get strep multiple times a year?

Of course not.

The foreskin is even more important than the tonsils. Having tonsils is important for a healthy immune system but they can become problematic, and removing them doesn't have a significant impact on your life once they're out and you've healed.

But having a foreskin is very important to a normal sex life, and your dh shouldn't be making a decision based on his own history about how his son's normal penis will look and function.

Good luck, mama. Your dh has even more need to rationalize what happened to him than most circed men, but that doesn't mean he's right -- it just means he's rationalizing.

[MommytoB]

Also they state most men who say they are dirty but cleaning themselves are having issues possiblity he was the one 'creating his own infections' by overzealous cleaning -especially with soap because soap can create yeast or what you call irritant dermatitis .

If that's the case of him cleaning too much he would have only needed to relax on the cleaning habbits avoid soap on his foreskin and glans to see if his infection would have gone away instead of circumcision.

Overzealous cleaning can create a dry out on the foreskin and create cracks in the skin .

[eepster]

As has been pointed out you DH's problems were most likely caused by mistreatment, forcible retraction and overzealous cleaning. If he had been lucky enough to have advice from us when this was going on then we probably could have help, but that is past and done so there's point pressing that too far. He had a problem; he had it treated; after treatment he felt better. This is what it is.

He now wants to have you DS undergo the same treatment even though your DS has yet to have an problems (hasn't even been concieved, but YKWIM.) If your DS should have problems as a teen, then one can consider treatment options (there are many that are less drastic than circ.)

I happen to have had all kinds of problems with my gallbladder, and had it removed many years ago. Almost all the women in my family have need to have their gallbladders removed, it is a very strong genetic tendancy in my family. Yet I did not consider having DS's gallbladder removed at birth. If DS does have the same problem, then they may even have better treatments by the time he has a problem. When my mom had hers out it was a much more complx proceedure than when I had mine out laproscopically.

There is a very good chance your DS won't have any problems (since you can come here and ask us about care) and even if he does there are many new treatments involving steroids creams and stuff that are much less painfull than circumcision. I'm sure if your DH had been offered creams when he was 17 he would have happily used them.

[mjg013]

Originally Posted by Tuckergirl

That actually crossed my mind too. I'll have to call my MIL and ask. Although given how ticked off that would make DH, I think I'll postpone it til we actually get pregnant with #2 and have the gender ultrasound. No sense in causing a huge fight if we get preggo with another girl.

The idea that it might have been caused by inappropriate care definitely something to look into, though. He's so convinced that doing it as a baby would prevent a hypothetical son from having to go through the long, painful recovery that he did that I don't think he considered that just cause he had infections doesn't mean his child would.

My dad was circumcised when he was in his 20s. Same thing repeated infections and problems with hygeine. He was told that it was caused by forcible retraction as an infant. I don't know how he managed to find a urologist that knew this and shared this with him. Anyway, he was told that parents of intact boys were told to retract and wipe with every diaper change and this caused adhesions and scarring and increased chances of infection and other problems later in life. He told my dad that it was improper care that caused it. My dad was so angry about it. When I was pregnant with my first son I knew I would leave him intact but I wanted to have enough info to keep others off my back about it. I called my dad and he told me please don't circumcise him and leave his penis the hell alone.