Is non-circ'd really that difficult to deal with? - Page 2

[dmpmercury]

It is just a myth about a intact penis being hard to care for. There is absolutely no care. You do nothing extra at all. If you circumcise you have wound car to deal with, possible adhesions and you are more more likely to end up with a hidden penis. When boys are older and retractable they just need to wash with water. Even if they do get smegma when they are older it is normal. UTIS are much more common in girls then in boys. The one study that says they are more common in uncircumcised men has major flaws in it including many of them left the hospital with instructions to retract and clean underneath with soap. Even still it accounts for such a small minority (1%) and is something that is totally treatable.

My boy was much easier to clean then my dd was when they were in diapers.

[hollytheteacher]

My son is 3 and it is in no way any "work" whatsoever. I wash his penis the same way i wash his fingers. That is it. If you circ a child you have to "care" for the wound. I have had to do zero care to my son's penis and i certainly prefer it that way!

Just remember that the huge majority of men in the world are intact. Their penises are not falling off rotting with infections. lol

[Claire and Boys]

Ok, I have two sons. Both intact. We live in the UK, where circumcision is unheard of apart from among religious groups, I believe the circ rate is something like 5% of newborns. Anyway, I don't think about or worry about my son's penises at all.

The only reason why anyone here does is because you live in a country where circumcision has been the norm for many years. Therefore it's an unknown for you. In a predominantly intact culture, penises are treated like any other body part.

You see threads on penis problems because no one is posting threads saying "My son's penis is fine today." Like with anything else, people post because they need help, the ones that don't aren't out there talking about it.

I go on mainstream forums and see endless topics about circumcision issues, whether it's people worrying that their son doesn't look right, infections, or buried penises (I see that one A LOT.)

[Quirky]

The complication rate from having a normal penis is actually very low. In countries that don't routinely circumcise, only a tiny fraction of men will ever genuinely require circumcision for a legitimate medical reason.

The complications of circumcision are shockingly high -- and not recognized as such by the medical profession.

First is the 100% complication of the loss of up to half of all nerve endings in the penis and specialized cells called Meissner's corpuscles, providing the same sensitivity found in the lips and fingertips. There's also the unique gliding action of the foreskin over the glans, which is destroyed.

10% of circumcised boys will eventually suffer from meatal stenosis.

Infection and bleeding are common complications. MRSA (i.e. flesh-eating bacteria) is far more likely to affect a circumcision wound than an intact boy or girl.

Up to 200 boys may die EACH YEAR from circumcision complications. Many if not most times these deaths are not attributed to circumcision because doctors and hospitals don't want the pants sued off them for what is recognized by the AAP as an elective surgery.

We get way more reports on here of hygiene issues caused by loose circumcisions where gunk gets trapped under the remnant foreskin, which has had its protective sphincter removed that would otherwise keep gunk out, than we do of any genuine hygiene issues with intact baby boys.

It really is a cultural mindset, not based in reality at all, that sees the foreskin as the ticking timebomb of dirt and disease, when the foreskin is just another body part -- exactly like a girl's clitoral hood and labia -- no more prone to disease than any other body part.

The sad reality is that far more pain, disfigurement, complications, and long-term hygiene issues result from circumcision than from leaving a baby as he was born. And that most US doctors aren't educated about these issues -- or choo$e to ignore these i$$ue$ for their own rea$on$.

[daisymommy]

As a mother of one circumcised and one intact baby, I can honestly say that the circ'ed child was the hardest to take care of! Even DH who was on board for the the ethical reasons of keeping the baby intact, was a bit leery that it would be an issue with cleanliness. And he said to me the other day, "I don't get what the big deal is, his penis so much easier to keep clean!" Well said dear

[eepster]

I have taken care of both circ'd boys (while babysitting) and intact ones, intact is much simpler.

One of the reasons that intact seems more problem prone in the US, is that in the foreskin gets blamed for stuff, but the lack of it gets ignored. If an intact boy is running a fever and it isn't known why, the Dr immediately leaps to UTI involving the kidneys!!! Then they insist on catheterizing instead of just tapping a bag over the penis as they would for a circ'd boy. The Dr happily informs the parent that all this is b/c the parent didn't circ. Where as, if a circ'd boy develops meatal stenosis when he is 3 or 4 years old, the Dr reasures the parent "these things just happen." In reality though, only circ'd boys get meatal stenosis. It is directly caused by circ, but this information is hidden and kept from parents.

Another thing is the worry of ignorant Dr injuring intact boys. This is a real concern, but it is in no way a reason to circ. All the damage that is caused by premature retraction happens during the circ surgery anyway. The first step of a circumcision is to forcibly retract the foreskin, so circ'ing does not avoid that ever happening. The next thing they do is a dorsal slit, so if your intact DS ever needed that b/c some ignorant Dr cause paraphimosis, then again circ'ing isn't going to avoid it.

Let's face it, the worst case scenario of having an intact boy is that he might need to be circ'd (very unlikely if you avoid ignorance.) Why would one choose to go straight to the worst possible treatment?

[daisymommy]

Originally Posted by Claire and Boys

You see threads on penis problems because no one is posting threads saying "My son's penis is fine today."

[T-man's Mama]

My DS, 17 months, is intact. It was not my place to choose to have a part of his perfect little body unnecessarily amputated!

I have had NO issues, not a single one, from keeping him intact. His penis requires no special care or consideration, except to simply leave the foreskin alone!

[Devaskyla]

Not difficult at all. All 3 of my boys are intact and I never even think about it. Well, except when my oldest is telling me his penis hurts, but it's only for a couple minutes & then he's fine and I'm 99% sure it's just separating. Either that or he has a rash on his testicles again, which has absolutely nothing to do with being intact, obviously.