Mothering › Mothering Discussion Forums › Health › Circumcision › "Natural" circumcision
New Posts  All Forums:
 

"Natural" circumcision

post #1 of 20
10/21/10 at 1:51pm
Thread Starter 
We have a three-week old DS whose foreskin didn't cover the tip of his penis when he was born. The pediatrician called it a "natural" circumcision (I know, oxymoronic, but I use the term in case others are familiar of what I'm talking about) and said we should have a pediatric urologist look at it to make sure that his urethra is in the right place.
I've seen my son pee, and it comes out where I think it should come out. Since birth, the foreskin now covers all but the very tip of the penis. (Honestly, I don't really know what an infant penis is supposed to look like!) The pediatrician still thinks we should take him to a urologist sometime before he is six months old. I'm not really all that concerned that he has some malformation of his urethra -- he pees just fine! --- and I certainly don't want to change anything about the appearance of his penis, so I wonder if I really need to make the appt.
Anyone else dealt with this?
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 20
10/21/10 at 3:21pm
From what you describe you dont need to take him. It sounds like he has a short foreskin which is normal for him. If the urethra is off center it isnt enough to need fixing or you could see it plainly. If it where me I wouldnt bother with the urologist because even if it where off center a bit I wouldnt have it fixed. The term for a off center urethra and partial foreskin is called hypospadias (spelled something like that) and there are different grades with some needing repair for proper function and some only cosmetic in nature.
post #3 of 20
10/21/10 at 3:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wami View Post
We have a three-week old DS whose foreskin didn't cover the tip of his penis when he was born. The pediatrician called it a "natural" circumcision (I know, oxymoronic, but I use the term in case others are familiar of what I'm talking about) and said we should have a pediatric urologist look at it to make sure that his urethra is in the right place.
I've seen my son pee, and it comes out where I think it should come out. Since birth, the foreskin now covers all but the very tip of the penis. (Honestly, I don't really know what an infant penis is supposed to look like!) The pediatrician still thinks we should take him to a urologist sometime before he is six months old. I'm not really all that concerned that he has some malformation of his urethra -- he pees just fine! --- and I certainly don't want to change anything about the appearance of his penis, so I wonder if I really need to make the appt.
Anyone else dealt with this?
Being born without a foreskin is called aposthia and it is a rare condition funny enough classifies as a birth defect, oh the irony burns doesn't it? Any way it doesn't sound to me like your son has this, he only has a naturally short foreskin. It doesn't sound to me like something that needs to be looked at but I'd say it's entirely your call.
post #4 of 20
10/21/10 at 3:54pm
Thread Starter 
That's what I think. Obviously, if it were to affect the function of his penis now or later, that's a different story.

Curiously, I did a little reading about this condition and learned that it can cause a curve in the penis when erect. My DH may not appreciate me revealing this, but he has a slightly curved penis, and now I wonder if it may be genetic. Anyway, DH's penis works just fine.

My DH is circumcized and I'm not sure about asking my MIL about my DH's penis when he was an infant.

I may call the urologist, just in case, but I'm not feeling particularly worried about it.
post #5 of 20
10/21/10 at 5:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wami View Post
My DH is circumcized and I'm not sure about asking my MIL about my DH's penis when he was an infant.

I'm with everyone else and it sounds like your DS just has a short foreskin...in the other hand - a curved circumcised penis is generally caused by a tight or uneven circ.
post #6 of 20
10/21/10 at 5:27pm
about the curve with circ.
post #7 of 20
10/21/10 at 10:14pm
Thread Starter 
Wow, really? That is so disturbing. I'll share that with my DH.
post #8 of 20
10/28/10 at 12:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm View Post
a curved circumcised penis is generally caused by a tight or uneven circ.

I mentioned this to dh about a year ago and he told me I was nuts
post #9 of 20
10/28/10 at 12:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mi.birthdoula View Post
I mentioned this to dh about a year ago and he told me I was nuts
Give him a demo with a sausage - show him what happens when you pull the natural casing too tight
post #10 of 20
10/28/10 at 4:18pm
I'd probably skip the urologist. It just seems like it'd be borrowing trouble. If they can find so many issues with a run-of-the-mill foreskin, imagine what they could come up with about a shorter than normal foreskin?
post #11 of 20
10/28/10 at 11:44pm
I agree, skip the urologist. They are surgeons.....

The function of the foreskin in childhood is to allow the passage of urine. If it works fine in that capacity, I would leave well enough alone.

If you want to take him to be evaluated by a urologist, I'd make certain to contact NOCIRC for a recommendation to a foreskin friendly doctor.
post #12 of 20
10/29/10 at 1:13pm
sorry, nak, but -- definitely skip the urologist appt. they're surgeons and will assume that you standing in front of them means you'd like them to "fix" something. it's just how they're trained. you're ds sounds totally fine, just another variation of normal.
post #13 of 20
10/29/10 at 6:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by wami View Post
Wow, really? That is so disturbing. I'll share that with my DH.
Yep. My dh has the same issue from his "high and tight" circ One of the reasons it was easy to convince him not to circ ds.
post #14 of 20
10/30/10 at 12:45am
My first thoughts when reading "Natural Circumcision" was: there is absolutely nothing natural about a circumcision. One must be doing something entirely unnatural to achieve the results of a circumcision.

I'll echo others who suggested to skip the uro since your son is peeing just fine.

I've read on here once about a mother explaining that her son's penis didn't fully develop. He was born with an incomplete prepuce organ but it grew and was completely formed when he turned a year old.

This reminds me of infant girls who are born premature and her labia hasn't completely formed yet; but as she got older her genitals continued to develop.
post #15 of 20
6/29/12 at 9:42am

I know this is an old post, but as it showed up when I searched the content, I feel obligated to comment. My son too was born with what they called a Natural circumcision. When they handed him to me, it was the first thing I noticed, as I have seen a many new born baby boy I knew it didn't look normal. I told myself if it was serious the doctor would say something. When the nurse was  checking him like they do, she called the doctor over, she was an older knowable doctor, she said it was fine, it was what we call a Natural Circ. So I put my mind at ease, when I took him for his week check up, the doctor said "oh he has a natural circ", I said yes, she said she wanted me to get it look at by a urologist at the children’s hospital, just to rule out anything serious. I had told myself before, if a doctor said it was something then I would get it looked at, so I got the referral and an appointment. He was just over a month old when he saw the urologist, the dr took one look and said yes he would need surgery. I worried about this none stop, and asked him to show me and explain why, because to me and my mother it looked like he was peeing fine. The doctor showed me and sure enough his urethra was not coming out where it was suppose to, there was a little pin hole right under where the urethra was suppose to be, I missed it, the first doctor missed it. For all of you to say, without seeing this woman’s son and going on her word, that she should not see a specialist that is trained to see it, is just uneducated thinking. If I had ignored that one doctor and listen to the first one, my son would of grown up with this problem, causing more problems. If a doctor says you should get it checked, get it checked, rule it out before worrying about surgery, which depending on the severity of the issue, its a day surgery, I felt more sorry for all the older boys that had to have the surgery, my heart went out to them, to be over 5 years old and having to have someone open up your penis because it wasn't looked at when you were a new born. I hope for your son, you went to the urologist and ruled out hypospadis.

post #16 of 20
6/29/12 at 5:47pm
Based on where the opening is determines if surgery is needed or not. The opening on the glans usually dosnt need it while on the shaft it would need it. By all means if you feel something is wrong have it checked but also keep in mind that an opening on the glans is fine even if not centered. I can understand a hole being below the natural hole being a problem and by all means it should be fixed but the foreskin should not be sacrificed to do so.
post #17 of 20
6/29/12 at 10:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MCatLvrMom2A&X View Post

Based on where the opening is determines if surgery is needed or not. The opening on the glans usually dosnt need it while on the shaft it would need it. By all means if you feel something is wrong have it checked but also keep in mind that an opening on the glans is fine even if not centered. I can understand a hole being below the natural hole being a problem and by all means it should be fixed but the foreskin should not be sacrificed to do so.


I disagree.  3rd degree hypospadias surgeries are extremely painful, and many times means replete surgeries throughout childhood or through adolescence.  From an intactivist point of view, as long as there are no immediate health concerns (fissures, difficulty urinating, possibly painful chordee, etc), the child should be left intact. Here are some resources on hypospadias:

 

http://intersexroadshow.blogspot.com/2011_04_01_archive.html

http://www.drmomma.org/2010/04/hypospadias-surgery-and-circumcision.html

look in hypospadias section: http://www.thewholenetwork.org/the-foreskin-and-penis.html

http://heainfo.org/

post #18 of 20
7/2/12 at 1:30pm

Wami, while reading your post and the thread, something kept rolling in my mind.  I hope you don't mind me asking this question.  "Is either you or your husband of Korean descent?"  I ask this because there is an entire population in Korea that has these short foreskins.  That is absolutely normal for them and they have no problems.  It is apparently a genetic difference that has spread in this isolated population to become common  there and there alone.

 

I'm not going to tell you not to go to the urologst.  I don't have the education, training or knowledge to make that advisement.  I also haven't seen your son.  But, realize that urologists are by definition, surgeons and if you go to a surgeon, you are more likely to get a prescription for surgery.  Ask a lot of questions.  Fnd out where he is coming from.  Don't give a quick answer but instead, take as much time as you need to make a rational and logical decision.  Ask your self "What will surgery improve?"  "What are the risks of the surgery?"  Are the risks outweighed by the benefits?"  "What will happen if I don't get the surgery?"  "What will happen if I put it off for a month, a year?"  "Is this really urgent?"

 

The typical appearance of the infant penis is to have a short part of the foreskin that sticks out beyond the glans.  This is called "acroposition."  The opposite is called "aposthia" and indicates a birth defect.  This is the absence of a foreskin and probably what the doctor is calling a "natural circumcision."  It happens possibly as often as 1 in 10,000 male births.  But, what you describe doesn't seem to describe aposthia.  It could be a very, very mild case of aposthia and not an indication for circumcision.

post #19 of 20
11/11/12 at 8:53am

I was born with a "natural circ". The foreskin only covers about half of the head of my penis until it's erect at which time it pulls back completely just like any other. It's never been a problem at all. I wouldn't have noticed anything different about me if my parents hadn't told me when I was young. No boys ever commented on it in the locker room nor even noticed. The first and only person to ever say a word was a nurse I dated years ago. She simply commented that it was rare. If anything I consider myself lucky as the lesser amount of skin makes it easier to wash while at the same time there is still enough foreskin to protect the tender area underneath it from the constand friction of rubbing against clothing.

My advice to any parent that runs into this is do nothing as long as everything else is working properly. I heard a conversation about this a few days ago and was surprsed at how people were concerned. How can a person feel it's proper to cut off the rest of the foreskin just because it doesn't hang all the way down? If a Dr. thinks a circumcision is needed just because of this, I'd check with another Dr.

post #20 of 20
11/13/12 at 6:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkgrl View Post

I know this is an old post,

Yup, it's about two years old. The son mentioned in the original post is approximately 2 or 2 1/2 years old now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sharkgrl View Post

For all of you to say, without seeing this woman’s son and going on her word, that she should not see a specialist that is trained to see it, is just uneducated thinking.

I'm surprised that I'm the only one who (apparently) caught this comment.
New Posts  All Forums:
 
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Circumcision
Mothering › Mothering Discussion Forums › Health › Circumcision › "Natural" circumcision