Don't assume intact men know proper care!!

[just_lily]

Just a caution for you ladies with intact men in your life.

Yesterday my DH was helping me get all of my kids (DD and daycare kids) ready for their naps. I asked him to change the diaper of the 16mo (intact) boy while I got the girls settled.

Later DH told me he thought there was something wrong with the boy because "it looks like his foreskin is growing over his penis."

I was like "Um honey, it is supposed to look like that!" I was really shocked because DH is intact himself, and comes from an intact family. I had to explain to him how the foreskin is attached in baby boys and that it only separates as they get older. He didn't retract the daycare boy, thank goodness, but he said he thought that is what you are supposed to do.

He says he doesn't remember ever not being retractable, so this concept is all new to him.

I am soooo shocked. I never would have thought to have this conversation with him, but I am glad we did.

[MommytoB]

Totally because if an intact male has a retractable foreskin otherwise if not told they will all intact males are retractable no matter what the age is .

He proably saw his mom retracting his brothers foreskin so that's proably where he got the idea of thinking supposed to do that .

[2boyzmama]

My (intact) husband retracts his foreskin when he cleans himself. When our first son was born and hubby changed his first diaper he said "um, so what do I do?" I said "you just wipe him" hubby said "but how do I get under there?" He also didn' tknow that the foreskin was fused, because he only ever remembers his being retractable.

[eepster]

Are these all men from the US?

My dad, born and raised in Ireland, is aware that boys don't start retracting till they are older. Of course intact men born in the US will usually have been regularly forcibly retracted from early on.

[just_lily]

Originally Posted by eepster

Are these all men from the US?

We live in Canada, but my DH was born in Britain. His family moved here when he was 5.

[Fay]

My DH is intact and he did not know proper care. He was forcibly retracted at age 4, and he thought that was normal medical care, until I showed him the research that proves otherwise (special thanks to the wonderful parents here who introduced me to the reference library at cirp.org).

[Friday13th]

Yeah, DH was forcibly retracted as an infant so he didn't remember ever not being retractible. (he was born in the US and MIL thought it sounded wrong but the doctor did it at every visit) I had to explain it before DS1 was born.

[MommytoB]

My son's father was born in Poland moved to USA when he was 6 . I remember one time questioning him when he became retractable he was like I don't remember he was like I think it could around 11 ,12 or 13 somewhere around there . So he knew he became retractable later on so I wonder if that is the case because he was born in a different country plus he stayed there for til the time he was soon to start first grade.

He wasn't much help in the kid department that is why he is my ex.

[Frootloop]

Unfortunately, this isn't uncommon, especially in the US. Even though my father was intact (I didn't even know this until the past year or so), he had no idea that my mom shouldn't have been forcefully retracting my brother from birth (he was born in 1977).. she was yelled at repeatedly by DB's pediatrician for not doing it enough, and in the end, he was circumcised without anesthesia around 2 years old because of repeated infections "which were caused by his foreskin being too tight and adhesions".

[eepster]

Originally Posted by just_lily

We live in Canada, but my DH was born in Britain. His family moved here when he was 5.

I think forcible retraction was standard care in Canada, but I don't know about Britain.

[jess_paez]

my hubby knew. he's also 1/2 hispanic, but when we were discussing circumcision i mentioned about the intact care of a baby and he said "you don't do anything!" and he went on some more. i am american, so i had no idea, but i remember thinking, "then why are people still doing this?!" i had heard that an intact baby was a pain to clean throughout the years. we left our son intact.

[MyBoysBlue]

I know that my DH was retracted as a newborn in the hospital. The doc gave MIL the choice to either circ or have him "dialated" (is what MIL recalls). They knew that they didn't want to circ. The docs made a small cut so that they could forcibly retract him. When MIL got home from the hospital she didn't keep retracting him like they told her to. She just let him heal back up on the advice of her mother, who raised a bunch of boys. I know she had 14 kids just don't know the ratio of boys to girls. DH must have been retractable pretty early as he doesn't remember not being able to. My older son was retractable at about 5. My younger one isn't yet, he's 4. I believe that we were given no advice on how to care for our intact son. I think I looked it up. It was 9 years ago so I don't remember for sure. I'm pretty sure DH only knew because I told him not to retract.

[Thrifty917]

This is important information to spread!

My DH is intact and told me the story of forcibly retracting himself (causing pain and bleeding) when he was 4 or 5 years old because he "wanted to see what was inside." I'm not sure whether or not he knew about proper intact care for babies, but I mentioned it while pregnant offhand, so I was sure he knew. But I'm pretty sure he had figured that out himself anyway, what with the pain and bleeding and all. LOL. (And because someone asked, no he is not from the U.S.)

[13Sandals]

this is a good point for moms of intact boys. My older son didn't fully retract until after 8, so he will remember both, but my middle boy was fully retractable by 2. I'm sure he will only have memories of being retractable, so if someone doesn't tell him what a newborn will look like, how will he know? In my high school biology class they taught circumcision, but not 'intact', care. I wonder if they do that now?

[AFWife]

Originally Posted by 13Sandals

this is a good point for moms of intact boys. My older son didn't fully retract until after 8, so he will remember both, but my middle boy was fully retractable by 2. I'm sure he will only have memories of being retractable, so if someone doesn't tell him what a newborn will look like, how will he know? In my high school biology class they taught circumcision, but not 'intact', care. I wonder if they do that now?

I don't remember either (and I graduated in 2005)

[AFWife]

Originally Posted by Frootloop

in the end, he was circumcised without anesthesia around 2 years old because of repeated infections "which were caused by his foreskin being too tight and adhesions".

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm still new to the idea) but aren't "adhesions" normal for the first several years for an intact boy? It's supposed to be "stuck to" the penis right?

[GoBecGo]

there is a non-retracting foreskin and there are adhesions. my dad was retracted so much "to clean" as a baby he needed a circ due to his horribly scarred and adhered foreskin. he is still very scarred, you can see where he had repeated scarring and infections (he tells me my mother told him - i have never examined it all!).

my DH is UK, as was XP, both cannot remember being non-retractable, and can remember being retractable by the time they were paying attention, around age 4. neither were forcibly retracted.

[Frootloop]

Originally Posted by AFWife

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm still new to the idea) but aren't "adhesions" normal for the first several years for an intact boy? It's supposed to be "stuck to" the penis right?

Oh no, you're totally correct! I'm sorry I didn't explain well.

My brother was eventually circ'd because of the forced retraction he was repeatedly subjected to, beginning as a newborn. My mother and father (who was intact) wanted to leave him intact, but my mom was yelled at (apparently, literally yelled at) numerous times by my brother's pediatrician for not retracting him to clean with every change. This happened over and over and over because my brother kept getting "infections" and "adhesions".. well, DUH!!! Mom felt in her gut that it was wrong to do (and apparently, my father didn't know any better, either).. and she couldn't stand to do it at every change. But, every time she brought DB in (not long after her retracting him completely, through her tears, as she was directed), the doctor would rip it away yet again and blame her for the problem. Mom finally agreed to the circumsion when DB was 2 yrs old.. his poor penis was a complete mess and full of true adhesions. This was the reason that my mom was all for me circumcising my son.. she didn't want him to go through the same kind of hell.
It was only a couple years ago (if that long) that everything unfolded and she found out the truth of what that doctor caused.

[skybluepink02]

I agree. My kid's dad grew up in the times of forced retraction. I had to educate him and his parents. He had lots of problems with "adhesions" and "phimosis" that I am sure could have been avoided.

[hakunangovi]

Originally Posted by skybluepink02

I agree. My kid's dad grew up in the times of forced retraction. I had to educate him and his parents. He had lots of problems with "adhesions" and "phimosis" that I am sure could have been avoided.

I am sure the "problems" with "adhesions" and "phimosis" were not real - only in the doctors mind.

I work with a guy who was circumcised because his older brother, who was intact, apparently had a lot of problems. I would bet real money that these were directly caused by an ignorant doctor forcibly retracting him, or ordering his mother to do the same.