A loose circumcision?

[RJones1204]

So DH and I were working in the church nursery, as expected there were dipes to be changed. There was a new little guy in there who was about 9mths old. His circ looked very different from any other little boys I have seen. He still had a lot of skin. Only about 2/3 of his glans showed. DH even asked (later when we were at home) "do you think maybe they just pushed the skin back and left it like that"....because that is how much there was. I told him no he def had a circ because you can see a tiny bit of the inside foreskin its a different texture then the outside shaft skin. But anyhow is that the definition of a "loose" circ?  

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

Yes that is how a loose circ looks.

[AFWife]

My DS1 has a loose circ and that sounds like his penis. MIL actually thought they had done it wrong and it would need to be redone because it was different from her boys...

[Galatea]

If there is anything positive about a circumcision, having it be loose would be it.  Will be better than a tight one as an adult.  But also makes for more complicated care as it is healing.

[buckeyedoc]

Yes, I have seen that in babies over the last few years. Makes the surgery extra pointless for the reasons most parents use to do it, IMO.

[bugmenot]

Originally Posted by Galatea 

If there is anything positive about a circumcision, having it be loose would be it.  Will be better than a tight one as an adult.  But also makes for more complicated care as it is healing.

Originally Posted by buckeyedoc 

Yes, I have seen that in babies over the last few years. Makes the surgery extra pointless for the reasons most parents use to do it, IMO.

It does seem like more and more circs are of the "loose" variety.  I think circumcisionists are starting to realize that "more skin removed = the worse it is" and are leaving skin for everything to "grow into it."

In addition, it seems like more and more frenulums are remaining, which is another good thing.

As I think we all know, a tighter circumcision can lead to stretching/pulling during erection, and all sorts of other nastyness.  For those who are circumcised, a loose one is certainly better.

[Smithie]

My DH was apparently on the leading edge of this trend. I'm a fan, given the alternative, but it does seem to be the worse of both worlds in terms destroying sensitive tissue without removing the necessity to retract for cleansing as an adult. 

[KMomto2xy]

I think the point is to shut up all the anti-circumcision people.  The doctors doing circumcisions presumably see it as a compromise, it eliminates some of the problems like hairy shaft, bent shaft, buried penis, and painful erections, unfortunately it comes at the cost of painful adhesions, that most doctors just think need to be ripped apart, along with an anecdotal increase in the risk of 'needing' to be recircumcised (because the doctor left too much).  How parents can go along with that is beyond me.  Regardless, I think they recognized if they kept doing the tight circumcisions that the tide would turn toward not circumcising much much faster.

[Frootloop]

Originally Posted by KMomto2xy 

I think the point is to shut up all the anti-circumcision people.  The doctors doing circumcisions presumably see it as a compromise, it eliminates some of the problems like hairy shaft, bent shaft, buried penis, and painful erections, unfortunately it comes at the cost of painful adhesions, that most doctors just think need to be ripped apart, along with an anecdotal increase in the risk of 'needing' to be recircumcised (because the doctor left too much).  How parents can go along with that is beyond me.  Regardless, I think they recognized if they kept doing the tight circumcisions that the tide would turn toward not circumcising much much faster.

Bolding mine..

While I am thankful that some of the things you mentioned are being eliminated somewhat, the fact that doctors are taking away less foreskin, but still not learning about how to deal with an intact penis.. in many cases, it's just enforcing the idea that foreskins cause problems. I've heard some parents venting about how the doctors left all this foreskin and how it's such a hassle to deal with having to keep pulling it back (and causing the baby more pain) to prevent adhesions, etc etc and that this is why they wanted the circumcision to begin with.. so they didn't have to deal with any "problems" that leaving him intact causes. Then they go for a recirc.

So, yes.. while these loose circumcisions are helping the baby in the long run (if people would just leave it alone and NOT go for a recirc), it's causing other issues, as well.

[KMomto2xy]

Originally Posted by Frootloop 

Originally Posted by KMomto2xy 

I think the point is to shut up all the anti-circumcision people.  The doctors doing circumcisions presumably see it as a compromise, it eliminates some of the problems like hairy shaft, bent shaft, buried penis, and painful erections, unfortunately it comes at the cost of painful adhesions, that most doctors just think need to be ripped apart, along with an anecdotal increase in the risk of 'needing' to be recircumcised (because the doctor left too much).  How parents can go along with that is beyond me.  Regardless, I think they recognized if they kept doing the tight circumcisions that the tide would turn toward not circumcising much much faster.

Bolding mine..

While I am thankful that some of the things you mentioned are being eliminated somewhat, the fact that doctors are taking away less foreskin, but still not learning about how to deal with an intact penis.. in many cases, it's just enforcing the idea that foreskins cause problems. I've heard some parents venting about how the doctors left all this foreskin and how it's such a hassle to deal with having to keep pulling it back (and causing the baby more pain) to prevent adhesions, etc etc and that this is why they wanted the circumcision to begin with.. so they didn't have to deal with any "problems" that leaving him intact causes. Then they go for a recirc.

So, yes.. while these loose circumcisions are helping the baby in the long run (if people would just leave it alone and NOT go for a recirc), it's causing other issues, as well.

Unfortunately on the issue of adhesions there's not a lot known about the looser circumcisions.   Once the synchotomy is performed,  the bond from the prepuce to the glans is broken.  Someone used a good analogy that I saw, unfortunately I have to most unholy terrible memory in existence, so I don't remember what it was except I think it involved glass and water? lol.  In any case, from what I understand, you may need to treat a loose circumcision differently than you would an intact penis, because the situation is different.  Or you may not need to.  They're not really sure.  I think the best thing is to err on the side of caution and leave it alone unless it's somehow affecting the boy, or if you can't do that, to make sure you're gently pulling it back from the get-go and using lots of vaseline as lubrication.  If you leave it alone and it forms adhesions (it doesn't always) then you can use the steroid cream and stretching exercises when he's older and it's more appropriate.  That's far less painful, I think.

Regardless, I think the most significant problem today is because many intactavists approach this from a moralistic standpoint instead of a practical one.  I think if we could get the facts out without putting people on the defensive, then we'd get a lot more info to a larger group of people.