So we were explaining that he's red on the glans (like I thought that was part of his symptoms of the UTI) and he checked because I guess the irritation of the glans and foreskin is separate from the UTI/Bladder infection. So he pulled back on the foreskin but only as far as it would go (1/3 of the way back on the glans). And it is all red in there.
What he said was that at 4 years old he should be able to fully retract himself, and that DS has "adhesions" and should probably be circed because his foreskin is "adhering" to the glans, which will cause problems later with erections and whatnot. I immediately stated that we are philosophically opposed to circ, and was this a medically necessary thing or did he think we could, you know, work on it, like in the shower and stuff. He responded well, telling us that there was no immediate need to circ and yes, we could work on getting him to retract more. To avoid (or attempt to avoid) a medically necessary circ.
So any experience with this? I'm under the impression that forcibly retracting is a bad thing, but is "working on it" going to cause infection? If he does have "adhesion" problems, will it negatively affect him to the point of needing circ? A medically necessary circ later in life is not at all the same as cutting an innocent baby, IMO. And I don't have to make a decision right away, DS can have plently of feedback on it, you know? But it really does look like his foreskin is, um, too small of an opening for his glans. Whether it's actually "adhered" to the glans, well I guess I have my doubts, but it could be?
FTR, if it helps, my DH had some adhesion problems in puberty and when he worked on them, he retracted himself and it never went back. So he's permanently retracted, which makes him looked circumcised. I guess I'm sharing because there's some genetics at play here and also his dad has history of pain and issues with it.
Any feed back is helpful, and TIA!