Give me a reason why...

[amyjeans]

I am so happy to have found this site! Not only for the birth and vaccination info, but the circumcision topic as well!

My husband and I have 2 girls, and can't wait for the boy (s) someday. We talked about circ and based on our knowledge...(none) we were planning on circ if we had a boy. Why? Because...frankly, doesn't everyone do it?(is that mainstream or what?)

We made our choices with birth based on mistakes we and others made, and are all the more wiser for it. We don't want to make a mistake with our boys in order to learn.

I learned about the pain and suffering, the brutality and ignorance in circ and we are not going to do it to our babes.

I am curious as to what concrete reasons are there for circ. I see so many logical reasons for not doing it...and to me they outweight the reasons to do it.

A special thank you to those women who educated me about the horror of circ, whether by posts or links in their signatures.

Warm Regards,

[Quirky]

I personally don't think there are any valid reasons to circ. To me this is not one of those "on the one hand....on the other hand" decisions with merit on both sides. It is genital mutilation, plain and simple. If you wouldn't cut your daughter's genitals to (fill in the blank - prevent disease - look like mommy - avoid locker room teasing - fulfill a religious commandment - whatever) then why would you cut your son's?

Circumcision - all pain, no gain.

[loving-my-babies]

There are no valid reason. The ones I know of are ignorance, or peer pressure.

[Mamm2]

There are no good reasons to circ. In my opinion, there are ussually two reasons why people end up doing it:
-ignorance
-peer pressure

Ignorance I think is the biggie. However, I know of many people who have the information YET they still circ.

[mattemma04]

For valid reasons(medical) you would have to take a look at the countries that do not circumcise their general population,and see what they do,when,and why.
I would not look at the US medical excuses because doctors in this country are soooooo ignorant about normal male genitalia that they are pushing for retraction from birth and circ from an early age to cure problems that aren't really problems at all!

[Frankly Speaking]

AmyJean:

You have to look no further than The American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement on circumcision to understand that there are no concrete reasons.

In their policy statement they say that they "have reviewed all current research" on circumcision and have found that "the risks outweigh the potential benefits."

To clearly understand what they are saying, you have to disect their statement into it's individual components. First, that they have reviewed all current research. The AAP's Taskforce on Circumcision first conveined in the late 1960's and has reconveined approximately every 5 years since then to review all new research. After each of these meetings, they have reconsidered their policy statement and it has remained essentially unchanged for more than 30 years. Regardless of what you may see that seems to support circumcision, they have reviewed it and have found no information that would change their minds. A new statement should be out soon and I expect no change except they may possibly strengthen it to support not circumcising.

The second part is about risks. Those risks can be severe and debilitating to their victims. They include severe infection, partial or complete loss of the organ, additional surgery or even death. Two separate studies done 20 years apart show that more than 200 babies die every year from complications of circumcision. For intact babies, the problems they have are very rarely required to be treated with surgery, there has never been a baby that has died because he was not circumcised as far as I know and I have never heard of a baby that has lost his penis because he was not circumcised.

The third part is about potential benefits. This is medically speaking and "potential" is defined as capable of existing but not conclusively known to exist. In other words, there are no known medical benefits to infant circumcision. This is after they have been reviewing all of the medical research for more than 30 years.

The final part I want to discuss is that the AAP's taskforce is dominated by a special interest group that wants to preserve circumcision and to that end they state that it is legitimate for the parents to consider social and other reasons in making the circumcision decision. This nebulous statement is outside their area of expertise. They are not lawyers so they can not advise on legal matters. They are not socialologists so they can not legitimately advise on social issues. These are spurious issues to the medical questions and are a result of this group's special interest in circumcision and justification for them to continue the procedure unchallenged. It is something you should probably not concern yourself about.

Basically, there are no concrete reasons to circumcise a male child and many concrete reasons why you shouldn't.




Frank

[loving-my-babies]

I also think that if the AAP were to openly say the truth, that circumcision hurts children and has NO benefits whatsoever, law suits would fly like you wouldn't believe, because they recommended it once and parents believed their lies. That's why I don't think they will ever tell the truth.

[amyjeans]

Fantastic Post Frank! Very well spoken I might add.
I know now that there is no good reason to circumsize. Its amazing how the medical community is so stuck in their twisted, medevil ways!
My babies will be born and will stay complete.
Thanks for all your responses.

ALl my best

[KellyB]

The best reason I've read is that cancer of the foreskin is more common in intact men.
Hmmm...
I'm thinking of starting a campaine to begin the practice RIM...routine infant masectomy...to prevent breast cancer later in life.

[Annie]

Originally Posted by Quirky

Circumcision - all pain, no gain.

That would make the perfect bumper sticker or advocacy shirt. Just had to say that.

[Galatea]

There are no reasons. There are just ignorant people who refuse to confront or acknowledge their own mistakes.

[annab]

The one that I hear the most often is the 'look like his daddy' reason, which of course is vanity run amuck. How hard is it to explain, "When daddy was little, almost all little boys had their penises cut. When you were born, daddy and mommy made the choice not to do that to you." If you did a poll of people about why they did it, I think that would rank first behind, "We have a choice?"

And as is evident among my sibs, some people admantly do not want to be educated about this or any natural living topics.

[MelissaEvans]

Rearranging what's been said, I think the "reasons" are emotional. Dad's can't admit that something of theirs was taken; doctors and nurses can't admit that they've hurt babies; other parents who cut their sons can't admit that they did something horrible. No one wants to say they were wrong, that they permanently worsened a newborn's life, that what they did was unethical. So they hide their heads in the sand and try to get others to follow suit.

[Benji'sMom]

Originally Posted by annab

The one that I hear the most often is the 'look like his daddy' reason, which of course is vanity run amuck.

Yeah, when I hear that one, it makes me wonder, do they plan on walking around with their penises hanging out? Why else would they have to have matching penises? Honestly, most boys probably never see their dad's penis, so really the dad is worrying about something that is not worth worrying about.

[zaftigmama]

There are no good reasons to mutilate an infant's genitals. It's horrifying that this country continues to encourage parents to circumcise their sons.

As for reasons that this won't change (and I agree with the PP that said lawsuits may be a reason as well) is because it's a money making industry. Why would the medical community not want to continue to collect an average of $250 per circumcision from the insurance companies who cover this elective procedure?? They must make millions, if not billions simply from circumcising.

The obvious answer is because in the Hippocratic Oath they promise to do no harm, and should be more concerned with the health of these babies. But we all know, sadly, the bottom line is financial and always will be.

Take care!

[earthmama007]

The obvious answer is because in the Hippocratic Oath they promise to do no harm, and should be more concerned with the health of these babies. But we all know, sadly, the bottom line is financial and always will be.

ITA with this! It is B*** S*** and it makes me sick.


The number one reasons I hear are either to look like dad and it is easier to clean. My Responses to these: My hubby is cut and he doesn't want our son to look like him because that would require removing a functioning part of his body. For the other I simply say gosh, having a vagina isn't hard to clean and neither is my son's penis. I clean as I would a finger or a nose, just wipe and go!

[Frankly Speaking]

Its amazing how the medical community is so stuck in their twisted, medevil ways!

You have to realize that for the most part, these people are people who are circumcised or have circumcised their sons. They have an investment in circumcision that they have to protect with the bodies of their patients.

The best reason I've read is that cancer of the foreskin is more common in intact men.

That has been used as a justification for decades. However, the meidcal profession has never been able to explain why most uncircumcising European countries have a lower penile cancer rate than majority circumcised America. the truth of the matter is that penile cancer is probably the result of an HPV infection and both circumcised and intact men can get this infection. There will be a vaccine available early next year that will make this a moot issue.

The one that I hear the most often is the 'look like his daddy' reason, which of course is vanity run amuck.

Circumcision of a child is all about the father's comfort with what was done to him rather than any emotional issues of the child.

So they hide their heads in the sand and try to get others to follow suit.

If you don't circumcise your son to conform to what they did, you are upsetting the status quo. the mere presence of a happy and healthy intact boy is viewed as a condemnation of what they did. However, they will never admit this. They have an investment in circumcision . . . A very intense and personal investment.

is because it's a money making industry. Why would the medical community not want to continue to collect an average of $250 per circumcision from the insurance companies who cover this elective procedure?? They must make millions, if not billions simply from circumcising.

Absolutely! A busy OB/GYN can make $70,000.00 a year from circumcisions alone and from what is essentially a sideline and part time job. I'd hate to give up that kind of money too! The people who run the insurance companies have an investment in circumcision. They are mostly circumcised and have mostly circumcised their sons. The decision to cover the costs of circumcisions is not a business decision, it's an emotional decision. They say they cover it because their customers demand it. BULL! Their business would not be affected one iota if they dropped circumcision coverage except they would become more profitable. The circumcision industry is estimated to be between $700 million to $1 billion a year. Think of all of the ways that money could be put to better uses! (I could use a new yacht!)



Frank

[mattemma04]

And now that foreskins have gone from the trash to the medical research labs there is even more of an incentive to cut boys.You get paid to cut them off,and then you get paid for those cut parts by private companies that use the cells.

[calpurnia]

Well, I can tell you that my partner was circed age 12 because he was seriously infected. So i guess there was a reason behind that.

I've never understood the "he has to look like his daddy" argument. My father is circed and my brothers aren't, and at first we thought that that was what a grown-up penis looked like, and then we understood that when and where daddy was born (50s South Africa) boys were circumcised but we don't do that here (80s England). Not difficult!

[Nathan1097]

Originally Posted by Frankly Speaking

Think of all of the ways that money could be put to better uses! (I could use a new yacht!)



Frank

Oh brother! Let me just roll my eyes a few thousand times! :LOL