Question about pain relief 25-35 years ago...

[Shaunam]

I know that lots of babies circ'ed today don't get pain relief. What about 25-35 years ago? I'm assuming it was even worse back then. People still believed the babies didn't feel it, right?

Does anyone know statistics? Or do any of you know what it was like back then? I'm only 21 so I definitely don't remember and my mom insists that most babies got pain relief.

[Past_VNE]

Someone with more 'hard facts' than I have will come reply, I'm sure.

It was rare, definitely. Usually, if they got anything, it was a sweetened pacifier as a distraction. That is screwed up. "Here, suck on this candy while I hack away at your penis." Sooo sad.

You mom wants to believe that. It makes her feel better. Not that she probably realizes it.

[loving-my-babies]

Yes, unfortunately your mom wants to believe something that is not true. Until 5 years ago, the vast majority of circumcisions were done without pain-relief, and even now, unbelievably enough, not all circumcisions are done with pain relief. LOTS of circumcisions are done with EMLA cream or other topical anesthetics that are, like perhaps putting some teething gel on the penis before cutting the foreskin off. Basically.. useless!! and like Frank said once... those sweet things they give the baby to suck on truly don't work... it's like me eating a hot fudge sunday while they cut my finger off, I *THINK* it wouldn't really care WHAT I had in my mouth at that point...

[Shaunam]

My brother was circ'ed 31 years ago. I know she said that to justify it. Since she's heard all my reasons for not circ'ing, I think she's starting to really think about it.

I just want to know for personal reasons. I'm just curious to whether my DH and my brother received pain relief. Probably not

It makes me depressed just to think about it.

[susienjay]

I think the prevailing thought used to be that babies don't feel pain. That is why my mil says she let both her boys be circed without pain meds. Obviously she realizes how stupid this sounds today. Babies feel pain just like everyone else.

[Frankly Speaking]

At that time, it was so rare for any baby to get any pain relief that you could almost say that none did. Even today, only slightly over 1 in 5 get any pain relief and less than 1 in 25 get what The AAP considers adequate and humane pain relief.

Our sensitivity to pain increases from the moment of conception and peaks about 6-8 weeks prior to birth. It stays at this peak for about 16 weeks or until about 8 weeks post partum and then begins to lessen. This gradual reduction of sensitivity to pain continues for the rest of our lives. This explains why a child who skins a knee or elbow acts like it is in extreme pain and an adult who suffers the same injury just shakes it off an goes on about their business. It hurts the child far worse than it hurts the adult because the child is far, far more sensitive to pain.

Some people assert that an adult circumcision is more painful than an infant circumcision. These people just don't understand pain. In actuality, it is the infants that should be getting full pain meds and the adults who should be going through the procedure with no pain medications if anyone has to tough it out. It would be the adult that would feel less pain because of their lessened sensitivity.




Frank

[njeb]

No, there was no pain relief given 25 years ago, which is why my 25 year old son is intact. Thank goodness I'd decided to give birth at home with informed midwives! If I'd had him in the hospital, chances are he would have come home without his foreskin.

[boingo82]

Originally Posted by Frankly Speaking

At that time, it was so rare for any baby to get any pain relief that you could almost say that none did. Even today, only slightly over 1 in 5 get any pain relief and less than 1 in 25 get what The AAP considers adequate and humane pain relief...

Frank, I know the numbers are low, but last I saw it was just under half that got any pain relief. Where did you get the 1/5 number? I'd love to update my links.

[Frankly Speaking]

I think maybe you misinterpreted the statistics. There was a survey of doctors that perform circumcisions that partially resulted in The AAP's policy statement that pain relief should be administered. In that survey, they found that only 53% of pediatricians had ever used pain relief and only 22% of OB/GYNs had ever used pain relief so less than those percentages use pain relief every time. Some had only used pain relief only once or twice and decided it was too time consuming and discontinued it's use. They also found that 80% of all circumcisions are performed by OB/GYNs and only 15% by Peds and 5% by family practitioners, so by doing some calculations, you will see that my numbers are approximate but as close as you can come to an accurate number given the information provided. If anything, they assume more circumcisers are providing pain relief than actually are and the actual numbers and percentages of boys that get pain relief realistically may be statistically lower than my numbers. If you will notice, I always couch my statements as "less than XX% of . . . " which leaves it somewhat open but gets the message across that doctors are torturing newborn babies unnecessarily when significant pain management is readily available.




Frank

[boingo82]

Originally Posted by Frankly Speaking

I think maybe you misinterpreted the statistics.

I think maybe I had *different* statistics, from a different study.

There was a survey of doctors that perform circumcisions that partially resulted in The AAP's policy statement that pain relief should be administered. In that survey, they found that only 53% of pediatricians had ever used pain relief and only 22% of OB/GYNs had ever used pain relief so less than those percentages use pain relief every time. Some had only used pain relief only once or twice and decided it was too time consuming and discontinued it's use. They also found that 80% of all circumcisions are performed by OB/GYNs and only 15% by Peds and 5% by family practitioners, so by doing some calculations, you will see that my numbers are approximate but as close as you can come to an accurate number given the information provided. If anything, they assume more circumcisers are providing pain relief than actually are and the actual numbers and percentages of boys that get pain relief realistically may be statistically lower than my numbers. If you will notice, I always couch my statements as "less than XX% of . . . " which leaves it somewhat open but gets the message across that doctors are torturing newborn babies unnecessarily when significant pain management is readily available.
Frank

OK. Interesting. Link would've been appreciated.

Here's mine. Granted it is from one hospital in Chicago, so it doesn't speak for the nation, but it gives numbers flat out without requiring computation.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/491035
mediajunkie
mediajunkie