Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › The Medical Definition of Phimosis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Medical Definition of Phimosis - Page 2  

post #21 of 36
Quote:
You all certainly have a different way of doing things on that side of the Atlantic.
You can refuse the papoose. You just have to be willing to sign a consent form for IV sedation & accept those risks. One of my children needed stitches on their face, it was a 2-layer closure & we insisted upon a plastic surgeon. We waited about an hour longer for him, and he approved the IV sedation, etc. It was worth it. There is virtually no evidence of the original injury.

There are options, but many times the docs do what is fastest/easiest for them. One problem we do have in this country is considering the emotional impact medical procedures have upon our children. But that's a soapbox for another time
post #22 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by busymomof5
You may, however, be failing to recognize how 1. complicit many parents are in forcing the issue of wanting to have their child circumcised and 2. the fact that many newer trained docs don't advocate routine circumcision.
.
We talk about parental complicity ALL the time. Check out some threads and you'll see us bemoaning sisters, brothers, friends with whom we shared information, and who decided to circ anyways.

But what other cosmetic surgery is a doc willing to perform on a baby? If I insist that my daughter's labia are too long and want them trimmed, will any doc in the country not kick me out of her office?

And yes, it's a start that newer docs aren't so actively PUSHING circ as they did when my husband was an infant.

They are, however, pretending to be neutral on the issue, telling parents, "You can consider cultural and personal reasons in your decision" which can mean anything the parents think it does. Even my OB, who did not cut his own sons, was very carefully noncommittal on this issue.

Would it be the same if I'd asked him what his stance on female genital cutting was? He probably would have choked on his coffee.

Maybe I'll try it next time I get pregnant.

post #23 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by acrathbun
You can refuse the papoose. You just have to be willing to sign a consent form for IV sedation & accept those risks. One of my children needed stitches on their face, it was a 2-layer closure & we insisted upon a plastic surgeon. We waited about an hour longer for him, and he approved the IV sedation, etc. It was worth it. There is virtually no evidence of the original injury.

There are options, but many times the docs do what is fastest/easiest for them. One problem we do have in this country is considering the emotional impact medical procedures have upon our children. But that's a soapbox for another time
I think some mom's would prefer the pappoose to IV sedation. I have not been in this situation but if it came between local anisthesia and a pappoose or sedation with all its risks I would choose the pappoose for my daughter and stay and comfort her like the Mom of Five did.
post #24 of 36
My son has had stitches in his face twice. At 14 months, he split open his eyebrow, like a "Y". The site was numbed with a topical (EMLA perhaps?) for 30 minutes or so before anesthetic was injected to the site. The doctor explained that she would wrap up the baby in a sheet, so he couldn't flail his arms and legs around. I was with him the entire time, comforting and soothing him. He was only wrapped for a few minutes.

A few weeks later we were back in the ER (isn't it wonderful to have healthy, active kids who can run into things, and put a tooth through a lip while bouncing up and down in a toybox?) This one required two stitches in his mouth and two stitches outside. Same ER doctor! An EMT who was assisting suggested Versad (sp?), a liquid drug squirted up the nose (my DH had the same thing for an upper endoscopy). It didn't knock my son out, but it made him not care at all what as going on around him - or how many people had hands in his mouth. Again I was with him the whole time, as close as I could be without getting in the way.

Fortunately my son's clumsy habits have not continued - it's been 10 years with no more stitches or broken bones.
post #25 of 36
Versad? Interesting, I will have to look into this. We refused the papoose board when our son was in the ER for rota virus. The had to draw blood and start an IV and wanted to papoose him. We declined and held him instead. This worked for us, but may not always be possible.
There was a thread in my local mothering group discussing dentists for young toddlers. The mother was looking for recommendations for dentists who 'allow' the parent to go back with the child. The discussion brought up such issues as the child being taken for exam and work without the parent (office policy), children being papoosed as a matter of course, GA administered for an exam (with no problems to indicate such a thing). Just so we can make sure those temporary baby teeth are clean. I know dental health is important, but it's not that important, sorry folks. Yeah, a painful, infected tooth, I could see administering something to make the procedure possible, but I think I would opt for GA or something similar. I would likely come here and get suggestions for research before allowing GA or a papoose board on the recommendation of the dentist.
post #26 of 36
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minky
I think some mom's would prefer the pappoose to IV sedation. I have not been in this situation but if it came between local anisthesia and a pappoose or sedation with all its risks I would choose the pappoose for my daughter and stay and comfort her like the Mom of Five did.

Thanks....There are risks with IV sedation and other medications and the papoosing/stitching seriously lasted less time than when we tried to get his head and body still to just numb it up. He was more hysterical from the first attempts than the papoosing.

There are no easy choices as a parent and we have sometimes have to make them in a short period of time. Papoosing isn't ideal, but I prefer it to the risks of IV sedation.

Of course, I'm sure if the doc came out and suggested IV sedation first, there would be people opposed to that too...ie 'how dare the doc suggest drugging my child'....trust me...I've met those people too. And no...I'm not implying that anyone on this forum would respond that way...It's just that sometimes, the doc can't win. If he doesn't prescribe antibiotics for ear infections/colds (because it's not standard of care to prescribe antibiotics for viruses) the doc has parents hollering and carrying on and insisting they will switch docs if they don't get what they 'know' that their child needs. If they do prescribe antibiotics for an infection, they get parents who refuse to fill it and run to their naturopath...it's lose-lose sometimes...though certainly not all the time.
post #27 of 36
I wonder what they do over here, tying a child up just isn't an option, and how in the world do you keep their face still?
post #28 of 36
My son needed lots of work on his lips after a bad bike fall and he had a GA. But thats in NZ.
post #29 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by busymomof5
Thanks...I think you hold the minority opinion though about me sticking around.
As long as you can deal with the fact many of us don't trust doctors with intact penises, we'll be cool
post #30 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by busymomof5
Is actually a tightening of the foreskin around the penis which can be caused by infection or other illness like ... interestingly....diabetes....

Treatement usually does NOT involve circumcision in children...go check the medical literature, people. Phimosis is the word to describe the tightening of the foreskin and it usually goes away with time or treatment of the infection.

Phimosis does not equal CUT.

http://www.nhhn.org/15704.cfm
You have to realize that there are two forms of phimosis and I think many docs see only that first paragraph. When they see a tight foreskin on an infant or toddler, they diagnose phimosis and "if it's tight, the only way to loosen it is cut it off."

Just from the posts I have seen here in the years I have been here, this seems to be the level of information of a lot, if not most doctors. Check the sticky at the top of the forum titled "A Warning for Parents of Intact Sons" and you will see ample evidence of this.

Practically every baby boy is born with normal and natural developmental phimosis. It's the normal condition of 99%+ male neonates and as the penis develops, the normal adhesions between the foreskin and glans will disolve and the non-elastic constrictive tissue surrounding the foreskin opening will be naturally replaced with naturally elastic tissue. This is where many doctors run afoul. They diagnose this totally normal condition as pathological phimosis.

Pathological phimosis is a rare and abnormal condition. It is exclusively caused by infectious pathogens or physical trauma. It does not happen over night, it takes years to develop. We have had many mothers of boys less that 2 years come here in a panic because they have gotten a diagnosis of pathological phimosis when there has been no pathology and that's just not possible.

One significant problem is that many, if not most doctors erroneously believe that if a child's foreskin is not retractile by 3 YO, he has pathological phimosis even without pathology. In truth, it is not unusual for the child to have normal developmental phimosis that does not self resolve until after puberty.


Quote:
Thanks...I think you hold the minority opinion though about me sticking around.
Probably not! We are a tremendously welcoming community here but we are also of a common mind on a vast number of topics about circumcision. We have literally had thousands of men and women pass through the portals of this forum in the years I have been here.

There was a perception when you first posted here that since you are a doctor’s wife, you felt you had “special” information and had come here to impart it to the unwashed. You also came with the perceived attitude that you could change our sinful ways with warnings of lawsuits.

I have watched this forum develop over the last 4 years. When I first came here, nobody knew the difference between normal developmental phimosis and pathological phimosis. Nobody had heard of normal separation trauma or what to do about it. Nobody knew to demand a culture for a suspected infection. Nobody had a clue what frenulum breve, hypospadias/epispadias, chordee, adhesions, aposthia or many other things are. But, over that 4 years, we have painfully built a solid base of knowledge. This forum has become the “go to place” for accurate information and we draw members looking for help from at least 8 other sites Now, for you to come here and try to nullify the efforts and investment to get that knowledge and completely change what this board basically is? . . . Well, I guess you can understand that it will not be well received!

I remember when nationally known pediatrician, Dr. Jay Gordon came here and posted. Now, mind you that Dr. Gordon does not perform circumcisions and has been very public about it. He posted some things that were not accurate and he was corrected It kind of set him aback but he maintained his composure and accepted that he was not as informed as he thought he was. He was certainly welcomed into the “family.”

When I first came here, I had a little information but didn’t try to force it. I patiently earned my stripes and built on my level of knowledge. At this point, I can push the boundaries a little bit but if I go too far, I certainly get called down. There is always someone watching me and someone always willing to counter my information. I try to take it with as much grace as I can muster. You might try the same approach. I’m sure you can become a much beloved member of the family just as hundreds of others have.



Frank
post #31 of 36
I have to add, it's true many doctors don't recommend forcibly retracting, but they do recommend 'pushing it back a bit' to clean and check it out. Now, to most people here, it's the same, but to *some* docs, it's different. There has been post after post of a doc who wasn't retracting, just pushing back a little.
post #32 of 36
Michelle, that's my story, too. At our last visit, I had made it VERY clear how I felt about it and my doctor and I agreed to disagree and he would respect my decision about the penis and foreskin and phimosis. But then he started messing with it! I repeated "Please don't retract him" "I'm not, I'm just pushing it back a little to see the urethra to make sure it's healthy and I'm concerned that the foreskin is so tight that I can't really see the urethra. The foreskin is really too tight and I'm worried." "Well he can pee fine and he's not in pain. He's fine." But I again had to ask him to put the diaper back on, "you're done now with his penis." And I really love this doc and hope to work with him for many years. He's just SO ignorant of the penis and foreskin. If I hadn't come here...but I said this already, just agreeing with you that's not always blatant and a mother (parent!) has to be on guard and knowledgable to protect her child.
post #33 of 36
If anyone wants to check a circ support board for medical advice, please pm me, I'll be happy to get some more opinions other than my own. I certainly think it toes the line but I'm just a newby and not as well versed as I wish. Maybe I'm sometimes over sensitive.

Just bring puke buckets, because it is not easy to read.

Jessica
post #34 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by busymomof5
Thanks...I think you hold the minority opinion though about me sticking around.

I also think you should pull up a chair and get comfortable here.

~Nay
post #35 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by busymomof5
I am still glad that I had a VBAC with #2 and #3, BUT, I see now from experience that it isn't just all hot air they are trying to blow up our skirts...there are dangers involved in VBACS.

Hey Busymomof5,

I've never had a cesarean section, but I've read into them somewhat. One thing I remember reading is that for awhile doctors were sewing up the mothers ceaseran incisions with only one set of stitches instead of two. This causes an increased risk of rupture....

Okay, I just tried to find the information. I'm 100% positive I read it somewhere. Brain, why aren't you working!! I will try to find it and post it later.

~Nay
post #36 of 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntoninBeGonin
I've never had a cesarean section, but I've read into them somewhat. One thing I remember reading is that for awhile doctors were sewing up the mothers ceaseran incisions with only one set of stitches instead of two. This causes an increased risk of rupture....


Actually, Nay, a single layer closure doesn't increase rupture risk (its the usual closure in Europe), but some people decided it should, one or 2 studies seemed to show it did and a lot of women got scared out of vbac. More recent studies show it doesn't affect rupture risk.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Case Against Circumcision
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › The Medical Definition of Phimosis