How old is too old?

[catholic74]

I am not interested in circumcizing my 3 month old, but when I decided not to circumcize my son, my husband did not agree with me and still brings up the issue. He'll say "I still want him circumcized" and other such things. I continue to explain why I cannot agree to circumcision, but I also didn't think you could bring a baby as old as ours in for circumcision anyway. Does anyone know? I'm just curious. At what age would they refuse to circumcize him anyway, if any. If there is an age "cut off" (no pun intended) what is it so I can tell my husband that it's "too late" anyway.

[Calidris]

Some circing cultures don't circ til 8 or so. Adults sometimes choose to get circumcised. A lot of medically "necessary" circumcisions take place on older children.
So I guess there is no cut off date.

Sorry.

[QueenOfThePride]

Just tell your DH that it's too late anyway.

[alegna]

They would never refuse. HOWEVER it must now be done under general anesthesia. And some providers won't do general for an elective procedure until 6 months or a year.

-Angela

[LavenderMae]

yes, he can still be circed and it probably wouldn't be hard to find a doctor more than willing to do it unfortunately. But I would tell you dh is too late because you know better and it's not going to happen.

[catholic74]

Originally Posted by alegna

They would never refuse. HOWEVER it must now be done under general anesthesia. And some providers won't do general for an elective procedure until 6 months or a year.

-Angela

Well, here's what I want to know. Why must it be done under general anesthesia once the baby is older? If a local anesthetic "works" on an infant, why wouldn't it work on a 6 month old or an older toddler? Just curious?

I would imagine that there are more risks with general anesthesia. It sounds scarier to me than a local. I would hope my husband wouldn't be willing to risk it just to have him circumcized. I would never consent anyway so I'm hoping he'll come to peace with it in time. He'll love his son regardless. Our son is just the way God wants him to be. He's perfect and beautiful just the way he is.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by catholic74

Well, here's what I want to know. Why must it be done under general anesthesia once the baby is older? If a local anesthetic "works" on an infant, why wouldn't it work on a 6 month old or an older toddler? Just curious?

Why what an excellent question- try asking a dr. who circs. :

I think the reality has to do with a couple of things- it *seems* barbaric on an older child (and um, they don't usually use a local on an infant- the majority are done with NO anesthesia) and they're harder to hold down when they're bigger.

-Angela

[yokosmile]

This is not something you should even have to worry about. You need to lay down the law to your H and let him know that your son's genitals will not be cut on, period. I am sorry you have to deal with this. What a waste to live in fear of something so wretched while you should be enjoying these first precious months with your baby. :

[catholic74]

Originally Posted by yokosmile

This is not something you should even have to worry about. You need to lay down the law to your H and let him know that your son's genitals will not be cut on, period. I am sorry you have to deal with this. What a waste to live in fear of something so wretched while you should be enjoying these first precious months with your baby. :

I felt that way throughout most of the pregnancy. I felt this impending sense of doom knowing we had opposing opinions on the subject. I researched and asked questions and did all my homework and after all of it, could never consent to circumcision, even if it meant causing stress between us. All I can do is hope that someday, he'll understand. I cannot ignore the instinct I have to protect my son.

[catholic74]

Originally Posted by alegna

Why what an excellent question- try asking a dr. who circs. :

I think the reality has to do with a couple of things- it *seems* barbaric on an older child (and um, they don't usually use a local on an infant- the majority are done with NO anesthesia) and they're harder to hold down when they're bigger.

-Angela

Adults are put under general anesthesia as well aren't they. I thought I remembered reading a study done on the anesthesia that stated that the local injections given to adults were found to be inefficient.

[yokosmile]

I am sorry, Momma. You shouldn't have to live in fear. I know you will protect that precious baby.

[Quirky]

They can and do circ older kids and adults with local, and I think they can get pretty good pain relief (until the pain relief wears off ). I know in the article on the mass circ campaign in Swaziland, the man getting circed is shown reading a brochure on HIV while the doctors are circing him.

But an adult or older boy (maybe adolescent or teen) could hold still under local - a bigger baby or child wouldn't, and they don't make circumstraints big enough to hold them. So the real reason tiny babies get circed is because, as a PP said, they're too small to put up any effective resistance. :

[Arduinna]

Originally Posted by catholic74

Well, here's what I want to know. Why must it be done under general anesthesia once the baby is older? If a local anesthetic "works" on an infant, why wouldn't it work on a 6 month old or an older toddler? Just curious?

Our old neighbors circed their kid at 6 for no reason other than they could now afford to pay for it, since our states medicaid doesn't cover it they didn't get it done at birth. Yeah I tried talking to them about it being unnecessary ect didn't do any good :

Why do the use general on older babies and kids? Because these kids can and will fight back is my guess.

[Bm31]

Originally Posted by catholic74

I cannot ignore the instinct I have to protect my son.

Kudos to you!!!

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

Now he would have to be put under GA because he would be to big for the circumstraint and it would be to hard to hold him still without it. GA is a huge risk for small babies.

There is no doubt you could find someone to do it one way or the other and I would be extra careful that your dh is never alone with your ds long enough to have it done without you. Yes that has almost happened here before

Has your dh decided not to read any more research or listen to what you have to say now? It has taken my dh 2+yrs to come to terms with ds being intact. I still talk to him about circ sometimes.

Your user name is catholic we cant discuss religious circ but maybe someone here could send you pm's with the catholic stance on circ.

[Mrs-Mama]

Originally Posted by Quirky

So the real reason tiny babies get circed is because, as a PP said, they're too small to put up any effective resistance. :

Those poor, defenseless babies

I'm so sorry you're having to deal with this, but it's so good to hear of someone sticking up for her son and not caving to pressures from the father.

[catholic74]

Originally Posted by Quirky

They can and do circ older kids and adults with local, and I think they can get pretty good pain relief (until the pain relief wears off ). I know in the article on the mass circ campaign in Swaziland, the man getting circed is shown reading a brochure on HIV while the doctors are circing him.

But an adult or older boy (maybe adolescent or teen) could hold still under local - a bigger baby or child wouldn't, and they don't make circumstraints big enough to hold them. So the real reason tiny babies get circed is because, as a PP said, they're too small to put up any effective resistance. :

If a baby can't fight back or give his consent and an older child would fight like heck to avoid having his genetalia cut, then it makes more sense to me to just leave well enough alone and allow the child to make his own choice when he's older. If he wants to put himself through that mess, then let him. It's his body and his choice.

[catholic74]

Originally Posted by MCatLvrMom2A&X

Now he would have to be put under GA because he would be to big for the circumstraint and it would be to hard to hold him still without it. GA is a huge risk for small babies.

There is no doubt you could find someone to do it one way or the other and I would be extra careful that your dh is never alone with your ds long enough to have it done without you. Yes that has almost happened here before

Has your dh decided not to read any more research or listen to what you have to say now? It has taken my dh 2+yrs to come to terms with ds being intact. I still talk to him about circ sometimes.

Your user name is catholic we cant discuss religious circ but maybe someone here could send you pm's with the catholic stance on circ.

He made a very half-hearted and dismissive attempt to look at my materials in the past and claims that he doesn't "buy into" any of it. I am hoping in time, he will just accept it, even if he never understands. I am aware of the group "Catholics Against Circumcision." Their argument makes a lot of sense to me. It's a very solid arguement, I think. It actually confirmed my feelings about the ethical aspect of circumcision and supported me a great deal during my studies. (Hope that's not really "discussing" religion) Just wanted to say thanks for the mention!

[jessjgh1]

Hmm, if dh is Catholic, I'd say go with that. Its really against Catholic doctrine from what I've read (I'm not Catholic)-- and anyways, the pope's have all been intact (as far as the ones in my lifetime, and I'd assume all of them)-- what else does he need to know??

Jessica

[PuppyFluffer]

Congratulations on your beatuiful baby boy. I am so thrilled to hear you are responding and listening to your instincts to keep him intact!

In time, I hope your husband can come to terms with it.

It is inevitable that religion will make a passing appearance in this forum. In this case, you have not delved into discussion or debate of religious circ so it's just fine!

Enjoy your baby boy!