Foreskin experts: a ?

[ZoshaMosha]

I don't know if this is the right place to post this, so I apologize in advance if it's not...

My ds is 3 days old. All throughout the pregnancy, DH and I argued over the circ. issue. After a lot of back and forth, he relented that I make the decision and he agrees to keep ds intact. However... I don't think he is entirely happy with the decision. His arguments in favor have been the usual--He will be a "freak" compared to other boys, women won't find him attractive later, it's "cleaner" (whatever that means), and lastly that there could be a complication with the foreskin that might lead to a necessary circumcision later in life.

It's been easy to debunk most of these arguments. But the last one has suddenly come up.

The ped said it looks like ds' foreskin is not aligned with his urethral opening. She said there's no way to know for sure until his foreskin retracts in a couple years. She suggested I maybe see a urologist to rule out possible complications.

I'm devastated, because even though DH is keeping quiet and respecting my feelings on the subject, I know in his head he's just chomping at the bit to schedule the procedure...which, btw, will happen over my dead body.

Unless...there is a real medical reason for it, but I can't seem to think there really would be one. I'm so confused. Does anyone have any information on this type of foreskin issue?

I apologize for the rambling post. Thanks.

[BamaDude]

As long as your son is urinating okay, there is nothing to worry about.

[whateverdidiwants]

As long as he's peeing without complications, he's fine.

[LavenderMae]

I was also going to say that if he can pee okay then he's fine.

[enstar780]

In reality circumcision is hardly ever necessary later in life, thats just a myth promoted by the lucrative circumcision industry. European countries, where circumcision is rare, have longer life expectancies than the US and circumcision in adulthood there is very rare. I believe it is 0.04% of intact men actually consent to circumcision as adults. Doctors will look for every minor and insignificant thing to try to justify circumcision. If your son can urinate fine, there is nothing wrong and nothing to worry about. What it sounds like to me, you have nothing to be concerned about.

As for the locker room argument, I find it unlikely this will happen. In fact, circumcision rates have fallen so your son will not be alone but many others will be whole and intact. As well, a person finding out his parents allowed such a personal part of his body to be altered and amputated without his consent can be very detrimental and emotionally damaging to some. It can leave them feeling violated and hurt. Its just not a good reason to cut off a healthy part of someone elses body in any case. Human rights to a whole intact body take precedence over such arguments as the locker room argument.

[the_lissa]

I don't understand how she would even know. My son is almost two and I have never seen his urethra. As long as he is peeing fine, there is no issue.

[snazzy_mom]

The only way she could even conjure that up is if she had pulled the foreskin back and even then, there is NO way to know unless it was quite forcible.

You will notice that sometimes, when your son urinates, there is a "bubble" in the foreskin, this is just the stream of urine navigating it's way out.

[Fyrestorm]

If the doc could see your son's urethra, you should run as fast as you can for the doc...That means she forceably retracted your DS. Even if his urethra is not lined up...circumcision will not magically center it! This doc sounds ignorant and dangerously pro circ. I recommend a new one that has a clue about intact boys.

I agree with the other posters...as long as he is urinating, then no problem exists, don't let anyone make it a problem.

[MommytoB]

why do doctors call meatus holes ' uretha isn't urethea a little tube in the urinnary tract system?

[ZoshaMosha]

Thanks for the quick replies.

The doc started examining his penis and I got right up in her face and told her not to retract. She said she wasn't retracting it, just looking inside as far as she could without retracting it. I got a very bad feeling.

I then noticed that she did drop the term "pre-circumcision." No, I will not be returning to that doctor.

[ZoshaMosha]

Oh, also, I haven't been able to catch him peeing yet.

[the_lissa]

You don't have to catch him peeing. As long as he is peeing, it is fine.

[snazzy_mom]

Originally Posted by TeresaZofia

Thanks for the quick replies.

The doc started examining his penis and I got right up in her face and told her not to retract. She said she wasn't retracting it, just looking inside as far as she could without retracting it. I got a very bad feeling.

I then noticed that she did drop the term "pre-circumcision." No, I will not be returning to that doctor.

I'm glad your mama instincts are so strong

Pulling the skin back, at all, is retraction. It sounds like a new doctor is exactly what you need.

[Nathan1097]

Do dr's see the pee come straight out of a females urinary meatus? do they pull back the labia watch it actually come out? Just because the pee has to pass through the opening of the foreskin, doesn't mean there's a bit ol' problem. We women have been peein' and wipin' with success for many many years.

[KMK_Mama]

Originally Posted by TeresaZofia

Thanks for the quick replies.

The doc started examining his penis and I got right up in her face and told her not to retract. She said she wasn't retracting it, just looking inside as far as she could without retracting it. I got a very bad feeling.

I then noticed that she did drop the term "pre-circumcision." No, I will not be returning to that doctor.

What did she mean by "pre-circumcision?" Was she saying he was born with hypospadias?

[veganf]

How would the doctor know that without pulling his foreskin back somewhat?? And what does it matter if it's lined up as long as the holes are there and functioning?

[glongley]

The bit about the urinary opening not lining up with the foreskin opening sounds like hypospadias, a condition where the urinary opening is not at the tip of the glans, but somewhere underneath it. Usually, if it is significant enough, the foreskin will not form uniformly around the glans, but appears to be missing underneath, with a hood on the top side of the glans. You didn't mention anything about a malformation of the foreskin itself, in which case, this is probably no big deal. In more severe cases, a surgical procedure may be done to correct the malplacement of the urinary opening, sometimes using the foreskin as part of the repair. For this reason, hypospadias is a contraindication to circumcision - i.e. there is a medical reasons for NOT circumcising. However, mild cases do not necessarily need to be "repaired". There is plenty of room for variability in the "lining up" issue. The doc may be suggesting the referral to the urologist for an evaluation of possible hypospadias. I tend to agree though that if the foreskin is well formed on all sides of the glans, and he is peeing fine, that it's not something to get all worked up about.

Here is a place for good info about hypospadias.
http://www.heainfo.org/FAQ-ForParents.html

Not meaning to add additional concerns for you with a 3 day old baby!!! Just adding information so you can be educated about what your doc is suggesting.

Gillian

[LianneM]

Originally Posted by the_lissa

I don't understand how she would even know. My son is almost two and I have never seen his urethra. As long as he is peeing fine, there is no issue.

my thought exactly - how would she even know?

oops, finished reading. Yikes.

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

The only true medical reasons for circ are frostbite, gangrene, cancer & accident damage that cant be fixed any other way.

A few diabetic men may have trouble because they are more prone to infection which leads to scare tissue that leads to true phimosis. But they also can loose feet but they arnt cut off just to prevent it from happening.

Good luck finding a new Dr. and remember to be on your toes about letting anyone touch your ds's penis. They do not need to look at the urethra or test the opening of the foreskin for any reason. Just tell them from the onset not to touch the penis. That way they cant do any harm.

The reason many of us here make such a big deal out of retraction is only partly due to the fact that it can cause damage. The major reason is because of cases like yours were your ds dosnt really have a problem but the Dr. has invented one.

The foreskin is like a sleeve on the arm in lots of ways in that if you pull the end of the sleeve over your hand you can move it to make it line up totaly with your hand or your can move it around so that it dosnt line up any more. The foreskin may line up perfectly with his urethra in the glans one time yet be totally off center the next time. That is just how the foreskin works and the urine will come out anyway since it is liquid.

I have a question some have mentioned possibly hypospadious in the case and I would like to know does your ds have a fully formed foreskin that goes all the way around the glans or is there just foreskin on top with none on the bottom?

[Cersha]

Originally Posted by snazzy_mom

I'm glad your mama instincts are so strong

Pulling the skin back, at all, is retraction. It sounds like a new doctor is exactly what you need.

ITA. Especially about the retraction. She need not manipulate his foreskin AT ALL. My ped tried to pull thatline.."I;m not going to retract, I'm just going to pull it back a bit" Uh, Lady, that IS retraction.

Good luck.