Phimosis and pain after urination

[Mamagab]

My almost 4 yr old has been "diagnosed" with Phimosis. His foreskin does not retract at all, which alone is not apparently a problem. He has pain about 3 minutes after he urinates, and sometimes spontaneously. The generalists and urologist have taken a wait and see approach to avoid anything drastic like circumcision.

We're going to do an ultrasound to make sure the "plumbing" works and then take it from there. It is hard to watch your child in pain and feel there is nothing that can be done.

I'm curious about other's experiences with pain after urination (we've ruled out UTI's, yeast and other infections), and phimosis.

Thanks.

[Gitti]

There is no such thing as a 4 yr. old having Phimosis. His foreskin should not retract yet. Not a 4 yrs. old. But it may very well be in the stages of retracting.

My grandson had pain in his penis from time to time when he was in the retracting stages. (Around 4 yr.) He would every so often grab his penis and say it pinched or hurt. And a few times he would yell out and start to cry, but it always was gone just as quickly.
We never took him to the doctor because I knew as long as he urinated without pain, there was no major problem.
His pain was more like instantaneously and not lingering. He said it is almost like a shot but never longer than a minute.

At 5 yr. he retracted completely, spontaneously, and has had no pain since then. If I were you, I would wait a bit longer and see if it doesn't stop on its own. I really do think it might be a retraction stage.

Again, there is no such thing as Phimosis in a 4 yr. old!

Here is what Dr. Fleiss writes in "What your Doctor may not tell you about Circumcision"
Phimosis:
There is no such thing as phimosis. There is especially no such thing as phimosis in children. Theis is a bogus "condition" or "disease", largely invented by nineteenth-century quacks looking for an easy way to hustle gullible people out of their money.
Today, circumcisers make a diagnosis of "phimosis" because they are ignorant of the facts of normal penile development and because that is what they were taught to do in medical school. Since many insurance companies refuse to pay for routine circumcision, doctors and hospitals fraudulently swindle reimbursement out of insurance companies by claiming that children are being circumcised as a cure for the disease "phimosis"....
Circumcisers define phimosis either as a foreskin that is "too tight" a foreskin with a small preputial orifice that protects the glans from premature exposure, or a foreskin that is attached to the glans. These are all normal developmental stages of the baby's penis. Pretending that these normal stages of penile development are a deformity is like pretending that a newborn's lack of teeth is a deformity of the face and mouth.

[Frankly Speaking]

Gitti, I hate to argue with you and Dr. Fliess but there really is such a thing as phimosis. First is normal developmental phimosis. This is the normal condition of a non-retractile child's foreskin. I don't know why they have to give something that is normal a name like it is a abnormal condition, but they do and the fact that it is the same name as a pathological condition confuses me even more.

Pathological phimosis is an abnormal condition resulting from untreated infections or trauma. It is extremely rare.

Here is a site showing the difference between normal developmental phimosis and pathological phimosis:

http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/...w10610_fm.html



Frank

[momto3boys]

My understanding from dr fleiss is there is phimosis in men but not children. And even then there is stretching and steroid cream.
However, phimosis usually will occur in someone who has been prematurely retracted.When this occurs scar tissue builds up where the synchia had been ripped and thus causing hardened skin that doesn't retract well if at all.

Now if one never prematurely retracts,and diabetes isn't an issue could phimosis still happen?

[Frankly Speaking]

Momto 3:

As you can see from the photos in the article I posted, phimosis does occur. I think what is happening is confusion between normal developmental phimosis that every boy has and pathological phimosis. Normal phimosis is the name given for the normal condition of the penis where the foreskin is bonded to the glans and the preputial sphincter is not elastic. This is the way practically all boys are born and is absolutely normal. Pathological phimosis is caused by disease or trauma such as forcible premature retraction.

I haven't read where Dr. Fliess says there is no phimosis in children but if he is saying this, he is doing a great disservice to children. If another doctor were to read this and take Dr. Fleiss's statements to heart and as truth, he/she is going to diagnose phimosis in every child he examines because normal phimosis is almost universal. It is a very rare child that is retractile at birth or even shortly afterward.

Pathological phimosis also is not the result of one or even two episodes. It is the result on numerous infections or traumas. It is the result of collective and cummulative damage. Few boys would have these numerous episodes that would lead to pathological phimosis and is the reason pathological phimosis is so extremely rare.

I suspect what Dr. Fleiss has actually said is that he has never seen a case of pathological phimosis. It does seem that I read that somewhere. That would be completely logical and reasonable since pathological phimosis is so extremely rare that few doctors would actually ever see a bona fide case.

Yes, even without retraction or diabetes, it is possible that it could happen. It's just highly unlikely. Any body part can have problems. We just don't cut other body parts off on the off chance that they could cause a problem years down the road.






Frank

[Gitti]

Frank,

So, in other words, the normal foreskin attachment to the glans, or head of the penis, by a special lining, called the synechia, that gradually disintegrates and results in the foreskin becoming free of the glans and retractable over it, is called Phimosis?

What your Doctor may not tell you about circumcision... page 172

The attachment of the foreskin to the glans is normal and highly protective in babyhood and childhood. Nearly all boys are born with the foreskin still fused to the glans. Over time, the glans
and foreskin slowly separate and develop their own surfaces. This is a natural process of penile development.........Many circumcised doctors in the US are unable to understand - or refuse to understand - these biological facts. They continue to call these natural developmental stages of the penis a “condition” or “disease” called “phimosis” or “penile problems”.....

OK, I got it: I just called my son-in-law (dr.) and he calls phimosis an infection of the foreskin or other problem....(very vague)

But the real definition is Phimosis = Muzzling. Contraction of the orifice of the prepuce, so that it cannot be retracted.

It is not really explained in the book, but I believe it is written for the mother who takes her son to the dr. and he sees a red foreskin and say "phimosis"

I actually think that is the case in the original post. What do you think?

[Frankly Speaking]

"Contraction of the orifice of the prepuce, so that it cannot be retracted."

That is the normal condition of the infant penis. The normal condition is also called phimosis, normal phimosis, developmental phimosis, etc. That is different from pathological phimosis.

Yes, it is definitely confusing and I think it may be the reason for false diagnoses of pathological phimosis and recommendations for circumcision to relieve "tight foreskin."

However, if we can educate doctors that there is a difference, calling both conditions phimosis will allow them to more easily understand that it is the normal condition and that there is nothing wrong and that a circumcision is definitely not in order.




Frank

[Gitti]

OK I got it!

It's like ABORTION.
Spontaneous abortion or induced abortion.
Tell someone so and so had an abortion and what do they think? induced abortion.

So, phimosis is the natural unretractible, unelastic foreskin in an infant.
So, "phimosis" is not a desease, not a condition. You always have to find out what the doctor is describing by calling the foreskin of a young boy "phimosis" and suggesting circumcision. It is what a boy should be having, not something that is cause for concern.

Interesting! I keep learning all the time.

Happy Thanksgiving!

[Frankly Speaking]

Exactly! Well, almost. :LOL

The distinction must be made between normal and pathological. Pathological means caused by a pathogen which usually means bacteria or virus. however, in this case it also includes trauma such as premature retraction or other injuries usually repetitive in nature or in the case of older men as a result of diabetes. The fact that many circumcisions are recommended for boys between the ages of 3 and 15 years old for "tight foreskin" clearly illustrates that many physicians do not understand the normal condition of the foreskin and the distinction between normal and pathological phimosis.

As this becomes more and more of a hot button issue and as more of the older physicians retire or die out, the medical profession will become more educated and aware of this important distinction.




Frank