"Some do, some don't." - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 35 Old 08-28-2010, 11:25 PM - Thread Starter
 
outlier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: far from average
Posts: 529
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This quote is from the L&D nurse who taught our hospital's childbirth class, referring to anesthesia use by the doctors there who circ. This is one of the biggest hospitals in my state, too!

I've heard people in this forum claim this kind of thing goes on, but I had somehow rationalized in my mind that it must be only a few old doctors scattered around who were holding on to their archaic methods. I guess not.

This is cruelty to babies!!!

9/2011 items decluttered
outlier is offline  
#2 of 35 Old 08-28-2010, 11:43 PM
 
Fellow Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Formerly JWhispers
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by outlier View Post
This quote is from the L&D nurse who taught our hospital's childbirth class, referring to anesthesia use by the doctors there who circ. This is one of the biggest hospitals in my state, too!

I've heard people in this forum claim this kind of thing goes on, but I had somehow rationalized in my mind that it must be only a few old doctors scattered around who were holding on to their archaic methods. I guess not.

This is cruelty to babies!!!
Well the whole RIC procedure is archaic, what did you expect?
Fellow Traveler is offline  
#3 of 35 Old 08-28-2010, 11:52 PM
 
serendipity22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In 1998 Stang found
Quote:
A substantial number of PEDs are performing circumcisions, and they are most likely to use anesthesia (71%), followed by FPs (56%), then OBs (25%).
Most circs were done by obs, much of the anesthesia was inadequate, sugar pacifier on its own, EMLA on its own etc.

As for the OBs, "unconscious hostile impulses" come to mind. (I cannot say what I really think.)
serendipity22 is offline  
#4 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 01:36 AM
 
brant31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 255
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Unfortunately, that's right -- something like 70% of newborn male circumcisions are still being done by OBs, and probably a majority of those are done without anesthesia at all, and almost certainly without adequate anesthesia. There was a collective groan from the medical profession when the AAP emphasized anesthesia for the first time in 1999. Maybe the OBs feel that an AAP directive doesn't directly apply to them, but a lot of doctors were rather annoyed at the recommendation. Circumcisions used to be fast money, easily 4 or 5 in an hour in experienced hands, at $300 a clip. Many docs simply did not want to wait 20 minutes for analgesia to kick in, or an hour for proper anesthesia. It knocks their game off... when you expect to slice 5 boys between 7 and 8 am and meet the rest of your foreskin foursome on the golf course by 9, it's pretty annoying to be held up a couple of hours by something Tiger Jr. won't remember by the time he's caddying age. Get priorities straight!

Unfortunately, the US does not have a law like other countries to ensure proper anesthetization of infants before surgery, including circumcision. Topical analgesia does not reach the second, inner layer of foreskin that is fused to the glans. And infants feel even more pain than adults, because their central nervous systems have not developed any pain-dampening mechanisms. To an infant, it must feel like he's being murdered starting with the penis. The great majority of parents whose sons have been circumcised in this way have no clue. There is even a popular YouTube video of a Canadian circumcision with the dad in the room specifically concerned and asking about anesthesia, and the doctor just baldface lies about it.

It's an ongoing American tragedy; the shocking truth is that as long as it takes more time, trouble and money to anesthetize a baby, many doctors still won't use it. The good news is that the anesthesia issue probably has dissuaded quite a few doctors from doing circumcisions altogether.
brant31 is offline  
#5 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 02:32 AM
 
eepster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: growing in the Garden State ............
Posts: 9,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In addition to the extra time and money Brant31 mentioned, there is also the additional risk of allergic reactions and the foreskin is then unsuitable for harvesting and selling for use in cosmetics.

Timmy's Mommy WARNINGyslexic typing with help of preschooler, beware of typos
eepster is offline  
#6 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 02:35 AM
 
fruitful womb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fort Worth TX
Posts: 2,291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
wow

and they're always asking moms if she wants an epidural even if she stressed her desire to have a natural birth.

"So, you want that epidural now... how about now? ... okay, I think you're ready for that epidural dontcha think?"

but to let a baby who is fully aware, hyper-responsive to touch (a survival mechanism) undergo a penis surgery without full pain relief? wow, if thats not abusive then I don't know what is.
fruitful womb is offline  
#7 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 03:16 AM
 
eepster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: growing in the Garden State ............
Posts: 9,010
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitful womb View Post
wow

and they're always asking moms if she wants an epidural even if she stressed her desire to have a natural birth.

"So, you want that epidural now... how about now? ... okay, I think you're ready for that epidural dontcha think?"

but to let a baby who is fully aware, hyper-responsive to touch (a survival mechanism) undergo a penis surgery without full pain relief? wow, if thats not abusive then I don't know what is.
A different Dr gets to send out a whole separate bill for an epidural. If they got to bring in an anesthesiologist, who could send out a separate bill, for circs, then it would be a whole'nother story, and babies would get all kinds of pain relief.

Timmy's Mommy WARNINGyslexic typing with help of preschooler, beware of typos
eepster is offline  
#8 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 03:58 AM
 
brant31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 255
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Then I guess it's worth lobbying for a regulation that for all surgical procedures that cut through and remove veins and nerves, an anesthesiologist's services are required. On a neonate or any other patient. I think this may be in Sweden's law. Weird that we'd even have to ask for this level of professional attention for genital surgery. It would be automatic for anything but circumcision.

Here is a bit of good news on the horizon. There have been previous attempts to get OB/Gyns out of the circumcision business (wrong gender specialty). It seems OBs picked up the habit because Pediatricians as a group have never been overly enthusiastic on circumcision, and the OBs saw it as money just lying on the table. So far, they have ignored calls to stop soliciting and performing circumcisions.

But professional ethics trudges slowly forward, and the issue is coming into better focus. Part of it is the anesthesia annoyance. The big question is, if OBs transition out of doing circs, is another specialty (Peds, Ped Urologs) ready to step in? Or should circumcision be discouraged? Or neither -- simply not mentioned? Would OBs be obligated to provide referrals?

These questions and others are probably addressed in an article just about to be published, titled "The Professional Imperative for Obstetrician-Gynecologists to Discontinue Newborn Male Circumcision" by James F. Smith MD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Westchester Medical Center, New York. Here are a few words from the abstract:

"Indications for routine circumcision remain controversial... it has persisted in the scope of practice of obstetrics and gynecology, a field specializing in the opposite gender. To excel in women's reproductive health, we should no longer passively accept or actively maintain this procedure in our specialty."

Couldn't be any clearer. I hope this time they listen.
brant31 is offline  
#9 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 04:22 AM
 
serendipity22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
"Indications for routine circumcision remain controversial... it has persisted in the scope of practice of obstetrics and gynecology, a field specializing in the opposite gender. To excel in women's reproductive health, we should no longer passively accept or actively maintain this procedure in our specialty."
Another reason why obs/gyns doing circs is inappropriate (even if I believed in circs) is that they are in a weak position to follow-up, or even know of complications.

Also ten years ago at least, many obs got no training re circ+anesthesia.

In Australia a few years ago a few obs did circs. Now infant circ can no longer happen in hospitals, obs are out of the picture. So banning circs in hospitals is a powerful solution.

Quote:
Indications for routine circumcision remain controversial
Huh?
i always thought the AAP said there were no indications for circ in the
neonatal period.
serendipity22 is offline  
#10 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 02:16 PM
A&A
 
A&A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 16,856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by eepster View Post
In addition to the extra time and money Brant31 mentioned, there is also the additional risk of allergic reactions and the foreskin is then unsuitable for harvesting and selling for use in cosmetics.


Cosmetics or other research. Here's an article about foreskins being used in HPV vax research:

"1986 – John Kreider finds a way to mass-produce HPV: He collects foreskins from infant circumcisions, infects them with HPV, and grafts them onto mice whose compromised immune systems cannot reject the graft or fight the virus."

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/may...&b_start:int=0


Foreskins can't be used in research if they've been "compromised" with anesthesia. And of course, foreskins can't be used in research if they're still attached to their original owners!!!

"Our task is not to see the future, but to enable it."
A&A is offline  
#11 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 07:14 PM
 
PlainandTall's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 98
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Brant- I look forward to seeing that paper written by the OB who says they should get out of the MGM business.

Several years ago I went to an ACOG convention and handed out this flyer I'd written.

Outlier- You asked about pain relief and how often it's used. Trust me- this situation is not just inflamatory rhetoric made up by "the anti's" ... it's much worse than you imagine. If you look at point 7. - read the Stang/Snellman paper and open the graphs to see just how bad it is.

Ten great reasons for Obstetricians to quit circumcising babies


1.To comply with ACOG guidelines of informed consent.
Being born with a normal male sex organ is not an emergency. A male can make this decision for himself if he chooses. ACOG makes a great effort to protect the physical integrity of female patients and to secure consent for all procedures, the willingness to ignore these guidelines in order to circumcise infant males highlights a sexist double standard. Males should also be respected as whole and embodied persons.

2. Circumcision violates the Hippocratic Oath. Participation in an invasive non-medical procedure is an indicator of a physician’s professionalism.

3. American circumcision is a global embarrassment.
Callis Osaghae bled to death after a home circumcision in Ireland. Many Irish doctors were incensed when it was suggested that they should preform circumcisions for the immigrants who requested them. They felt this was an abuse of their medical training and a clear ethical broach. American doctors are protected by law, from pressure to circumcise females, yet no such legislation protects doctors from the pressure to circumcise males. Their inability to stand up to that pressure, in the absence of state mandated legislation, reflects poorly on their ability to comply with internationally accepted medical standards.

4. Obstetricians are specialists.
Despite this, obstetricians have cornered a market outside their specialty by popularizing the circumcision of male neonates. High pressure tactics in the hospital and a service industry conveyor belt give indifferent or reluctant parents the opportunity to secure a circumcision without having to do anything. A circumcising OB will rarely do any followup and will also not encounter any of the common long term pediatric or adult issues of circumcision damage. This confusion of the role of an obstetrician as child circumciser reflects poorly on the obstetric profession and abusively forces maternity nurses to cooperate.

5. Soliciting elective surgery from women in labor is abusive and unethical.
There is an implied medical endorsement when hospital staff solicits in the course of admitting patients. The AMA circumcision policy states that a lack of information and deferral of the decision until after the birth contribute to the high rate of circumcision in America. This means that if parents were given more time and more information, fewer would circumcise their son.

6. Unnecessary surgery exposes a circumciser to avoidable liability.

7. The refusal to treat infant pain is well documented. The obstetrician circumciser is the worst offender of any medical specialty; with the most appalling record right here in the northeastern US. Despite the AAP admonition that children not be exposed to the pain of circumcision, many medical schools still teach circumcision without pain relief. (using living human children)
Circumcision Practice Patterns in the United States
Stang HJ, Snellman LW Pediatrics. 1998 Jun;101(6):E5
http://pediatrics.aappublications.or.../full/101/6/e5

8. Circumcision in America did not spring from our culture, it came from our doctors.
Circumcision is now known to have no medical value, yet doctors inexplicably offer it as a cultural service, maneuvering consent from fathers circumcised in an era predating modern respect for patient autonomy.

9. Circumcision gains public acceptance at the expense of a physician’s professional integrity.
As long as physicians are willing to involve themselves in non-medical surgery, parents will be confused about the intended purpose of such surgery.

10. The best reason to say, "NO!" is your own.

This message to obstetricians comes respectfully to you from a survivor of Placenta Previa
PlainandTall is offline  
#12 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 09:17 PM
 
serendipity22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 469
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


The baby is NOT the ob's patient.
serendipity22 is offline  
#13 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 11:07 PM
 
PuppyFluffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Coast, USA
Posts: 9,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have an aquaintance (nurse) that worked for a urologist for a while. She is strongly anti circumcision.
She told me that anesthesia was applied via injection but the doctor would then immediately begin the procedure - giving no time for the anesthetic to take effect. So, even when you have anesthesia being used, it's useless unless it is allowed to actually anesthetize the area.

"To err is human, to forgive, canine." - Unknown
PuppyFluffer is offline  
#14 of 35 Old 08-29-2010, 11:45 PM - Thread Starter
 
outlier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: far from average
Posts: 529
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yeah, I guess I shouldn't be so stunned by this, but she just laid it all out there in our class like it was no big deal, and apparently dh and I were the only ones who wanted to scream. The nurse did make sure to say that if you want your boy circ'd to make sure they use anesthesia because it does hurt, even comparing it to labor. Of the three couples there who knew they were having boys, two were dead set on it.

I told dh that if our baby is a boy, he (dh) is not allowed to let the baby out of his sight the entire time we're in the hospital. I think we'll bring a sharpie marker with us and may consider writing on the baby depending on the situation.

9/2011 items decluttered
outlier is offline  
#15 of 35 Old 08-30-2010, 09:18 AM
 
jenP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by brant31 View Post
Unfortunately, the US does not have a law like other countries to ensure proper anesthetization of infants before surgery, including circumcision. Topical analgesia does not reach the second, inner layer of foreskin that is fused to the glans. And infants feel even more pain than adults, because their central nervous systems have not developed any pain-dampening mechanisms. To an infant, it must feel like he's being murdered starting with the penis. The great majority of parents whose sons have been circumcised in this way have no clue.
Ironically, one of the main reasons I hear from parents who are going to circumcise (second only to the "look like dad/tradition/culture" reason), is the old, "it will hurt much more if he has to have it done when he's an adult."

Jen
jenP is offline  
#16 of 35 Old 08-30-2010, 12:03 PM
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Those numbers are so sad and make my heart think. How can doctors who swore the Hippocratic Oath seriously skip anesthesia for such a procedure? Do they really think babies don't feel pain or it doesn't matter since they won't remember as adults? Obgyns just sunk a whole 'nother level deeper in my eyes. I often discuss medical decisions and tendencies with my MD sister (we are born and raised in Germany, my family still lives there). Of course we are not always of the same opinion (she thinks birth out of the hospital is dangerous e.g.), however circumcision is something we would never do without clear medical indication (a true condition must exist) and surely not without anesthesia. She didn't want to believe me when I first told her how it is not done at all or only EMLA cream or such... Now that I know the sort of current statistics on how often it is used, I will ask her to talk to her peers, I'd love to find out how other docs back home feel about that fact. I want to know it that's an American thing or if all docs are like that. My sister clearly as a mom of a boy is very protective and might have a different stance. Do you guys know of any medical professionals outside of the US and have asked them how they feel about this situation?
nia82 is offline  
#17 of 35 Old 08-30-2010, 01:44 PM
 
Pirogi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am reading What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Circumcision, and the authors are talking about complications from circumcision. The tone is that most anesthesia techniques are associated with a higher complication rate for newborns than adults. Is this right? How "safe" is it to anesthetize an infant, even if there is a true medical indication (which there is not in RIC)?

They say that with local injection anesthesia (penile block), the doctor has to inject in just the right spot where the nerves are, in order for it to work. But, the doctor can't know if they actually injected the anesthesia in the right place or not. If they inject too deeply, it can cause erectile dysfunction, although I am not clear on if this is a risk only in adult circumcisions.

Also, they say that one manufacturer of EMLA cream states that the product is NOT for use in surgery.

I don't remember any discussion on the ring block local injection method. Does anyone know which method is usually used? Or is it a crap shoot, since there is no guarantee that the OB will even use anesthesia?
Pirogi is offline  
#18 of 35 Old 08-30-2010, 07:53 PM
 
Claire and Boys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,407
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuppyFluffer View Post
I have an aquaintance (nurse) that worked for a urologist for a while. She is strongly anti circumcision.
She told me that anesthesia was applied via injection but the doctor would then immediately begin the procedure - giving no time for the anesthetic to take effect. So, even when you have anesthesia being used, it's useless unless it is allowed to actually anesthetize the area.
Yes.

How many times have I heard parents say "It wasn't a big deal, he was only gone for five minutes." If he was only gone for five minutes, you can guarantee that that baby received NO pain relief.
Claire and Boys is offline  
#19 of 35 Old 08-30-2010, 11:09 PM
 
PuppyFluffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Coast, USA
Posts: 9,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I saw a friend of mine today who is a former NICU nurse. She said they would circ the NICU babies on the day before of day of departure (when requested by the parents). Assisting with circumcision was a required part of her job. She said none of the doctors liked doing them and they did them as fast as possible. They would inject anesthetic and immediately begin the procedure.

"To err is human, to forgive, canine." - Unknown
PuppyFluffer is offline  
#20 of 35 Old 09-03-2010, 02:01 AM
 
bugmenot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuppyFluffer View Post
I saw a friend of mine today who is a former NICU nurse. She said they would circ the NICU babies on the day before of day of departure (when requested by the parents). Assisting with circumcision was a required part of her job. She said none of the doctors liked doing them and they did them as fast as possible. They would inject anesthetic and immediately begin the procedure.
Doesn't anesthetic need time to take effect? From what i've heard, this is another problem with circumcision. They may give the anesthetic, but they won't give enough time for it to take effect.
bugmenot is offline  
#21 of 35 Old 09-03-2010, 02:10 AM
 
PuppyFluffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Coast, USA
Posts: 9,177
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes it need time to take effect.
My friend said that none of the OBs liked doing circumcisions because it took away from other things they needed to be doing, like dealing with laboring women. She said they all just wanted to get them over with. I asked her to clarify what she meant by "immediately begin" and she said exactly that, inject and set the syringe down and start clamping, probing and cutting.
I've had lidocaine injected twice for stitches. It stings like a wasp sting for a bit before it takes effect. It's an extremely sharp feeling - sharp like getting lemon juice into a cut sort of sharp. It doesn't last too long as it begins to anesthesize the area but it's a really unpleasant thing.

"To err is human, to forgive, canine." - Unknown
PuppyFluffer is offline  
#22 of 35 Old 09-03-2010, 05:28 PM
 
fruitful womb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Fort Worth TX
Posts: 2,291
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlainandTall View Post
5. Soliciting elective surgery from women in labor is abusive and unethical.
There is an implied medical endorsement when hospital staff solicits in the course of admitting patients. The AMA circumcision policy states that a lack of information and deferral of the decision until after the birth contribute to the high rate of circumcision in America. This means that if parents were given more time and more information, fewer would circumcise their son.


I tried to get a copy of the "informed consent" when pregnant with ds#2. They wouldn't let me see it. They said "its policy that a mother can only see it right after she has given birth".

Even then, while recovering from a birth & in my case I had a very traumatic birth with ds#1, its unethical.

Its unethical, period.
fruitful womb is offline  
#23 of 35 Old 09-04-2010, 05:52 PM
 
MrsJewelsRae's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Isn't it ironic that OBs often push and encourage drugs on birthing mothers, but when it comes to the newborn they circumcise w/o any pain relief at all?? WTH is wrong here!?

Jewels & Jon (Married 11+ yrs)- Homeschooling, No Circ, BF, CD Mama to:
Alex 8 Gabby 6 (Homeborn!) Gideon 2.... chickens, ducks, cats and a dog
MrsJewelsRae is offline  
#24 of 35 Old 09-05-2010, 02:17 AM
 
knitted_in_the_wom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by outlier View Post
This quote is from the L&D nurse who taught our hospital's childbirth class, referring to anesthesia use by the doctors there who circ. This is one of the biggest hospitals in my state, too!

I've heard people in this forum claim this kind of thing goes on, but I had somehow rationalized in my mind that it must be only a few old doctors scattered around who were holding on to their archaic methods. I guess not.

This is cruelty to babies!!!
Another frustrating thing is that the two methods considered most "effective" at relieving pain during circ are dorsal nerve block and a penile ring block. The problem with both of these methods though are that they involve injecting pain meds into the penis.

Have you ever had novacaine for dental work? I'd guess injecting meds into the penis hurts worse. One of my clients who opted to have her son circed told me that she could hear him screaming from down the hall...and the most awful thing was that he didn't get the circ done that day due to some potential complications that came up--so ALL that was done was the injection of meds. And he slept for over 4 hours in a very deep sleep after the trauma of it. He had the circ done on a different day--so injection of meds all over again. I had hoped SO hard that after the first experience with the meds the parents would realize how painful it was and change their minds, but they didn't.
knitted_in_the_wom is offline  
#25 of 35 Old 09-05-2010, 01:00 PM
 
Banana731's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: the wild Midwestern Woods...
Posts: 3,718
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have a friend who is a FP, and he is against circ personally. Where he works, he has a hospital rotation weekly where he attends births in OB for the birthing FP patients. He told us at first he tried not circ, citing personal reasons (though he was given a hard time by his superiors for it). But ultimately decided to do circ if parents request it, because he realized that if he refused, someone else would and at least he knew that he was doing properly and as painlessly as possible. It was hard for him still, though. I guess I understand where he is coming from. I had never really thought about it from that kind of a perspective. I bet it's even harder for some of the nurses and assistants in similar postions to some of the pp. I mean I imagine that it's not as if a nurse can say to a doc, "hey you-should be waiting longer, using this, are hurting that baby..." you know?

Banana, doula wife to Papa Banana and mother to Banana One, Banana Two, Banana Three, Banana Four...

Banana731 is offline  
#26 of 35 Old 09-05-2010, 10:46 PM
 
Fyrestorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banana731 View Post
I have a friend who is a FP, and he is against circ personally. Where he works, he has a hospital rotation weekly where he attends births in OB for the birthing FP patients. He told us at first he tried not circ, citing personal reasons (though he was given a hard time by his superiors for it). But ultimately decided to do circ if parents request it, because he realized that if he refused, someone else would and at least he knew that he was doing properly and as painlessly as possible. It was hard for him still, though. I guess I understand where he is coming from. I had never really thought about it from that kind of a perspective. I bet it's even harder for some of the nurses and assistants in similar postions to some of the pp. I mean I imagine that it's not as if a nurse can say to a doc, "hey you-should be waiting longer, using this, are hurting that baby..." you know?
No excuse...there is no right way to do a wrong thing. Period.End.Of.Story. He cuts babies for whatever reason and that makes
him just as culpable as anyone else. If doctors don't stand up for those poor helpless babies, then who will. Aren't there war criminals who used the same excuse?

Victim of Birth Rape & Coerced ribboncesarean.gifUnnecesareanribboncesarean.gif What makes people think they can cut up someone else's genitals? nocirc.gif
Fyrestorm is offline  
#27 of 35 Old 09-05-2010, 11:16 PM
 
Fellow Traveler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Formerly JWhispers
Posts: 2,042
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banana731 View Post
I have a friend who is a FP, and he is against circ personally. Where he works, he has a hospital rotation weekly where he attends births in OB for the birthing FP patients. He told us at first he tried not circ, citing personal reasons (though he was given a hard time by his superiors for it). But ultimately decided to do circ if parents request it, because he realized that if he refused, someone else would and at least he knew that he was doing properly and as painlessly as possible. It was hard for him still, though. I guess I understand where he is coming from. I had never really thought about it from that kind of a perspective. I bet it's even harder for some of the nurses and assistants in similar postions to some of the pp. I mean I imagine that it's not as if a nurse can say to a doc, "hey you-should be waiting longer, using this, are hurting that baby..." you know?
I think we need Drs like him to take a strong position and stand by his/her convictions. This doesn't stop if people keep giving into peer pressure.
Fellow Traveler is offline  
#28 of 35 Old 09-05-2010, 11:19 PM
 
jenP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 997
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fyrestorm View Post
He cuts babies for whatever reason and that makes him just as culpable as anyone else. If doctors don't stand up for those poor helpless babies, then who will.
Agreed.
I've heard a number of times of doctors who are "personally opposed to circumcision" but "do it anyway, if the parents are adamant" to "make sure it is done properly." It just smacks of arrogance to me, as in "these ignorant fools can't even do a circumcision properly.. guess I'll just have to step in and do it for them."
It also smacks of the AAP's recently made-then-rescinded policy on having doctors offer to perform female genital cutting "to protect them from getting it worse" by someone else.

What would make parents think twice about circumcising their baby: a doctor who tells them, "You do realize it is non-therapeutic, and as a medical doctor I do not recommend the procedure. However, if you insist on getting it done, I will make sure your baby receives proper anesthetic, unlike some other practitioners, and it will be a better result than if an OB or resident did it."

Or, "If you want to have your baby circumcised, you will have to find another doctor. It is a non-therapeutic surgery, it is risky, it amputates healthy erogenous tissue, takes away the freedom of choice and bodily integrity from the man that your baby will grow up to be, and I simply will not perform such an unethical surgery."

Actually, the first one would actually sound reassuring to many if not most parents having their baby circumcised. Likely they would feel good knowing he was in competent hands and would receive anesthesia. They would ignore the bit about it not being medically recommended and being non-therapeutic because of course they knew that it is not for any medical purpose. It would be for "tradition" and "cultural reasons" and to "look like Dad." I mean, it would make about as much an impression as a doctor telling someone who has requested it that piercing their baby's ears was non-therapeutic. They would be like, "Of course it isn't! Could you just do it already so we can pack up and be discharged?"

But someone flatly refusing to do it, on ethical grounds? That might actually make an impression.

Jen
jenP is offline  
#29 of 35 Old 09-05-2010, 11:44 PM
 
ElliesMomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlainandTall View Post
Circumcision is now known to have no medical value, yet doctors inexplicably offer it as a cultural service, maneuvering consent from fathers circumcised in an era predating modern respect for patient autonomy.
this is so true. in my case, and so many others that you read about on these boards, it's a circumcised father pitted against a mother who wants to keep the boy intact. and the fathers themselves were circumcised during an era in which doctors did the harm without even asking the parents for permission.

ElliesMomma is offline  
#30 of 35 Old 09-13-2010, 09:23 AM
 
Addie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 427
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My nephew was circed in a well-known hospital in a major metropolitan area, and no anesthesia was used. SIL asked after he came back from the procedure, and the nurse said no, no anesthesia. SIL replied, "oh, it doesn't hurt?" The nurse, perhaps to her credit, replied, "oh, no - it hurts."

I was pregnant with DS at the time, and needless to say this solidified our decision not to circ. I also had heard that "most" circs were done with anesthesia, and was shocked to hear it laid out like that.
Addie is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off