Crap. Crapcrapcrap. I wish I had had time to read this before I went. He did not do a culture. He examined him (rubbed his belly) and then looked at his penis. And I think HE retracted him too (although my son just laid there like nothing wasa bothering him). At least, he manipulated the foreskin enough to tell me that his opening is extremely small (he said something about it being 2 points) and being a reason the infection occurred. I said I had read on AAP that intact boys are NOT more likely to have UTIs and he said, 'Well, this is true. But his opening is significantly smaller, which could cause a problem.' He said it could continue to be a problem and that they might recommend circumcision and at that point I very clearly said I did NOT want my son circ'd. He said that it was my choice, and that we'd see how he did on the abx.
I'm trying to think what else he said/did. I did ask him what his general position on circumcision is and he said he thought it was appropriate for medical reasons or religious ones. But "medical reasons" is pretty vague, no?
As it stands, I'm supposed to return with my son in a week with a fresh urine sample so they can see if the kidneys have returned to normal function.
My gut feeling is that this is UTI, possibly caused by the disposable diapers, and equally possibly caused by his absence of routine bathing during that week (husband thought son had showered with me, and vice versa, while all the while he was, apparently, playing with cousins). While his comments about the small opening give me pause, I wonder if it's just something that will naturally enlarge, as I was under the impression. My other gut feeling was that I wasn't comfortable with this doctor - it felt like he was rushing me. And I hate that I am wondering if this "specialist" retracted him. Gah!