Mothering Forum banner
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,764 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Wow.

At dd's play school (parents stay) I was in a convo with 2 other moms. One is due in a month. She mentions how she hopes she's not having a boy - b/c its just soooo hard to find a dr who will circ. (woo hoo!) The other says she understands since she had to go thru at least 5 doc before she found one to do her ds.

So, after I resist the urge to vomit, I chime in, with a huge non threatening smile on my face,
"I have both. My older boys are done, my youngest isnt. And man, caring for my intact boy was sooo much easier. No messing with the vaseline and guaze - especially late at nite when I was sooo tired!"

Silence. Death stares. "well, I'M concerned with all the problems he'll have later on" (brush off with the hand)

me: Hmm. I havent had any problems. who knows? (still smiling, non threatening trying to keep the peace)

But, man, it got cold in there. Suggesting not circumcising seemed sooo offensive. And if you're so sure about it, why get so defensive and treat a simple statement with such hostility?

I know the answer to that. And I know you know too. Just give me the strength to back today, armed and ready!

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,717 Posts
Jee, tell them since the provincial medical doesn't fund it, mabe there's a REASON for it? and ask if they have better things to do with their money when expecting a baby than to perform cosmetic surgery on him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,764 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I know! And not that I hold all dr's on some high regard, but if you're having difficulty finding one to do it, and without even having a boy already, just knowing that its difficult to do so, why oh why are you still trying to do it?!

Maybe, just maybe, the dr's (and CPS) are right in this?

Kill 'em with kindness today, kill 'em with kindness. Make them love me and then bam! change their mind! Hee hee....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,764 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by leila1213 View Post
Maybe if there is a similar comment about problems, ask specifically which problems they would be worried about? Or mention a problem or 2 your circed DS has had??

I thought of that late last nite. (isnt that always the case?) I shouldve said, "any possible future problems are usually caused by misinformed docs telling you to retract and clean or forcibly retracting themselves at 'well baby' visits". So, now thats stored away for the next time.

The moms werent there today. Here I am, all loaded and ready to go, and they're not there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,764 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
sadly, I think it still is. Dh 2 bro's are very pro-circ, my sis was very pro-circ (the horrible messed up birth changed her mind). I think we're doing awesome at bf, but still have a way to go with circ. (most of the moms in this playgroup bf to at least 1, a small handfull after that)

I think the thing is still - "look like daddy" and "its cleaner/looks better". And once someone in the family is done, its hard to change their mind. I should know, our last ds almost got done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,785 Posts
Where I live (in Alberta) circ is still quite common, although the numbers are slowly dropping. I'm pretty sure I have the only anti-circ bumper sticker in town, but I'm doing what I can!


Let us know what happens the next time you see those moms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,350 Posts
Re: The "problems later on" b.s., I would look at them literally like they have 2 heads and say:

- Would you remove your newborn's tonsils and appendices to prevent tonsillectomy and appendectomy later on?

- Would you remove your daughters breasts at puberty to avoid breast cancer?

What if they NEVER occur? You're denying him the most sexually sensitive area of his body FOR LIFE. I don't know about you, but I would want him to stay whole and the best he can be until HE decides to mutilate himself when he's an adult!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,764 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
It really did catch me by surprise! I hate when that happens. I hate not being prepared. It doesnt do much for the cause when I'm only able to stutter out things like, er...ah..who knows......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
155 Posts
I'm in BC and its pretty rare here too. There are a couple of little guys in play group done but most are not. The preggo's around here know I'll give them the anti-circ lecture and emails
hehe
I'm hoping to reduce the few to none.

Sarah
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,101 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Microsoap View Post
- Would you remove your newborn's tonsils and appendices to prevent tonsillectomy and appendectomy later on?

- Would you remove your daughters breasts at puberty to avoid breast cancer?

What if they NEVER occur? You're denying him the most sexually sensitive area of his body FOR LIFE. I don't know about you, but I would want him to stay whole and the best he can be until HE decides to mutilate himself when he's an adult!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
824 Posts
*Comes out of lurker mode to say ..*

Hmm, I'm from the maritimes, and the rate must be lower here, because I'd never even heard of circ until I was about 18, and have never seen a circ'd male ..

*Returns to lurker mode ..*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,533 Posts
Wow, does my heart good to envision all of you Canadian moms from sea to shining sea speaking up for baby boys. This is a memo from the Saskatchewan College of Phys and Surgeons to their members which, I think, speaks volumes about the dangers of foreskin amputation:

This is a memo to Saskatchewan physicians warning them of potential lawsuits resulting from circumcisions. Gloria

Memos on infant male circumcision
issued by:

COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS
OF SASKATCHEWAN

February 20, 2002

TO: Members of the College

FROM: Registrar

RE: Caution Against Routine Circumcision of Newborn Male Infants

The practice of medicine is increasingly becoming evidence based. There is a strong and growing consensus that medical intervention should be based upon sound evidence of expected benefit that outweighs the potential risk of any such intervention.

Where there is little evidence of expected benefit from a surgical procedure, but well recognized risk of surgical complications that may cause harm, it would generally be considered imprudent if not improper for a surgeon to perform such a surgical procedure.

Notwithstanding these fundamental principles, 27.6% of newbom males were circumcised in the province in 2000-2001, in spite of the fact that the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) has for two and a half decades explicitly cautioned against routine circumcision of newborn male infants.

Since August 1996, infant circumcision has not been a publicly insured service in Saskatchewan. The decision to deinsure the service was based partly on the lack of valid medical indications for the procedure.

Even though citizens must now personally pay for this service, the incidence of routine male circumcision has dropped only moderately over the past five years.

The relatively high rate of newborn male circumcision in Saskatchewan stands in very sharp contrast to that in some other regions of the country. For example, in Nova Scotia the rate has dropped to 1.5%, while in Newfoundland/ Labrador it has dropped to 0.6%.

Such high infant circumcision rates in Saskatchewan in the face of an explicit caution from the CPS is of great concern to the College of Physicians and Surgeons, and ought to be a concern to all physicians who perform the procedure.

Is it possible that so many Saskatchewan physicians are totally unaware of the position of the CPS, and the research evidence that supports that position?

If physicians are aware of the evidence against routine newborn circumcision, why do they continue to practice in a manner that ignores this evidence?

In my dialogue with Saskatchewan physicians about this issue, I've encountered many who claim to be "neutral" in their opinion about routine circumcision, but perform the procedure strictly on the basis of parental preference.

On the surface, that approach might seem commendable as it seems sensitive and responsive to parental values. However, it begs the question as to whether the parents are appropriately informed about the benefits and risk of this procedure. Even more importantly, it begs the question as to whether physicians are providing accurate and adequate information to parents that is likely to yield a truly informed decision on their part.

Informed consent to any surgical procedure relies on an assumption that the decision maker possesses full and accurate information about the benefits and risks of the procedure. The onus is cast upon the surgeon, who might perform the procedure, to ensure that such information is not only conveyed to the decision maker, but is understood by the decision maker.

It is difficult to identify any other domain of medicine in which physicians would feel comfortable playing such a passive role in a decision pathway culminating in surgery. It is also difficult to identify any other domain of medicine in which practice patterns stand in such stark contrast to research evidence.

When the Council of the College of Physicians and Surgeons reviewed this issue at its last meeting, it directed the Registrar to initiate an effective educational strategy to raise professional and public awareness of this issue. The first step in that strategy is this memo, which is directed to all members of the College who perform circumcisions, or are likely in a position to influence parental decision making on this issue.

These are my recommendations to you:

1. First, be sure that you are fully and accurately informed about the research literature on this subject, which serves as the basis for the CPS position against routine circumcision of newborn male infants.

You can obtain a copy of the CPS Position Paper, and a succinct summary of the relevant research evidence, by logging on to the CPS website at www.cps.ca.

If you are not able to access this information from the CPS website, please give Ms. Jo-Anne Wolan a call at the College. We will be pleased to send you a written copy of the CPS position paper.

2. In any dialogue you have with patients [sic] about potential circumcision of their newborn male infants, be sure that you accurately and effectively convey the message that this is not a recommended procedure.

3. If parents remain adamant in their preference that newborn circumcision be performed, notwithstanding their awareness of the research on this subject, remember that you are under no obligation to perform any surgical procedure for which there are not valid medical indications. You can, and should, respectfully decline to perform the procedure just as you should respectfully decline to carry out other requested medical acts that you regard to be inappropriate.

4. If the parental request for infant male circumcision is based exclusively upon religious beliefs and values, and you are inclined to act in deference to those religious beliefs and values, you would be prudent to require parental signature of a consent document which clearly stipulates that the circumcision in question is not medically indicated and is being performed in accordance with parental religious practices.

In such cases, physicians would be prudent to consult with and seek advice from the Canadian Medical Protective Association before proceeding.

May 7, 2002

TO: All family physician, pediatrician, obstetrician and urologist members of the College of Physicians and Surgeons

FROM: Registrar, Dr. D.A. Kendel

RE: Infant male circumcision

A substantial number of College members who received my memo of February 20, 2002 regarding infant male circumcision have sought clarification from the College in respect of information contained in that memo. We are pleased to provide this clarification to all members who were in receipt of the February 20th memo.

First, let me clarify that it is not the intention of the College of Physicians and Surgeons to prohibit physicians from performing infant male circumcision if it is their professional judgment that the procedure is indicated, and there is truly informed consent to support its performance.

However, it is the view of the College that this surgical procedure is sometimes performed much too casually, without adequate attentiveness to the risk for patients and the surgeon.

The Exercise of Sound Professional Judgment

It is the expectation of the College that all physicians exercise sound professional judgment in all the professional decisions they make. In the exercise of professional judgment physicians ought to consider many factors, including the preference of patients (guardians), the best available evidence with respect to potential benefits and risks of a contemplated intervention, and alternatives to that intervention.

While attentiveness to patient preference is always important, maintenance of professionalism demands that physicians decline to become little more than robots who perform an array of medical interventions on demand.

While no patient should be coerced to undergo a medical procedure against his/her will, it is equally true that no physician should be coerced to perform a medical procedure that is contrary to his/her professional judgment.

Every day, physicians are bombarded with patient pressure to prescribe antibiotics where there are no medical indications for their use. Physicians are sometimes pressured to issue medical reports to employers or insurance companies that support a particular patient's aspirations, but are inconsistent with the physician's professional opinion and judgment. In such circumstances, we encourage and expect physicians to make sound professional decisions based upon reliable evidence and sound judgment, rather than subordinating their judgment to the will of patients.

We encourage and expect physicians to take the same approach with respect to requests for infant male circumcision. When physicians receive such requests, it is important that physicians take ample time to gain an understanding of the basis for the request, to provide accurate detailed information to parents about the potential benefits, risks and alternatives, and to gauge their understanding of that information.

If parents persistently request circumcision of a newborn male infant after a thorough dialogue about benefits, risks and alternatives, a physician is not obligated to perform the procedure if he/she does not regard the procedure to be medically indicated and appropriate. Physicians can respectfully decline to perform this medical procedure just as they respectfully decline to prescribe medications that are not medically indicated and just as they decline to author medical opinions contrary to their best professional judgment.

At the conclusion of my February 20th memo, I made reference to the unique circumstance where infant male circumcision is requested for religious rather than medical reasons. In such circumstances, there is a high probability that the procedure will be performed by someone other than a physician if the option is not made available through a physician. Some physicians are understandably inclined in that circumstance to accede to the request because they logically believe the procedure would be performed more safely by a physician than by a non-physician.

The final sentence in my February 20th memo, which recommended consultation with the CMPA, pertained to circumstances in which a physician is confronted with a request for infant male circumcision based upon religious rather than medical reasons. Where physicians may be inclined to comply with such a request as the "lesser of two evils," even though it is contrary to his/her medical judgment, we would recommend that physicians obtain advice from the CMPA about appropriate documentation of the consent process so that it explicitly defines the conditions under which the procedure is performed.

Obtaining informed consent for infant male circumcision

Most physicians today understand that obtaining informed consent for any medical procedure is a process rather than simply obtaining the signature of a patient or guardian on a consent form.

Obtaining informed consent for any procedure requires disclosure of all relevant benefits and risks of the anticipated procedure as well as alternatives to that procedure. While Canadian courts have stopped short of casting an obligation on physicians to ensure that all of the information is understood by the patient or guardian, a prudent physician will make a reasonable effort to achieve understanding of the information that is shared with patients/guardians.

The surgical consent form used in some Saskatchewan Health Districts concludes with this certification statement that requires a physician's signature:

I hereby certify that I've explained the nature, effect, risks, and alternatives of the above-mentioned procedure(s) and in my opinion the above-named patient or guardian understands their nature and consequences.

To formulate and certify a professional opinion that a patient has understood the nature, effect, risks, and alternatives of a contemplated medical intervention requires much more than one-way disclosure of risks to the patient. It requires two-way dialogue through which the physician has reasonable potential to gauge the understanding held by the patient or guardian.

Regrettably, the research evidence in respect to what primarily motivates parents to request infant male circumcision is not very encouraging. In a study published in Pediatrics (1987), Brown reported that the strongest factor considered by parents in a request for infant male circumcision is whether the father is circumcised.

It is unfortunate to consider that surgery, which is not without risk, might be undertaken on an infant just to ensure that he "looks like his dad." Most physicians would consider it quite unethical to perform facial plastic surgery at the request of parents to make a child look more like his dad. However as a profession, we've often acquiesced to parental requests for circumcision based on nothing more substantive than this same logic.

Medical Indications for Infant Male Circumcision

On the basis of a thorough review of the most recent medical literature, the Canadian Paediatric Society has concluded that the overall evidence of the benefits and harms of circumcision is so evenly balanced that it does not support recommending circumcision as a routine procedure for newborns.

As early as 1971, and again in 1975, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) took a stand against the routine circumcision of newborns on the basis that there are no valid medical indications for circumcision in the neonatal period. In 1975, 1982, and again in 1996 the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) reviewed the literature and reached the same conclusion.

Complications of Infant Male Circumcision

Infant male circumcision is often treated as a very minor procedure with virtually no risk of significant complications. That is frankly not true.

Infant male circumcision may lead to complications that range from minor to severe. They include easily controllable bleeding, amputation of the glans, acute renal failure, life threatening sepsis and rarely death. Reported rates of such complications vary widely in the literature. In a study reported in the British Journal of Surgery (1993) Williams and Kapila have suggested that complication rates range from 2% to 10%.

The complaints committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons has recently concluded its investigation of a tragic case in which routine infant male circumcision resulted in urinary tract obstruction, massive bladder distention, and compression of the inferior vena cava. The physician who carried out the circumcision believed the procedure had been performed uneventfully.

What is the Risk for Physicians?

At our suggestion, the Canadian Medical Protective Association (CMPA) reviewed its closed legal claims pertaining to infant male circumcision between 1991 and 2002. There were twenty such lawsuits and the decisions were equally split between the plaintiffs and the respondent physicians.

During the same timeframe, the CMPA gave assistance to physicians in respect of thirty-six circumcision related complaints to the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons, half of those being related to newborns.

Physicians might be tempted to take some solace from these data which suggest that College complaints and lawsuits related to infant male circumcision are relatively infrequent. However before becoming too complacent in the matter, we would recommend that physicians take heed of a profound rise in activity by citizen groups that very vigorously oppose infant male circumcision, and characterize it as unwarranted mutilating surgery.

In many countries including Canada, these citizen groups are gaining a higher profile and more credibility among the general public. They are bringing to light new evidence that the male prepuce may play an important physiological and psychological role in adult male function, which has to date been largely ignored in any consideration of harm associated with infant male circumcision. As a consequence of the public awareness raised by these groups, a growing number of adult males and/or their parents are now expressing strong resentment against physicians who performed infant male circumcision many years ago at their request. The retroactive anger toward these physicians is generally based upon arguments that parents were given woefully inadequate information about potential adverse impact on adult male function, and inadequate information about normal infant penile development and hygiene.

Whether this growing backlash against physicians does or does not generate lawsuits, it is certainly making life somewhat unpleasant for physicians who are perceived by their former patients as having been much too casual in their decision to perform infant male circumcision.

While the College's primary mandate is public protection, we do encourage physicians to give careful thought to the downstream risks they may incur by taking an inappropriately casual approach to infant male circumcision driven exclusively by parental preference without valid medical indication for the procedure.
If members do have any unresolved questions or concerns about this issue, we would be pleased to respond to individual requests for clarification. >>end of memo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
Wow, that is cool circ. rates are so low in Canada, and the Sask. memo. I had no idea. Most of my non-cruchy friends planned to circ., but I didn't realise that I was in the majority here (that's a weird feeling!)

My parents were very pro-circ, and warn me all the time to clean DS's properly. I
just nod and say "uh-uh".
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top