T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
749.1 | **Moderator Warning** | RAVEN1::HEFFELFINGER | Vini, vidi, visa | Tue Mar 05 1991 13:51 | 6 |
| OK folks, this is one of THOSE topics. :-)
Please keep it calm and don't use loaded language.
Tracey
Parenting co-mod
|
749.2 | Our son didn't react with pain for long | CRONIC::ORTH | | Tue Mar 05 1991 14:00 | 33 |
| My wife was with him when they circumcised our eldest son. She says:
Yes, the hurt, *but* for a very brief time, at least while they do the
actual circumcision. Josh cried for about a toatl of 60 seconds, and
then just lay there cooing and looking around. He never cried when his
diaper was changed. They do put a sort of dressing on the tip of the
penis, consisting of gause and petroleum jelly, and you will need to
change this till it's healed, but it's not hard to do, and Josh never
seemd to mind. They sometimes don't pee for quite a few hours after the
circ is done, due to mild swelling, but, again, never seemed to cause
discomfort to him. And they are often quite sleepy for the next 12 to
24 hours after the circ, as it is a trauma to them, however brief.
Does it need to be done? No. Will there be any harm if its not? No.
Will there be any harm if it *is* done? Extremely unlikely, although it
is minor surgery, and with it go the possiblities of complication of
minor surgery (mostly infection, but these are very rare). Basically it
is not even so much of a recommended procedure, and is certainly not
standard. I'd ask my OB, if I were you, since he's the one who will do
the circ. (*not* the pedi).
Culturally, I'd say, is where the biggest factors come in. Is it
culturally correct for a boy to be circ'ed in your family/ethnic
heritage? If yes, are you able/willing to go against that?. Does he
have brothers who are/aren't circ'ed? Some people worry about teasing
in the teenage years (you know, group showers in boys gym classes) if a
boy is not circ'ed and his friends are.
There are many factors to consider. But, it is clean, safe, sanitary,
and, judging strctly from teh amount of crying our son did, not painful
for very long at all. It's just not medically or hygenically necessary.
Get all the facts, and base your decision on that.
--dave--
|
749.3 | | TIPTOE::STOLICNY | | Tue Mar 05 1991 14:05 | 9 |
| re: .2
There is also some type of dressing that you don't have to
change. You do have to put bacitracin (I think) on it at
diaper changes, but you don't remove the gauze, or whatever
the stuff is, until it falls off on its own at which point the
wound now longer needs dressing. Very easy to care for.
Carol
|
749.4 | See also V2 | POWDML::SATOW | | Tue Mar 05 1991 14:33 | 11 |
| There is also a discussion of this in Parenting V2, at note 216. See note
7.11 on how to get to Parenting V2.
That's not to stifle any discussion here. I get the impression that attitudes
toward circumcision have changed quite a bit in the last few years. As for
the "kidding in the locker room" angle, the base noter might want to get some
statistics from her ob/gyn or hospital on what percentage of male babies are
circumcised these days. Also, check with your health insurance or HMO.
Circumcisions are not routinely covered by all medical plans.
Clay
|
749.5 | What is Daddy? | WMOIS::PLANT_D | | Tue Mar 05 1991 15:55 | 17 |
| Hi,
When our son Joshua was born we had decided that since Daddy was not
then he would not. I have not found that it any harder to keep clean.
I (we) felt that whatever way Dad was the baby should be. That way
when baby sees Dad undressed, he would not have to wonder why he is
different?
I have heard (not to discredit any previous replies) that is does hurt
a lot and the babies scream.
I think that this is a personal decision between Mom and Dad to be.
I hope this helps you.
Denise
|
749.6 | We had to do it! | KRAPPA::MACK | If I only had a brain...... | Tue Mar 05 1991 16:17 | 21 |
|
I made the decision to not have my son circumcised at birth
....I couldn't deal with the pain he'd go through ( I had witnessed
one by accident in the nursery with my first :^( )
But, I was lucky enough to have the 1 in 100 boys that really
needed one. By the time Josh was 6 months old we noticed that he would
"balloon" up when he urinated. He had a condition called Phimosis,
meaning the opening was too small and caused backflushing of the urine.
So---at 1 year old ( we had to wait until he was old enough for the
doctors to be comfortable with general anesthesia), he had to be
circumcised. Never again for us. Any future boys will be done at birth.
Recovering at a year old was very painful for him.
Just lucky, I guess...
Good luck!
Nancy
|
749.7 | I didn't say he didn't scream... | CRONIC::ORTH | | Tue Mar 05 1991 16:17 | 21 |
| We did not say that our son did not scream....he did. Loudly. *But*
only for approx. 60 seconds, and then it was as if nothing in the world
was wrong. Without getting real gross and technical, they use a round,
hollow instrument which goes over the tip of the penis, and under the
foreskin. It then clamps onto the foreskin only, so the cutting only
gets near the foreskin, and never even close to the penis (the metal
instrument is "in the way"). The baby howls till the clamp is on, and
abruptly stops. The clamp deadens all sensation to the foreskin, sort
of like an anesthetic...actually clamps off nerve fibers in teh
foreskin. So the cut is never even felt, and doesn't produce tons of
soreness later, as it's just below the line where the clamp was, and
where the nerves were crushed. It *does not* affect sensation in the
boy's penis itself. This is how the doctor explained it to my wife,
since she watched, and was curious. It is also why they don't cry too
much after wards, although you'd think with such a cut they would. Any
soreness they have is from the excessive handling, mostly.
I, too, have heard the "go with how the boy's father is" train of
thought, and it was one of the reasons we've had our boys circ'ed.
--dave--
|
749.8 | Just made our decision | KAOFS::M_FETT | Schreib Doch Mal! | Wed Mar 06 1991 08:05 | 18 |
| I was surprised at the feeling I got from the nurse who taught our
prenatal class - she and the doctor who was a guest one session seemed
to be not in favour of the procedure, however, they were telling us
that it was our decision (outside of social or religious reasons), but
that we should remember to keep in mind that it will be a decision in
the interests of the child, not the parents.
I decided to leave the decision up to my husband, since he has been
one of the unfortunate few who has had to have it done as an adult
(AND had complications with the procedure!). What made him decide not
to have it done is, first; he is the only male in his family to have
had problems, secondly, the videos we saw that evening happened to show
both an uncircumsized and a circumsized newborn -- it made him decide
that in this case, if we do have a boy, it will in fact BE different
than Daddy.
- Monica
|
749.9 | our experience | STAR::LEWIS | | Wed Mar 06 1991 08:27 | 16 |
| re .4:
>>toward circumcision have changed quite a bit in the last few years. As for
>>the "kidding in the locker room" angle, the base noter might want to get some
>>statistics from her ob/gyn or hospital on what percentage of male babies are
>>circumcised these days.
For what it's worth - the day I went home from the hospital there were
five boys leaving the nursery. The nursery nurse told me that none of
them were circumcised. I suspect this was an unusual day but it helped
validate our decision not to have Andy circumcised. This was nine
months ago.
re: .0
It's a tough decision - just remember that there's not a right and
wrong - just what's right for you and your family.
|
749.10 | GLAD WE DID IT!! | DELNI::HODGE | | Wed Mar 06 1991 09:15 | 19 |
|
Our boy was born in June of 1990 and he was circumcised. My husband
was against it only because of the pain. I was for it only because of
how he might feel in the locker room and the pain of having it done later
in life.
I'm far from an expert, but newborns shouldn't remember the pain
when it's done at two days old, but at two or twenty years old he would
certainly remember it for a long time.
Stuart's pain was over in a day or two, it was a little inconvenient to
clean for a couple of weeks, but I'm glad we did it now so we/he
doesn't have to worry about it ever again
There wasn't any religious factors in this for us and my husband is
circumcised so it's individual choices.
Tricia
|
749.11 | | MOIRA::FAIMAN | light upon the figured leaf | Wed Mar 06 1991 09:35 | 9 |
| From what I've heard, with children who are born these days, it's probably
more likely that they'll get teased in the locker room if they are circumsized
than if they aren't.
As for the "look like daddy" issue, a response I've heard which sounds pretty
convincing to me is that the difference between *any* preadolescent boy's
penis and *any* adult's penis is much more obvious than the difference
between a circumsized and an uncircumsized penis -- that the little boy
isn't going to look like his daddy, regardless of whether he's circumsized.
|
749.12 | The choice is yours. | ROSMRY::MATTIA | | Wed Mar 06 1991 09:44 | 18 |
| re: -1
Dave, the OB did your sons circ!! I have never heard of that. I have
had both of my boys circumcised and the procedure was done by a pedi.
It was with 2 different pedi's from different pediatric groups.
As for the childs discomfort during the procedure. There is a lot, I
think most of it stems from the fact that they are uncovered and their
arms just fly all over the place. They are scared, most of them had
just been in the womb 24 hrs before and after they are born we wrap
them up nice and tight. Then all of a sudden there is a strange voice
taking to them, they are stark naked (my 1st son urinated all over
himself), and somebody is making them hurt. Hey, I'd be angry and cry
too!!
After all this, we are still glad we made the decision we did. The
choice is yours, don't worry what every one else is doing. Do what you
feel is right for YOUR baby.
|
749.13 | Try Wine | MR4DEC::POLAKOFF | | Wed Mar 06 1991 10:13 | 25 |
|
I witnessed a circumcision at a "bris" (a religious ceremony where the
circumcision is done--and then celebrated). The baby was 8 days old
(this is part of the ritual--the baby must be exactly 8 days old). The
circumcision was done by a pedi. who moonlights as an adjunct rabbi!
The circumcision was done in the home.
First, a cloth napkin was soaked in some Maneshevitz (sp?) wine. Then,
the napkin was put into the baby's mouth and the baby sucked on the
napkin. Then, the circumcision was performed.
There wasn't even a peep from the baby. A few minutes after the
circumcision, the baby fell asleep. When he woke up a few hours later,
he was fine--no crying, no nothing.
That's the way I'd do--and will do it if I have a boy.
BTW--the American Medical Association stopped recommending circumcision
a few years ago and just recently--started recommending it again.
There's some medical reason for the recommendation--but I forget what
it is. Anyone know?
Bonnie
|
749.14 | One of Each! | MAMTS3::DHOWARD | He who laughs, lasts! | Wed Mar 06 1991 10:37 | 24 |
| I have two sons. The first is almost seventeen, and when I had him I
was made to feel that "that's the way it's done!". The GP who
delivered him told me that if the baby was a boy, there would be a $50
extra charge because of the circ -- I never questioned it.
My 2 1/2-year-old, however, has not been circumcised. My eyes have
been opened over the years, and it feels refreshing to actually have a
say in what's being done to my child. I was just reading about the
circ question in American Baby magazine last night. More and more,
people are making their own decisions, and I think by the time Chase is
in a locker room, he'll find that he looks like a lot of other kids!
My husband was totally against it (mainly because it would be somewhat
painful), and as it happened, the baby was in Neonatal Intensive Care
for several days, and there was no way we would have subjected him to
one more procedure.
I'm due in July. If it's another boy, he'll look just like the last
one! FWIW, my OLDER son thinks I made a terrible decision, and that
his little brother looks "funny" ...
Whatever decision you make will be the "right" one for your family!
Dale
|
749.15 | | ISLNDS::BARR_L | Is it Friday yet? | Wed Mar 06 1991 12:40 | 11 |
| My son was born on July 27, 1990. He was not circumsized because
of a minor medical problem that could either correct itself or would
have to be surgically corrected at 1 year of age. The surgical
procedure would require use of the foreskin for grafting purposes.
My son is now 7 months old and it looks as though his problem has
more or less corrected itself, but we still have to wait until he's
a year old to have him circumsized. Yes, we will have it done at
that time. Why?, you may ask. First of all, for religious reasons
and secondly, I feel it's cleaner.
Lori B.
|
749.16 | Apples/oranges 6 of one, half dozen of the othe | ULTRA::DONAHUE | | Wed Mar 06 1991 12:52 | 29 |
| My husband was dead set against circumcision, so I set out to prove him
wrong. I was brought up believing that the only boys that _didn't_ get
circumcised, were different, that's all.
Any way, I read everything I could get my hands on, trying to find
medical evidence that circumcision is necessary.
Nothing I read would back me up. The more I read, the more amazed I was
that this procedure is strictly a cultural thing, not medical at all.
I talked to my pedi and gyn and neither of them would say that it was
absolutely necessary. The only thing that was brought to my attention,
was the fact that in very rare cases, the uncircumcised boy may be
prone to urinary tract infections more than a circumcised boy. That's
it.
Needless to say, Daniel is not circumcised, but you know... to this
day, I wonder if I will regret my decision years from now. But, I guess
that would be the case, even if we _did_ have Daniel circumcised.
What's "in" today is "out" tomorrow. Make the decision between you and
the baby's father. Those are the only people who should be involved in
the process.
By the way... The pedi would have done it, if we requested, _not_ the
gyn. The pedi takes care of the baby, the gyn takes care of the mommy.
Good luck,
Norma
|
749.17 | surgeons... | STAR::LEWIS | | Wed Mar 06 1991 12:58 | 6 |
|
> By the way... The pedi would have done it, if we requested, _not_ the
> gyn. The pedi takes care of the baby, the gyn takes care of the mommy.
I was told that the OB would do it because they were surgeons and
the pedi wasn't.
|
749.18 | | TIPTOE::STOLICNY | | Wed Mar 06 1991 13:03 | 4 |
| re: .17 Yup, that's what I was told as well. My ob-gyn performed
Jason's circumcision; his pedi said she didn't do them.
cj/
|
749.19 | Bell and a String | NEWPRT::WAGNER_BA | | Wed Mar 06 1991 13:31 | 11 |
| My OB did them as well as the PEDI so I had my choice. But my OB said
she didn't like to do it, so I chose the PEDI. Now he says he doesn't
like to do them either, but who would! Poor baby! I'm glad I didn't
have to be in the room when they did Chase (2 days old). He used a bell
and a string, when I first heard of it I said WHAT!! But it was a little
plastic thing that goes over the tip and then a piece of string that
wraps around and then it just falls off when it heals. No cleaning
fuss. I'm happy with my decision to get it over with right away, and
would do it again. (Our reason: to be like daddy and no infection
worries)
|
749.20 | | STAR::MACKAY | C'est la vie! | Wed Mar 06 1991 13:58 | 8 |
|
It depends on the state regulation...In Mass, circumcision has to be
done by a physician that carries surgical malpractice insurance
(when done in a hospital).
Most pediatricians are not surgeons, thus do not carry the necessary
insurance. So, the OB's do the circumcision, since they are surgeons.
Eva.
|
749.21 | Thanks for the OB replies! | CRONIC::ORTH | | Wed Mar 06 1991 14:59 | 10 |
| Thanks, all who wrote saying their OB did the circ.! I knew we were not
crazy! I am 110% positive the OB did our eldest son, as my wife was
right there watching the whole thing. But that was in NY state. I'm 99%
sure it was the OB in Mass., as *he* came to talk to us about it, and
*he* came in to tell us everything went fine, even though we didn't
actually see it.
It's the one defiance of the "pedi gets baby, Ob gets mommy" rule.
--dave--
|
749.22 | | PERFCT::WOOLNER | Photographer is fuzzy, underdeveloped and dense | Wed Mar 06 1991 15:05 | 10 |
| I consider it mutilation.
Of course, my earlobes have been "mutilated" (pierced) - but that was
my decision, at age 14, and there's some chance that they'd grow back
to a nonpierced state if I wanted to reverse my decision.
As one of my grandmothers loved to say, "if you see something <insert
deity> didn't put there, sew a green button on it."
Leslie
|
749.23 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Wed Mar 06 1991 15:09 | 15 |
| re .13
Apparently some study indicated that partners of uncircumcised males
were more likely to suffer cervical cancer. I have my doubts.
Anyway, I am one of those uncirced males who had problems when a
baby. The Dr made a small incision in the foreskin to open it up a
bit and that was the end of the problem. The same thing was done for
adhesions (all when i was a baby). I have never had a problem in *my*
memory. I understand that a lot of Drs when presented with tight
foreskin or adhesions take the circ approach as being a simple once
and for all solution rather than the "let's fix just the problem" ...
like doing a full mastectomy when a lumpectomy will do just as well.
Stuart
|
749.24 | | AIAG::BUZZELL | | Wed Mar 06 1991 15:42 | 15 |
|
My husband is one of 6 boys, none of them circumcised at birth. Over the
years 3 of them have had problems, 2 resulting in circumcisions at an
later age. It's very painful as an adult, so they say.
My two boys were both circumcised. My husband thought it was best even
though he isn't.
Both circumcisions were done by the ob. I also had no problems with the
dressing, my first boy's was done two days before I left the hospital and the
gauze pad was already off. In my opinion, the umbilical cord was alot
harder to deal with.
joan
|
749.25 | | AIMHI::SJOHNSON | | Wed Mar 06 1991 17:03 | 20 |
| I have been attending some Prenatal Classes at the Hitchcock Clinic in
Nashua NH. One (titled "The Doctor is in") discussed this topic. Here
is some of the info that the Newborn Nurse told us:
- The "delicate" procedure is done at 2 days old.
- The baby is strapped onto a contoured table (naked)
- Baby can not remember operation or pain at later date
- Baby cries because it is cold & doesn't like being stretched out like
that after being in the tuck position for so long.
- More babies are having this done at Memorial Hospital in Nashua than
aren't.
- They haven't had any problems/infections after procedure is done.
FYI - just heard that a friend of mine's sister had her baby done at a
later date after much grief from friends/relatives and it cost $800.00
somewhere in NJ because they considered it to be plastic surgery! The
baby was only 2 months old!
Good luck w/ decision.
Sonia
|
749.26 | 2 more - OB please! | BCSE::WEIER | Patty, DTN 381-0877 | Wed Mar 06 1991 22:22 | 25 |
| Both of my sons have been circumcised, and we're glad we did it. Part
so they'd look like dad, but mostly to avoid ANY possibility of it
needing to be done when they could remember it. Also, the locker room
stuff was a concern.
The OB did both of them. With my first, no prob, he cried some, not a
big deal, REAL easy dressing that fell off when the circ was healed.
With my second one, he screamed for about an hour afterwards, and the
nurse made a very *LARGE* point to make *SURE* that I realized just
WHAT I had put my poor baby through and was quite clear in letting me
know that she thought I was a rotten mother. I had more problems with
her than with either circ.
Also, both boys have what is sometimes referred to as a short-circ,
where they don't remove as much of the foreskin as might normally be
removed, so there's some 'extra' skin, but not as much as a
non-circumcised boy.
....I couldn't imagine a boy/guy having to go through that and
_remember_ it!!
Good Luck!!
Patty
p.s. I agree, the Umbilical cord was much worse to deal with
|
749.27 | cancer is a possibility | JUPITR::LUSKEY | | Thu Mar 07 1991 08:33 | 10 |
| According to my husband (hematologist/oncologist), the chances for
cancer of the penis exists only among non-circumsised males. Also,
the rate of cervical cancer for female partners of uncircumsised males
are probably greater (the data is not very certain).
He also pointed out that not much cancer of the penis is seen these
days and that given the possibility of any of the above, why not
circumsise?
|
749.29 | Uncircumcized | AIMHI::MAZIALNIK | | Thu Mar 07 1991 12:27 | 10 |
| We didn't have our baby circumcized. I didn't have a strong feeling
on it either way but since dad did, I left the decision up to him.
Now I do have a strong opinion on it and feel good about not
having him circumcized. I've seen lots of naked baby boys since
I've had Eric and it's been about a 50/50 split on circ'ed vs un.
The pedi would have done it. He asked if I was going to have
Eric circumcized, I said "no", he said, "Good, I hate doing them".
Donna
|
749.32 | | STAR::MACKAY | C'est la vie! | Thu Mar 07 1991 14:50 | 15 |
|
re. 28
I find your reply very biased.
My brother was circumcised when he was 8 after he had several
infections. And that hurt like hell. Now, my parents are Chinese,
they didn't believe in circumcision at birth until they went
through the ordeal with my brother. Now, I know, that my
brother wasn't an isolated incidence since there are a lot
of urinologists in Hong Kong that specialized in circumcisions.
So, if there is a chance that my son (I don't have one) has to
be circumcised due to medical reason, doing it at birth seems to be
a better way.
Eva.
|
749.33 | My Views, incl grandfather and son(s) | CSC32::DUBOIS | The early bird gets worms | Thu Mar 07 1991 14:52 | 19 |
| My grandfather died of cancer of the penis. He was uncircumcised. When I
was pregnant, we debated for a long time about circumcision. We finally
decided *not* to circumcise. I have never regretted it.
We called the American Cancer Society. According to them, hygiene was never
taken into consideration with the studies of uncircumsized men. Hygiene
apparently plays a very important part.
All you have to do to clean an uncircumcised penis is to pull back the foreskin
as far as it will go (which is about nil, when they are infants) and splash
some water on it. That's it. By the time our son was 2, he was pulling back
his own foreskin, and I was pouring a glass of water on it when he took a
bath.
I consider circumcision unnecessary. I don't believe in putting my children
through unnecessary pain, so if we have another son, we will not circumcise
him, either.
Carol
|
749.35 | Pain is part of the process of life ... | SITBUL::FYFE | | Thu Mar 07 1991 15:08 | 14 |
|
I find it interesting that there are so many people worried about
the pain of a circ. Considering all the pain that a child goes
thru during the process of growing up I would consider the pain
of a circ. to be a moot point or at most insignificant.
As far as 'keeping clean': Yes this help prevent problems, but it does
not guarentee that all will be well for a lifetime. I'm sure most
if not all of the examples of older circs shared in this note were
not the result of poor hygiene.
There is no right or wrong answer to the question
Doug
|
749.36 | all my kids have healthy lungs | CSSE32::RANDALL | waiting for spring | Thu Mar 07 1991 16:35 | 15 |
| Both our boys are circumcized for religious reasons, though we had
the procedure done in the hospital rather than on the eighth day
as I'm told we should have. The pedi did it both times. Neither
boy had any problems at all, either during or after.
Steven cried quite a bit during the procedure -- I didn't watch
but I could hear him from my room, and I was a bit upset until the
next day, when they brought him in for his pre-going-home bath
(where they check to make sure you won't do awful things like
using soap on the baby's face when you bathe him) and he screamed
bloody murder. I mean, people from other rooms were coming to see
what we were doing to this poor kid. The crying during the
circumcision was nothing compared to it . . .
--bonnie
|
749.37 | | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | let us pray to Him | Thu Mar 07 1991 22:32 | 18 |
| RE: .22 Mutilation????? A little melodramatic phraseology, huh?
RE: .26 I'd have been in that nurses face as well as writing a letter
to the hospital administrator.
RE: What's with all the set hidden notes?
Weel, we had our son (now 4 days old) circ'd. The reasons were- 1) we'd
rather have it don now then later 2) so he'd be like dad.
A side note- there was a guy where we lived who sued his parents for
having him circumcised. (It takes all kinds)
Peace,
Mike
|
749.38 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Fri Mar 08 1991 14:46 | 14 |
| >
> RE: What's with all the set hidden notes?
>
Shall we just say that religion strayed a little too far into the subject
matter.
>
> A side note- there was a guy where we lived who sued his parents for
> having him circumcised. (It takes all kinds)
>
I'd have been a little perturbed if I had been ... not sufficient to sue
my parents ... but I can at least understand ...
Stuart
|
749.39 | ex | AIMHI::SJOHNSON | | Fri Mar 08 1991 14:55 | 12 |
| Just a side note to one added earlier:
- Memorial Hospital in Nashua has the Pedi doing the "delicate"
procedure. I was told that none of them "enjoy" doing it - but who
would?
Sonia
|
749.40 | | SITBUL::FYFE | | Fri Mar 08 1991 15:28 | 6 |
|
>I'd have been a little perturbed if I had been ... not sufficient to sue
>my parents ... but I can at least understand ...
Or more likely you would not have known any different and been
indifferent after the fact.
|
749.41 | what *would* you call it? | JAWS::WOOLNER | Photographer is fuzzy, underdeveloped and dense | Fri Mar 08 1991 15:38 | 14 |
| .37>> Mutilation????? A little melodramatic phraseology, huh?
Cutting off a body part which is not diseased, malformed, or dangerous
to the organism in any way? Without the informed consent of the
patient?
Shall we also remove tonsils and appendix of the neonate as a matter of
course? They can get infected in later life too, and it's *d@mned*
inconvenient to have _those_ operations as an adult.
I'm not talking about corrective surgery here, just the equipment that
comes, in good working order, with the "base system."
Leslie
|
749.42 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Fri Mar 08 1991 17:06 | 14 |
|
>Or more likely you would not have known any different and been
>indifferent after the fact.
Considering how I feel about unnecessary medical and pseudo-medical
procedures, no ... I don't think I'd feel indifferent ... resigned
to the fact it was done maybe, but not indifferent.
After all is said and done, evolution has changed the length of toes,
the height of the body, stopped hair growing over much of the body ...
if the foreskin wasn't considered "necessary", surely it should have
evolved away by now!
Stuart
|
749.43 | Maybe we haven't evolved enough... | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Sat Mar 09 1991 15:15 | 11 |
| re: .42
> After all is said and done, evolution has changed the length of toes,
> the height of the body, stopped hair growing over much of the body ...
> if the foreskin wasn't considered "necessary", surely it should have
> evolved away by now!
Maybe it's like your appendix, no known function, but still there.
Bob
|
749.44 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Mon Mar 11 1991 11:02 | 14 |
| re .-1
>
> Maybe it's like your appendix, no known function, but still there.
> ^^^^^
I think you've said it in one .... just because we don't know exactly
what it's for doesn't make it useless and therefore a candidate for
routine surical removal without just cause like infection.
Maybe, since we don't know what we are here for, long term, we should just nuke
ourselves anyway, we'd save generations to come a lot of agony!
Stuart
|
749.47 | Shadow logic does not make a convincing argument | SITBUL::FYFE | | Mon Mar 11 1991 11:34 | 37 |
|
> Shall we also remove tonsils and appendix of the neonate as a matter of
> course? They can get infected in later life too, and it's *d@mned*
> inconvenient to have _those_ operations as an adult.
> Leslie
Surely you're not comparing a Tonsilectomy (sp) or Apendectomy (sp)
with a Circ!
Re: Stuart-
> Considering how I feel about unnecessary medical and pseudo-medical
> procedures, no ... I don't think I'd feel indifferent ... resigned
> to the fact it was done maybe, but not indifferent.
I guess you'd have to be there see how meaningless to the affected
individual this topic really is.
> After all is said and done, evolution has changed the length of toes,
> the height of the body, stopped hair growing over much of the body ...
> if the foreskin wasn't considered "necessary", surely it should have
> evolved away by now!
> I think you've said it in one .... just because we don't know exactly
> what it's for doesn't make it useless and therefore a candidate for
> routine surical removal without just cause like infection.
I think its pretty obvious what it is for. Protection. Cloths have taken
over this function. We no longer live a lifestyle which requires this
protection and there has been no evolutionary event that would promote
such a change.
Doug
Stuart
|
749.48 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Mon Mar 11 1991 12:36 | 41 |
| Doug,
> I guess you'd have to be there see how meaningless to the affected
> individual this topic really is.
>
Of course it is meaningless after the fact ... unless someone comes up
with a mechanism for regrowing removed tissue. As I said, I do not believe
in unnecessary surgery - never have, never will. I see routine circumcision
as unnecessary surgery ... Many of the problems of the foreskin amongst
uncircumcised males can be solved with less radical surgery. If I had been
done, I would probably still take this view.
>
> I think its pretty obvious what it is for. Protection. Cloths have taken
> over this function. We no longer live a lifestyle which requires this
> protection and there has been no evolutionary event that would promote
> such a change.
>
Clothing has provided protection that hair was there for before too ... hair
has evolved away ... And anyway just because clothes provide additional
protection does not mean that we should just simply do away with the foreskin.
I wouldn't go so far as some and say this is mutilation, because undoubtedly at
the time the procedure was started there was a perceived need. I do not
believe that there is still that need today, but heritage plays a large role
as can be seen by some of the responses here ... whether the choice is for
ehtnic/religious reasons, or whether the choice is simply "to be like dad".
So, as with so MANY of these things, there are really only a few basic
arguments pro and anti the issue and if after presentation of the arguments
one way or another one hasn't evoked a change of mind, then we'll all have
to agree to disagree. Evoking emotional cries like "Mutilation" and
"Barbarism" is only going to make people ignore the facts and harden their
stand.
My last comment has got to be that it is interesting the number of doctors
that actually don't like performing the deed .... that must say something.
Stuart
|
749.49 | What does it say? | TIPTOE::STOLICNY | | Mon Mar 11 1991 12:47 | 9 |
| re: .48 and the last comment.
I don't find it that "interesting" or telling at all. I suspect
that there's a lot of things that doctors and nurses "actually don't
like" to do...but do, since they are either requested by the patient
or are medically necessary (drawing blood, urine samples, episiotomies,
etc, etc.).
Carol
|
749.50 | Trying not to digress .... | SITBUL::FYFE | | Mon Mar 11 1991 13:02 | 21 |
|
Stuart:
My previous note was meant to show that some of the arguments in the
not against Circ. are emotions and not logical. For instance, comparing
a Circ. to the removal of an internal organ, or because it is
mutilation 'without the consent of the individual', ect...
It was also to answer the question of why there is a foreskin, and that
is, in a primitive environment, it protects a rather sensitive part
of the body from abrasion.
The only rational arguments for/against in this note have been based
on health issues, not emotions. Rational arguments are the ones that
matter, not the emotional ones based on 'shadow logic'.
Agree to disagree? I thought that was a prerequisite for notes
participation :-)
Doug.
|
749.51 | But who'd say they liked doing them? | MINAR::BISHOP | | Mon Mar 11 1991 14:09 | 7 |
| re .49, previous
There's another point: what kind of reaction would a doctor get
if he or she said "I like to do circumcisions"? It sounds a bit
kinky, doesn't it?
-John Bishop
|
749.52 | Who Care What You Do? Do Not Judge Me! | MR4DEC::POLAKOFF | | Mon Mar 11 1991 14:52 | 42 |
|
I did not see the "hidden" notes, but I suspect they were a reply to
the suggestion that to circumcise is to "mutilate."
Please be sensitive to the fact that in the Jewish religion, it is a
terrible sin to leave the foreskin on--and as a result, most Jewish
boys are circumcised. To call this "mutilation" is to insult a
religious ritual, and I don't think that is what "valuing differences"
is all about.
For those of you who think that a circ. causes a baby undue harm and
pain, I will again reiterate what I said in an earlier note. I
attended a "bris" (the Jewish religious ceremony where the circ. is
done 8 days after the birth, in the home) and watched the whole
procedure. The baby was given a cloth napkin that had been dipped in
Maneshewitch (sp?) wine--the baby sucked on the napkin for about a
second. The moil (a combination pedi./rabbi) then performed the circ.
The baby did not make one sound--not a peep. If that baby was in pain,
you could have fooled an entire room of adults. The baby seemed
oblivious--went ot sleep for 2 hours--and when he awoke, breastfed very
happily, thank you. The "baby" is now 4 years old and does not look
"mutilated" to me. He is a happy, well-adjusted pre-schooler. I'm
sure that all the millions of circumcised men in this world would not
consider themselves "mutilated" either.
With advanced medical technology and knowledge, circumcision is one of
those things that appears to be optional--although the AMA has recently
begun recommending the procedure again.
Let us not be zealots and pretend to know what's best for someone else.
If someone suggested to me that I not circumcise, I would take
offense--as I would feel they were insulting my religion. When a
non-Jewish friend asked me my opinion on circumcision--and what she
should do with her newborn boy--I was able to have a discussion with
her based on what I know medically--and socially. She decided not to
circumcise. We are still very good friends!
Bonnie
|
749.53 | He HATES doing them | HAMMAR::MAZIALNIK | | Mon Mar 11 1991 14:56 | 13 |
| If a doctor said they liked doing them, I'd think they are not
only kinky, but sadistic.
What impressed me about the doctor saying, "Good, I hate doing
them" is the fact that he said anything at all. He could be
indifferent and not comment as would probably be the case in many
procedures (or he could push for a parent to have it done).
He didn't just say, "Oh, that isn't an enjoyable procedure for me
to perform", he stressed that he *hates* doing them. That is a bit
stronger than what I'd expect.
Donna
|
749.54 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Mon Mar 11 1991 16:39 | 48 |
| Doug and I have been engaging in some conversation out of notes on
this because I was intending to not write another reply here but
someting in his last note here I felt deserved attention.
The one thing that came out of that discussion, leaving religion out
of it, was that I see surgery, even as minor as a circ as a "drastic"
procedure, and that he does not. Bonnie's reply describing her
attendance at the ceremony and the baby not crying at all lends
credence to the idea that it isn't. Others have probably seen it
done and heard the baby howl its lungs out ... to them it is drastic.
The point is that it is a polarized issue. There really is no sense
of half-way ... either you believe in it or you don't (except
for drastic medical reasons requiring it). You believe it's drastic
or you don't. You believe it's a sin not to or you don't.
Doug rightly pointed out that the facts get clouded by the emotions.
The facts are that
. there is inconclusive evidence of health problems in uncirced
males
. there is inconclusive evidence of health problems in the female
partners of uncirced males
. there is inconclusive evidence that cleanliness of the penis
may prevent these health problems
. there are religious and ethnic requirements to circ
. there are generation pressures and peer pressure requirements
to circ (to be like other boys or like dad)
. there is inconclusive evidence that babies may or may not suffer
pain from the procedure
. there are no reported problems from having the procedure done
. problems like unretractibility of the foreskin do occur (#s
unknown)
The emotions are numerous.
I still don't believe in it, because I believe it's a drastic procedure
to fix something that ain't necessarily broke, but at least now I do
understand why others do believe in it, including Bonnie who indicated
that it was considered a sin not to (you learn something new every day
for I didn't realize how deeply embedded the requirement was ... and I
think you'll find that a lot of people don't).
So, has anybody got any real FACTS to add to this discussion ? I think
we've run the course on emotion.
Stuart
|
749.55 | | MAMTS5::MWANNEMACHER | let us pray to Him | Mon Mar 11 1991 17:46 | 15 |
| RE: Leslie-To compare a circumcision with an appendectomy or a
tonsilectomy (In my opinion) is ridiculous. The fact is that
there are good reasons for doing this as a preventitive measure.
That does not mean that everyone should or should not get it done, to
each there own. I think to call it "mutilation" is being very
melodramatic.
Mutilate-To cut off or permenantly destroy a limb or essential part of.
You decide.
Peace,
Mike
|
749.56 | LOTS OF UNNECESSARY SURGERY IN THE GOOD OL' USA | HSOMAI::BUSTAMANTE | | Mon Mar 11 1991 18:34 | 10 |
| Re. .55: Appendectomies are usually not preventative but tonsilectomies
are frequently done under the guise of "preventing" future infections.
In fact, my parents were wise enough to refuse to do a tons. on me and
as a result I hardly ever get a cold (I can't even remember the last
time I had one!) because my tonsils stop invading viruses. They may get
a little swollen but that's it and the pain goes away quickly.
As for circumcision, I was the cause of the hidden notes and all I'll
say now is that there's way too much unnecessary surgery in this
country from circ. to cesarean sections to hysterectomies.
|
749.57 | | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | let us pray to Him | Tue Mar 12 1991 07:34 | 8 |
| RE: .56 "way too much unnecessary surgery done"
I agree 100% with this, we've (our family) have had some experience
along these lines.
Peace,
Mike
|
749.58 | Only the facts please. | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Tue Mar 12 1991 10:05 | 31 |
| re .55
>The fact is that
>there are good reasons for doing this as a preventitive measure.
Mike,
The fact you quote is not a fact at all, it is an opinion. And
we all have opinions, and we aren't expressing them very humbly at
times, myself included here.
Let's stop debating whether the act is mutilation or not ... quoting
dictionary definitions is not going to make anyone change the way they
feel about it ... they'll just look for another word to express the same
feeling. That's the whole point ... some people *feel* it's *like*
mutilation ... others like me feel that if something ain't broke why fix
it (and this isn't your ounce of prevention either.) All you are trying
to do is to tell us we cannot or should not feel as we do. But we do
feel that way.
If you think we should change our mind, show us HARD facts. Conversely,
for me to change your mind, hard facts are needed, and to be honest, apart
from those I summarized in .54, I don't know of any other *facts*.
Maybe it's time we found out more facts, or just accept that some
people believe in the procedure and others don't. And to those that
haven't decided, show them the facts as we know them and let them decide for
themselves without blasting them with emotional arguments.
Stuart
|
749.59 | Pain, etc | CSC32::DUBOIS | The early bird gets worms | Tue Mar 12 1991 16:04 | 23 |
| Stuart, most of what you put down as facts are true. However, I disagree
with a couple of them:
<<<< Note 749.54 by KAOFS::S_BROOK "Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME!" >>>
<
< . there is inconclusive evidence that babies may or may not suffer
< pain from the procedure
The procedure is painful. That is why the baby Bonnie watched was given
a drug (alcohol). From what I have read in this and earlier versions of
PARENTING, if I was going to have my son circumcised, I would ask a Jewish
(moll?) to do it. They seem to do it with the least amount of discomfort
and pain for the baby.
< . there are no reported problems from having the procedure done
Actually, in a very small number of cases there is a problem. The adult
performing the circumcision can botch the job and hurt the penis. Again,
in the normal circumcision there is not a problem afterwards, but there is
always a risk. In the book that Shellie looked at when we were considering
whether or not to circumcise, there were several photos of botched jobs.
Carol
|
749.60 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Tue Mar 12 1991 16:38 | 14 |
| OK ... let's reword this
. there is inconclusive evidence that babies may or may not suffer
considerable pain from the procedure (after all it is usually
performed without anaesthetic)
And the other one was based on the satisfactory performance of a
circ. Botched circs will happen ... to make it a meaningful and
useful fact I wonder what the numbers are. (We seem incredibly
devoid of solid numbers to attach to any of the so called statistics
that everybody gets so worked up about when discussing this topic)
Stuart
|
749.61 | Oh well, whatever. | MAMTS3::MWANNEMACHER | let us pray to Him | Tue Mar 12 1991 16:59 | 6 |
| Hi Stuart, I see nothing wrong with how I presented the information.
Sorry if you do.
Peace,
Mike
|
749.62 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Tue Mar 12 1991 18:10 | 1 |
| What is wrong is entering opinion as fact. What more can I say ?
|
749.63 | | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | let us pray to Him | Wed Mar 13 1991 09:04 | 10 |
| Ah, but it is not opinion. There are substantial preventitive reasons
for the procedure. Just because you do not see them as such does not
make them invalid. You are making the mistake of presenting your
judgement as fact. There are risks of infection, this cannot be
denied. Anyway, enough of beating this dead horse. Different people
with ifferent interpretations.
Peace,
Mike
|
749.64 | Circ. is Not Surgery | MR4DEC::POLAKOFF | | Wed Mar 13 1991 09:39 | 25 |
|
C'mon folks. I can't believe you are argueing whether or not the
"procedure" is painful or not. OF COURSE IT HURTS! My goodness,
you're cutting off a piece of skin from a body part--a rather sensitive
body part. I would think it hurts a lot.
I am NOT OF THE SCHOOL who believe that infants feel no pain. If I had
a baby that needed surgery, I would INSIST that some medication be
given for pain. The same goes for a cicumcision.
Yes, the baby I saw get circumcised was given a drug (wine=alcohol).
And it worked! That baby felt no pain--or if he did, he certainly
didn't care! In my opinion, that's the way to go.
One nit: regarding a circ. as being "unnecessary surgery"...it isn't
surgery. It is illegal to perform surgery in a private home (ie: even
if a woman is laboring in her own home--if a c-section is necessary,
she's rushed to the hospital--and appendectomies or tonsilectomies are
performed in hospitals). A circ. is considered a "procedure," and
therefore, can be done in a private home, or anywhere for that matter.
A circ. is not surgery.
Bonnie
|
749.65 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Wed Mar 13 1991 10:01 | 22 |
| >
> One nit: regarding a circ. as being "unnecessary surgery"...it isn't
> surgery. It is illegal to perform surgery in a private home (ie: even
> if a woman is laboring in her own home--if a c-section is necessary,
> she's rushed to the hospital--and appendectomies or tonsilectomies are
> performed in hospitals). A circ. is considered a "procedure," and
> therefore, can be done in a private home, or anywhere for that matter.
> A circ. is not surgery.
>
The legal definition of surgery has not really got a lot to do with the
technical term, except to distinguish what people think should be done
where. After all the laws vary depending on where you are. Surgery is
performed outside of hospitals very routinely in parts of Canada and
Europe and legally -- sometimes it's not exactly advisable to do so, but
that's another matter altogether.
Mike, you still don't get it do you ? Never mind.
Stuart
|
749.66 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Wed Mar 13 1991 10:05 | 3 |
| In all the circumcision ceremonies I've knowingly attended, the wine was given
to the baby after the circumcision. The baby has always cried, generally
starting well before the incision is made, usually while he's being undressed.
|
749.67 | Beforehand On The One I Went To... | MR4DEC::POLAKOFF | | Wed Mar 13 1991 10:14 | 10 |
|
In the 1 circumcision ceremony I attended, the wine was definetly given
beforehand. I think this is the way to go.
If I have a boy, I will definetly try and get the same "moil" my friend
used. And hope for the same results!
Bonnie
|
749.68 | hmmm... | TIPTOE::STOLICNY | | Wed Mar 13 1991 10:15 | 23 |
| re: .65
Strange, I read the "Mike, you still don't get it do you?" and
think the EXACT opposite (i.e. Stuart, you still don't get it,
do you?).
My perception is that the "con" contingency see this as a black/white
situation and are rather condemning of those who chose circumcision
while the "pro" contingency recognize the "greyness" of the decision
and are stating why THEY personally chose circumcision for their
offspring. The "pro" group also seem to routinely mention that what
is right for them, may not be right for others. But having chosen
to circumcize my son, I guess my perception may be skewed. It is
interesting (to me, at least) that the 2 noters with the strongest
opinions against circumcision have daughters only (to the best of my
knowledge).
Anyways, it is clear that neither camp is going to sway their opponent
by further bantering. So perhaps it might be of most benefit to the
basenoter, to call a ceasefire and allow people to enter the opinions,
experiences, and "facts" and let her decide!
Carol
|
749.69 | FWIW...dictionary definition of surgery | DEMON::DEMON::CHALMERS | Ski or die... | Wed Mar 13 1991 10:44 | 6 |
|
SURGERY n. The medical diagnosis and treatment of injury, deformity,
and disease by the cutting and removal or repair of
bodily parts.
|
749.70 | A Circ. is a Medical Procedure | MR4DEC::POLAKOFF | | Wed Mar 13 1991 11:05 | 11 |
|
The medical profession does not consider circumcision to be "surgery."
It is called a "procedure," and hence, in the United States, can be
done outside of the hospital. It can also be performed by someone
outside the medical profession (ie: a moil) and done in a private home.
Medically speaking, a surgical procedure can only be performed in the
hospital or doctors office (for minor surgical procedures), in the
United States anyway.
|
749.71 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Wed Mar 13 1991 11:12 | 33 |
| re .68
Have you really read what I wrote, because it sure doesn't sound like
it ?
My comment to Mike was based on his expression of opinion as fact. He
was trying to indicate that there were known preventive benefits from
circumcision. Any published information I have ever read has indicated
that the studies for the problems related to not circumcizing were
inconclusive. Therefore, to state that there are known preventive
benefits is not fact, but opinion.
While I am anti the procedure, I thought I had made it clear in earlier
notes that if you choose to have it done for religious or ethnic
reasons, then I have no argument - you must live up to your beliefs.
If you must have it done on medical grounds, then so be it (although
not all problems actually require circumcision). Now, for those who
do it for fear of generation / peer pressure (to be like father or
other boys), my only question is, are you happy that that is a valid
reason? (In my family it wouldn't ...) If you are happy that it is
a good enough reason to submit your baby to surgery, then so be it.
Now, that only leaves those who do it as a "preventive measure".
Again, if you choose it for that reason, fine, although I'm not
convinced that the reason is totally valid. At one time, it may
well have been.
So, to me, the bottom line is that if you can decide from these things
that you want to do it, then so be it. I am not making a judgement on
anybody because they choose to have it done, please understand that.
I am sorry if it sounds that way.
Stuart
|
749.72 | | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | let us pray to Him | Wed Mar 13 1991 11:14 | 8 |
| Hi Stuart,
You don't get it either....I guess that means that each one of us
is as pigheaded as the other :'). Here is an olive branch.
Peace,
Mike
|
749.73 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Wed Mar 13 1991 11:29 | 25 |
| Also re .68
>It is
>interesting (to me, at least) that the 2 noters with the strongest
>opinions against circumcision have daughters only (to the best of my
>knowledge).
It is interesting isn't it ... that thought had occured to me too, but
my decision that if we ever had a son that he wouldn't be circumcised
was made LONG before we had our first daughter! (And now, the discussion
is academic because we have no intention of trying for another ... !)
>Anyways, it is clear that neither camp is going to sway their opponent
>by further bantering. So perhaps it might be of most benefit to the
>basenoter, to call a ceasefire and allow people to enter the opinions,
>experiences, and "facts" and let her decide!
This isn't really a battle in the sense that you are implying, I am
just trying to ensure that if someone looks at this issue they see
the fact/opinion distinction. Obviously for someone who has decided
to do it, then, lacking hard facts, nothing will change their mind.
As I've said before, I wish there were some hard facts out there on
this subject ... there are just lots of inconclusive studies, opinions
and emotion.
|
749.74 | Tongue in cheek (kinda) | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | let us pray to Him | Wed Mar 13 1991 11:35 | 18 |
| Hi again Stuart,
You were writing .71 as I was writing .72. I thank you for backing
up what I presented as fact in your .71 (sorry but I'm feeling
confrontational today :'))
In .71 you said "If you must have it done on medical grounds, then so
be it (although not all problems actually require circumcision)."
In .55 I said "The fact is that there are good reasons for doing this
as a preventitive measure.
I submit to you and the jury that the risk of repetitive infection is,
in fact a "good reason for having it done as a prevetitive measure."
Peace,
Mike aka Perry Mason :')
|
749.75 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Wed Mar 13 1991 11:54 | 20 |
| OK Mike, I'll bite this last time ...
>In .71 you said "If you must have it done on medical grounds, then so
> be it (although not all problems actually require circumcision)."
> In .55 I said "The fact is that there are good reasons for doing this
> as a preventitive measure.
> I submit to you and the jury that the risk of repetitive infection is,
> in fact a "good reason for having it done as a prevetitive measure."
Now, I am not circumcised, nor are my brothers (I have 2), nor is my
father. None of us, as yet, have had a single infection requiring
medical attention, let alone a repetetive infection. That's nearly 160
man-years without problems.
So, as I have said so many times, the evidence of health problems with
uncircumcised males is inconclusive.
Stuart
|
749.76 | I'm convinced! | SITBUL::FYFE | | Wed Mar 13 1991 12:36 | 14 |
|
Wow! A sampling of 4 men out of a planet of billions! That stat aught
to hold up in court!
What do you have to say to those in this note who has listed their
family members as having infections and cancers?
Forgive me, but I must now perform surgery on my finger to remove
a splinter :-)
Just another brick in the wall ....
Doug
|
749.77 | | NAVIER::SAISI | | Wed Mar 13 1991 12:41 | 9 |
| It is not unlike some doctors may recommend to certain women that
they get a masectomy as a preventative measure against breast cancer.
Now to some that is unneccessary surgery, but if the woman has lost
a mother and sisters to breast cancer she may think it is a good
idea. It is a matter of whether you think the potential for a problem
outweighs having the procedure done. If there is any chance of
problems than without it than the procedure can be called preventative.
It is whether it is necessary/reasonable that is debateable I think.
Linda
|
749.78 | | KOBAL::4GL::SCHOELLER | Schoeller - Failed Xperiment | Wed Mar 13 1991 12:51 | 15 |
| OK, call me a sucker. I'll join this (rather pointless) exchange 8^{).
I remember reading that there is a slightly higher incidence of urinary
tract infections among uncircumcised males than circumcised. Also a
slightly higher risk of certain cervical problems among the wives of
same. However, the actual risk was not mentioned. I have the impression
that it was 1:1000 vs. 1:1002 or some other such VERY small difference.
That being the case, there is not a very strong argument in favor of
the procedure for preventative reasons.
However, for those of us who plan on having our sons (should any come along)
circumcised for religious reasons (that includes me), it is nice to know
that there is some (albeit minor) medical benefit.
Dick
|
749.79 | Not a personal attack | JAWS::WOOLNER | Photographer is fuzzy, underdeveloped and dense | Wed Mar 13 1991 13:00 | 20 |
| re .52 & .64, especially -
My intent was not to insult any religion or individual, but to state
how I feel about the practice of circumcision (opinions were requested
in the basenote).
For me, tradition (or, "because we've always done it that way") does
not validate a practice, "procedure", or ritual; I don't feel that
repetition lends credence or logic.
Valuing differences is, to me, a concept of laissez-faire, not a
blanket endorsement/espousal/participation in everyone else's belief
systems and rituals. I reserve the right to disagree with, or even
find ludicrous, the practices of individuals, groups, societies, or
religions. But I won't interfere with, or try to change, those
practices unless they threaten me or my family in some way. So. This
relates to circumcision as follows: if I ever give birth to a son,
don't anybody come NEAR him with a knife!
L.W.
|
749.80 | | KAOFS::S_BROOK | Ask Not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for ME! | Wed Mar 13 1991 13:03 | 27 |
| re .76
Oh come on Doug! Sure, on a statistical basis, it's pretty crummy,
but to be honest, I can't say I've heard of anyone personally who has
had problems either. Again that's not saying a great deal either ...
after all who goes around shouting that they have a UTI ...
What this does tend to indicate is what most info I've read on the
subject states .."inconclusive".
Going back to the (only slightly) similar comparison with
tonsillectomy, I have had lots of tonsil infections, and I probably
should have those out, I admit it, but that doesn't mean that just
because they are prone to infection that they should be taken out.
I know, it's a more drastic procedure and so shouldn't be compared,
people are yelling. Let's go a little more simple ... let's shave off
everybody's hair and all go around bald. Everybody is less likely
to suffer from dandruff, sebbhoraeic (sp?) dermatitis, and head lice.
We'd save lot's of health care money, we'd save lots on shampoos, we'd
save lots on electricity for hair driers. Let's pull fingernails and
toenails off ... no more in-grown toenails or hangnails.
Why are we saying here, for the sake of a probable lack of a little
hygiene, that we know better than nature and do a circ ??? How many
other things in nature should we "fix"?
Stuart
|
749.81 | Helping it to heal | ICS::RYAN | | Wed Mar 13 1991 13:17 | 12 |
| Just a word from personal experience. When they instruct you on how to
care for the circumcision - ask some questions. I assumed that when they
told me to put petroleum jelly on the end of his penis to help heal it
- thats all that was needed, and that is just what I did. What they failed
to tell me was that you need to draw back the extra skin and then apply
it. I left the extra skin alone and my son developed adhesions from the
cut to the normal skin. Pulling the skin back after it had partially
attached itself was a no-fun task. At one point I made an incredibly
stupid decision on how to assist the skin in separating and almost
resigned as a father on the spot (of course, this was the day after I
banged his head on the crib).
JR
|
749.82 | Where are those damn blinders anyway ... | SITBUL::FYFE | | Wed Mar 13 1991 13:19 | 7 |
|
Sorry Shawn,
No personal attact on you. I entered the note (.76) as an expression of
the direction this note is taking. I think Dick said it best in .78
|
749.83 | | POWDML::SATOW | | Wed Mar 13 1991 13:28 | 12 |
| re: .0
> Any information would be helpful!
Are you sure? :^)
re: .81
Thanks for entering an informative note.
Clay
|
749.84 | I have a son | CSC32::DUBOIS | The early bird gets worms | Wed Mar 13 1991 15:23 | 9 |
| < interesting (to me, at least) that the 2 noters with the strongest
< opinions against circumcision have daughters only (to the best of my
< knowledge).
Because of my writing style, it may not be obvious, but I, too, have *very*
strong opinions against circumcision, and I currently have 1 son, and will
probably have another.
Carol dB
|
749.85 | Just STOP! | ATLEAD::PSS_MGR | Does Fred Flintstone do his own stunts? | Wed Mar 13 1991 15:42 | 13 |
|
I really think this topic has gotten out of hand....why doesn't
everyone wait a day or two before replying...or just:
AGREE to DISAGREE
Everyone has a personal preference (or religious reason) on this
issue and NO ONE PERSON is going to change the other person's mind.
This yo-yo back&forth replying is getting real TIRESOME! Just let
it go!....8*)
|
749.86 | I think I've told this one before! | NEWPRT::WAHL_RO | | Thu Mar 14 1991 10:22 | 12 |
|
Speaking of disagreements....................................
When I was pregnant last year my Mother-in-law insisted that all boys
should be circumcised because it was unsanitary not to. I laughed so
hard I almost fell off my chair. I guess her memory has eluded her.
Neither of her sons are circumcised, and both son's refused to have
their son's circumcised.....
Rochelle
P.S. I still haven't reminded her of the facts!
|
749.87 | Origins | CSC32::DUBOIS | The early bird gets worms | Thu Mar 14 1991 16:16 | 6 |
| Circumcision in the U.S. became popular for the same reason as Graham Crackers
and Corn Flakes were invented:
to prevent masturbation!!!! (no kidding!)
Carol
|
749.88 | | RTL::ROLLMAN | | Thu Mar 14 1991 16:20 | 4 |
|
ok. I'll bite. How do Corn Flakes and Graham Crackers prevent masturbation?
|
749.90 | | WMOIS::B_REINKE | bread and roses | Thu Mar 14 1991 16:24 | 8 |
| They don't really, but both Kellog and Graham were health nuts
and were very concerned with the problem of 'self abuse' in
young men.
They had a theory that proper diet would prevent it - and
thus the invention of graham flour and crackers and corn flakes.
Bonnie
|
749.91 | Kellogg rathole cont'd | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Fri Mar 15 1991 12:24 | 8 |
| Speaking of Kellogg (correct spelling, remember the jingle?), my father picked
up a gynecological journal from the late 1800's at a garage sale. There are
several ads for sanatariums, including one for Kellogg's. I don't know how
targeted their advertising was (if it was, they obviously wouldn't have
mentioned "self-abuse" in a GYN journal), but at least one sanatarium
advertised that they treated opium addiction. This was when narcotics
were available over the counter, and many patent medicines contained large
amounts of alcohol and opium.
|
749.92 | phimosis | WONDER::BAKER | | Mon Mar 18 1991 12:41 | 16 |
|
My son Stephen is almost 3 and has what is called phimosis. He is
uncircumcised and his opening in his foreskin is too small, so when
he has an erection his penis hurts. Ideally he will out grow this
as he gets older, but I'm not so sure. (The opening is very small).
I'm dreading the possibility of a circumcision at age 3 or 4. Any
similar experiences? I had such a hard time deciding whether to
circumcise him or not and the day after he was born my OBG. laid a
real guilt trip on me about wanting to circumcise him so I didn't.
Not a nice thing to do to a mother recovering from childbirth.
Well, I'm sure he'll be fine. We are so blessed in everything else
I really can't complain.
Karin
|
749.93 | Phimosis here too. | KRAPPA::MACK | If I only had a brain...... | Tue Mar 19 1991 18:44 | 22 |
|
I replied earlier in this topic. My son also had Phimosis. He
could not be circumcised at birth (although I wasn't going to anyway) due
to some other problems he had. So when we noticed the "ballooning" during
urination, I mentioned to our pediatrician. She said he'd outgrow it also.
She suggested I "pull it back" often to get it to open up. After he was
about 6 months old, I had had about enough from that ped. and found a new
one. The new one took one look and sent us to a specialist. The
specialist took one look and scheduled the surgery. He even took a picture
of the condition because he said it was a classic case. The circ. was not
a major removal--just a small cut to open up the foreskin.
Bottom line.....Sometimes a second opinion (or third) is worth it. I would
think your son would have "outgrown" it by now if he was going to. The
first Pedi. kept telling me if it hadn't changed by a year old it
wouldn't.
Anyway, that's my experience,
Nancy
|
749.94 | Just do it before 48hours old | NRADM::TRIPPL | | Fri Mar 22 1991 12:16 | 31 |
| Holy Smokes...(no pun intended) This is QUITE a number of replies to
one subject!!
From my personal knowledge, I remember being told in school that infant
nerve endings DO NOT develop until after they are older than 48 hours,
if this is the case, in theory the Circ Should NOT hurt! I'd venture a
guess that what the infant is crying about is probably that he is COLD!
When AJ was first at home he was extremely lethargic, what we didn't
know is that he had an infection brewing, and his visiting nurse would
come to the house and routinely undress him to wake him up, and wake
him up she did....ususally complete with being pee'd on by my now naked
son! Plus she always manage to get him to exercise his lungs-Bigtime!!
In our circumstances I was asked somewhere during my prenatat visits if
I would Circ the child, if it were a boy. I answered I would without
ANY hesitation. As it turned out, AJ had both bowel and bladder
problems as birth defects, so circ wasn't performed until he was
several months old, and then in two or three different stages. (see the
note on Hypospadeus). His was done by the Urologist, and at this point
you can't tell that his circ was done in several stages, or anything
other than the customary way.
I do have a friend who's son had to have one around age 7 or 8, it was
Day Surgery, I will never forget the look of fear and pain I saw in
that child's face when his mother and I walked into recovery following
the surgery, or the several days of recouperation following. My
opinion is to do it, and do it before they are 48 hours old.
Lyn
(who appreciated all the wide and varying opinions)
|
749.95 | further research says pain is real | WINDY::SHARON | broken wrist = no caps | Fri Mar 22 1991 14:41 | 10 |
| >From my personal knowledge, I remember being told in school that infant
>nerve endings DO NOT develop until after they are older than 48 hours,
today this is thought to be false. under this belief, open heart surgery
and other procedures were done with no anesthesia. there is an eye-opening
article on this topic in a 1990 issue of "Mothering".
the idea makes me ill.
=ss
|
749.96 | Premies show pain | SLSTRN::RADWIN | | Fri Mar 22 1991 16:45 | 19 |
| re. pain
I don't particularly like to remember it but my daughter showed
sensitivity to pain from day 1. She was a premature baby and spent
over a month in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.
From the start, she was poked and probed -- IVs for medications and
nutrition, hypodermics for blood tests, etc. These invasive
procedures clearly hurt her, for she would cry out when they were done.
Fortunately, her distress didn't seem to last long.
Emily's dad
|
749.97 | My experience | EXPRES::GILMAN | | Mon Apr 08 1991 15:07 | 36 |
| I hear alot of sympathy for those who were circumcised at an age old
enough to remember it. I was circ. at the age of 12 and I do remember
it! It was not a big deal physically. I was sore for a couple of weeks
afterwards but it was not a big deal. I have suffered more pain during
dental procedures, (how about some sympathy for that!) At the time I
was circ. (mid 1950's) most boys were circ. so I was one of the
different ones. There were some comments at camp and group shower
situations..... nothing heavy duty but enough to make me feel
different, and, that was important to a 12 year old. So, having it
done was positive for me because it helped make me 'one of the guys'.
Now the frequency seems to be about 50/50 so no one group will stand
out for comments.
We decided to have our son circ. at birth in 87 because, yes, then he would be
'like Daddy' and not subject to the comments I was. In 87 I was not
aware that thinking in the U.S. on this issue had changed so much
against it. I still would have had it done even had I known about the
swing away from it. According to an article in the New England Journal
of Medicine, (May 1990) there is an increased risk of penile and
cervical cancer (with uncirc. mens' woman partners) for uncirc men.. Take it for what
its worth, I read it in a reputable Journal.
For every pro there is a con... this does not seem to be an issue
which can be undisputably argued EITHER way.
For the people who cry 'mutilation' I think its little different than
piercing your ears.
"Hurting baby" it seems a bigger deal to the parents than the baby.
Our son was unaffected by the post circ. effects.
I agree with the others who have said do what is right for your family
and you... you won't do wrong no matter which you decide.
Jeff
|
749.98 | poor Stephen... | WONDER::BAKER | | Wed Jul 17 1991 13:56 | 17 |
| I am updating my reply from a few notes back. My son Stephen had
phimosis which is when the foreskin doesn't detach. We went to a
urologist and he was circumcised last Monday July 8th. It was
a day surgery at Children's Hospital and he did great. He is 3 years
old and has been so brave.
My problem is it has been over a week and the tip is still raw and
sore. How long does it take to heal? He was potty trained last
December and now is afraid to go to the bathroom because it might hurt.
He's had a number of accidents so I got some of the disposable pull-ups
and said they were special underwear so he doesn't seem to mind. He
WILL NOT wear a diaper. The worst problem is if he doesn't have enough
ointment on it will stick to his underwear and then it hurts to take it
off. I feel terrible for him. Any suggestions or words of
encouragement?
Karin
|
749.99 | | TOOLS::ALLOFA::SUTTON | Pushin' a rock... | Thu Jul 18 1991 10:42 | 11 |
|
Timothy (also three years old) recently went through this. As with
your Stephen, Tim had day surgery (we were in the hospital by 7, out by
9:30 or so!).. he _also_ had the rawness for a while; I'd make a guess
that it was 2-3 weeks worth. Apparently, releasing the adhessions
between the foreskin and the tip of the penis is what creates all the
rawness (it _looked_ SORE!); we tried to keep the ointment slathered on
pretty thickly along with gauze when possible.
-- John
|
749.100 | Xerofoam and antibiotic ointment | JAWS::TRIPP | | Wed Aug 07 1991 12:44 | 18 |
| I know this is late, and I do hope all the *boys* are recovered by now,
but since AJ's circ had to be done in about 3 stages we had lots of
experience and can offer "tips of the trade"...
We kept Xerofoam Gauze, which is gauze manufactured with petrolium
jelly and kept the tip of his little penis wrapped in it. Now of
course he wasnt' trained at that point, but I still wrapped it so the
place where the urined came out (sorry if this is gross) was exposed
enough. We also added a layer of Triple Anitbiotic, which is
Bacitracin, Polymixin and somthing else, before putting the gauze on.
Bacitracin by itself would also work just as well I suppose.
The Xerfoam guaze is available at most bigger drugstores, or surgical
supply house, no prescription needed, in our case the hospital gave us
enough to get through it.
Good luck!
Lyn
|
749.101 | Anonymous - circumcision at age 7 | QUARK::MODERATOR | | Tue Oct 29 1991 13:33 | 41 |
| The following reply has been contributed by a member of our community
who wishes to remain anonymous. If you wish to contact the author by
mail, please send your message to QUARK::MODERATOR, specifying the
conference name and note number. Your message will be forwarded with
your name attached unless you request otherwise.
Steve
My son was not circumcised at birth. The drs. told me (and I'm not questioning
this) that unless it was religiously desired or physically necessary, it's not
as "standard" a deal as it used to be, so it was my choice and I chose not to
subject him to that.
Now he's almost 7. We've been waiting to see if things would get better on
their own but at his latest regular checkup, the dr. says the time for waiting
is over. The foreskin on his penis is extremely tight (as the dr. put it, it
doesn't GET much tighter than his !) and we're going to see a pediatric
urologist the week after next to have something done.
I don't know WHAT will be done yet, and won't till we talk with the specialist.
I'm wondering
1 - does anyone have any ideas of the possibilities ?
2 - has anyone had to go thru this with their child ?
3 - what do people think of Dr. Diamond of UMass ?
[Note from moderator - please respond by mail to this question.]
4 - how can I get over feeling guilty that I "caused" this by
not having things done differently when he was born ??
Any words of wisdom or any actual knowledge someone can impart would be most
appreciated. I'll post more info if people are interested after the visit
with the specialist.
thanx
a worried mom
|
749.102 | to Mom | KAOFS::M_FETT | alias Mrs.Barney | Tue Oct 29 1991 15:04 | 25 |
|
I think you have to understand that once in a while, the need for
late circumcision becomes apparent much much later, as in your case.
Are you a clairvoyant that you could have foreseen it? I think not.
So, try terribly hard not to blame yourself for the decision not
to do it at birth.
As previous notes have stated, many health professionals hesitate
to perform this procedure and usually advise against it, unless there
is a tradition to follow, or the parents are very convinced it is
necessary.
Even with the history of this type of problem in our family (my husband
and cousin BOTH had to have it done at 25!) my husband decided against
it for any male children we might have. The chances are still too
small.
Like any surgical procedure for small children, I am sure you are
greatly concerned; but let your doctor calm your fears -- it is
not a terribly dangerous or horrible procedure. From what my husband says,
it is much more preferrable to have this procedure over with now,
than have it done to a male who is already sexually active.
Monica
|
749.103 | some thoughts.... | MCIS5::TRIPP | | Tue Oct 29 1991 15:27 | 22 |
| First, and foremost, spare youself the guilt. As someone said
previously you had no way to know this was going to happen.
Now as for dealing with this at age 7, somewhere in all these replies I
have entered this, but for an encore here goes: I have a close friend
whose son was circumcised at 7, done in one of the Boston Hospital. He
was miserable for the day of and a few days later, I won't sugar coat
that one, but he did well, went on to graduate from West Point, and has
since married and fathered two children. Anatomically, you can't tell
whether his circ was done at birth or at even 18! it looks the same.
As for the Dr, I have nothing but positive experiences with both he and
the hospital, please contact me off line, browse through my replies in
this note, and the ones on Hypospadius and UTI's. My son had to have his
circ done in 3 different stages. There are at least two other noters who
have dealt with this wonderful man.
I guess this is a case of whatever fears, guilt or anxiety you have try
above all not to let your son know of them, it will only increase his
fears and anxiety.
Lyn
|
749.104 | I felt terrible too! | WONDER::BAKER | | Wed Oct 30 1991 13:57 | 18 |
| RE: .101
My son Stephen age 3, was circumcised in July.(see replies .93, .98).
I too felt guilty. Why hadn't I done it at birth...I should have known
there would be a problem...etc. It is such an awful feeling.
Well, Stephen was very brave, and it took around 2-3 weeks to heal.
At the time it felt like an eternity but now looking back on the
experience it wasn't so long.
Just remember to keep the tip moist all the time so it doesn't stick
to his underpants. Keep you chin up, the time will pass quickly!
Please send me mail if you have any questions or if you just want to
talk.
Karin
|
749.105 | my son's circ | HOBBLE::MCFARLAND | | Wed Nov 06 1991 10:19 | 10 |
| Thought I would add a brief note on the subject...
My son was born 6 days ago, and was circumcized the day after. I
talked briefly with the OB that performed the circ... he mentioned that
he hated doing circumcisions (an earlier note mentioned a similar MD's
opinion), but the reason he didn't like to do them was because they
had to undress the baby and then strap them down to a board, which was
no fun for either doctor or patient. He also mentioned that his son
was circumcized, so I figured if it was good enough for the doc...
Stan
|
749.106 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Mon Dec 09 1991 13:00 | 3 |
| For a different (*very* different) perspective on circumcision, see
Dave Barry's column on the subject. It's note 713 in HYDRA::DAVE_BARRY
(KP7 or SELECT to add to your notebook).
|
749.107 | Snug foreskin can cause probs... | SWAM1::MERCADO_EL | | Fri Mar 20 1992 23:24 | 22 |
| I noticed this subject and boy did it bring back memories!
Because my husband is not circumcised (he's from Mexico) and because
I questioned the process in general, I did alot of research with
several doctors (including a pediatric urologist) and friends/family
regarding this. This was 5 years ago, but at that time the attitudes
were definately changing about circumcision.
After all the inquiries and reading I decided against it.
Unfortunately 14 months later I was forced to have my son circumcised
due to the fact that he kept having infections under the foreskin.
My pediatric urologist said that my son was a one-in-a-million child
who just happened to be born with a very "snug" foreskin, and for
that reason was especially prone to infection. Isn't life funny?!
I mean we're talking about a kid who was bathed nightly, diapered
at the drop of a hat, and his foreskin was too tight!!
Daniel was circumcised on April Fool's Day, 1988......!!!! :)
(BTW-he was under anesthesia when it was done.)
-Elizabeth
|