My husband and I have been questioning whether we should circumcise the baby or not. I never thought it would be so difficult to decide. I talk to my clients all the time about whether or not they are going to and if they should or if they shouldn't. We tell them that insurance does not pay for it because doctors are finding research stating it isn't medically necessary. I never really thought about what we would want for the baby, but now, now that it's OUR baby, it's so tough!
My first instinct was that we would circumcise, naturally. I've never seen an uncircumcised penis (only in books) and I have to say that an uncircumcised penis seems to be unattractive. We are finding in the research out there that this is everyone's impression. Most families have their baby boy's penis circumcised simply because it looks better. Some do it because they believe it must be more hygienic. Studies out there show that either way, it's the same. Yeah, when your little boy is 3 years old, you'll have to show him to pull back the skin when bathing or wiping, but it would be the same thing as showing your 3 year old little girl to wipe from front to back... That's all it takes.
Studies reveal that children on the West Coast are not circumcised as much as boys in the Midwest. It's 50/50 in California. It's about 80/20 in the upper Midwest. People are saying that now that more and more insurance companies are not paying for it, there will be more uncircumcised babies. There will be a decrease in circumcision and boys will not have to worry about not looking like each other! Yay...!
So, we're still on the fence. Should we have our baby boy go through the unnecessary, painful, but brief experience or should we just say no and move on? It's still very hard to answer. The more I think about it, the more I think we should just do it, but then I think is it really that important? Any comments, suggestions, experiences would be greatly appreciated here.
Don't do it. My parents had my circumcised at birth and it's caused severe physical and mental problems. I'm not sure if I'll be able to fully forgive their ignorance on the subject.
ReplyDeleteDon't! I blog about it at chaoticmama.wordpress.com as well, but here's the nutshell. I was for circumcision because of the looks factor. My husband was against it, so we went with his opinion. NOW, I've been doing more research, and find that it is not something that should be done. Most of the studies are biased. The hygiene arguement is grasping at straws. Also, it may not fully retract until they are 9 or 10, so cleaning it is a non issue (and our intact baby's is super easy to clean).
ReplyDeleteDon't remove what doesn't need to be removed. Condoms prevent HIV more than circumcision. Plus, you don't have to deal with ANY of the complications that can occur with circumcision (excessive bleeding, Exsanguination, infection, malformation, excessive pain). You don't have to deal with cleaning the wound. You don't have to drug your baby in it's first few weeks to deal with the pain of healing. Plus, it's pretty adorable!
I'm ashamed that I ever considered circumcision based on cosmetics!
This is a tough question, but I'm also in the no crowd...
ReplyDelete- It only looks 'funny' because here in the Midwest we're not used to seeing them. I've taken care of lots of boys who were not circumcised, and once you get used to them they look just fine. (besides, my husband tells me that guys don't compare in the locker room to nearly the extent that women seem to think)..
- The pain / healing process can last for days or even weeks - that's a lot of stress for you, and a lot of stress for your baby.
- It just seems silly to perform cosmetic surgery on a baby ...
- Like you said in your post, they're not as hard to care for as many think, and the tide is shifting - your son will by no means be the only kid he knows who isn't circumcised.
That's all. I hope you're doing well!
Being an uncircumcised male, I have to advocate for not circumcising. That skin covers an extremely sensitive bit of the male anatomy, and the thought of having it not there makes me squirm. The head is naturally kept moist, and without the foreskin it's my understanding that it dries out and changes in texture and sensitivity. Roughly equivalent to removing the clitoral hood. I find it interesting that people who would normally be offended by the idea of female circumcision don't see anything wrong with male circumcision. There are differences in magnitude of affect, I'm sure, but there are also a lot of similarities.
ReplyDelete