Thread: To circumsize??? Or Not?

i also want to say, no i don't have kids, but i have taken care of lots of them. i have seen both sides or circumcision, and it isn't that much harder to care for a baby who isn't circumcised.

and thanks to halvarado and mistressb and any others i might have missed (sorry) for posting the links and articles.

Well when i had my first son i was goin to be a single mother an i still lived at home with my parents and everyone in my family has been cut but it was very hard for me to have to make that decision on my own.........cuz i thought it should be left alone as that is how he was born........

but on the other hand i had a friend that had a lil boy and didnt have him cut an this lil boy went thru so much pain becuz of it he always had infection after infection and that is the only reason i had it done cuz i didnt want to have to see my son go thru that ..........

then when i had my 2nd son i didnt want to have it done but at this time i was married and my dh at the time thought it would be best for him cuz he was done as well....
and i called him and he said that they used a topical to numb it an he didnt scream at all.........

It is really all up to the parents....but imo i wouldnt have it done cuz that is the way god made it. maybe it would look better or maybe it would be easier to clean if u did have it done and u wouldnt have to worry about infections like if it werent done. i think u really need to think about what would be best for u and ur child.......

Also i have to agree with the other ladies you shouldnt have it done cuz it looks better or whatever that is not the question here i think the point to the question is really does it hurt or not? My dh is standing here now telling me that he dont remember when he had his done and he watched both of his boys being done an they never let out a peep.

i just don't understand how all these kids keep getting infections. i know so many guys who arn't and had no problems including my son. are they not being cleaned properly or something?

I think that is where most of the infections must be coming from cuz my friend that didnt have her son done when he was about 2 he wouldnt let her clean it after he went pee so then thats when it all started so i think some mothers that go thru that dont realize u have to pull the skin back and make sure that it is clean.

I still say no way is "better." This is a personal choice. To attack others because they did or didn't is intolerant. My son is not a freak because he is uncut. If he wants to get it done later, good for him. I really have no "say" in this matter. I spoke with various pedatriations and they never advised for it.

I would like to see stats from other countries where it is not the norm...

Anyhow, some people do it for religious reasons, and you have to respect that. Also, they do it because dad or the brothers or cousins are.

To each his own. More MEN need to reply here!!!

I had my son circumsized. It was a personal choice for me. I have seen both sides of it as well and well most of the guys I know who arent cut have MAJOR problems with cleanliness and infections, so I decided that MY boy was NOT gonna have that problem.

Originally Posted by mistressB

i just don't understand how all these kids keep getting infections. i know so many guys who arn't and had no problems including my son. are they not being cleaned properly or something?

Could be the same reason some get cancer or staff infections or heart attacks and others do not?! I know that at the age of 2 its hard enough to clean "down there" so I imagine its hard for a momma to hold down a struggling child to clean it as well as I am sure its hard on mommas to clean little girls, no kids really like to lay still? I am just guessing here. Then once boys get to be a certain age its like pulling teeth to get them to shower, let alone clean it properly? Also possibly boys don't wash their hands and by touching it to go to the restroom they spread germs. Then when they become men and don't wash their hands and are on the job site and hands are dirty, once again they hold it with dirty hands, thats spreading germs again. Then when they are old men, as a previous poster posted, its harder fr them to see, and dexterity becomes an issue. Like I stated this is only a guess.

Originally Posted by DivineMsDi

I still say no way is "better." This is a personal choice. To attack others because they did or didn't is intolerant. My son is not a freak because he is uncut. If he wants to get it done later, good for him. I really have no "say" in this matter. I spoke with various pedatriations and they never advised for it.


Anyhow, some people do it for religious reasons, and you have to respect that. Also, they do it because dad or the brothers or cousins are.

To each his own. More MEN need to reply here!!!

ITA, nicely put.

Originally Posted by Patchouli

I also heard that too. They don't think the girls should have pleasure when having sex. Medicaid paid for it when Brian was born. Medicaid doesn't pay for anything that they don't feel is necessary so that surprises me that other insurance companies wouldn't pay for it. I have never heard of that.

I did a search to see if medicaid is still paying for it. Reminds me of how they used to take a kids tonsils out just 'cause they got a sore throat.

A growing number of states are no longer supporting it.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2002/6/prweb40166.htm

Arizona Joins Growing Movement Against Medicaid Circumcisions

PHOENIX – Arizona became the seventh state to eliminate Medicaid funding for infant circumcision this week, as Governor Jane Hull allowed the state’s budget to become law without her signature. Currently, Medicaid programs in California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, North Dakota, Mississippi, and many private HMOs serving Medicaid recipients, as well as some private insurance companies do not cover circumcision. In the past year, Arizona Medicaid paid for 12,600 boys to be circumcised at an average cost of $132 per boy and a total cost of $1.66 million.


Circumcision has grown increasingly controversial in recent years as mounting evidence indicates that any potential or slight benefits are outweighed by the surgical risks, pain, complications, and lifetime consequences of circumcision. Despite the fact that circumcision is not recommended by any national or international medical organization in the world, Medicaid pays for 25% of all US newborn circumcisions.


A 2001 report issued by the International Coalition for Genital Integrity (ICGI) documents Medicaid wastes tens of millions of dollars per year on circumcision (www.icgi.org). ICGI Co-Director Dr. Rio Cruz states, “It is simply deplorable that our government uses healthcare tax dollars to subsidize a cultural procedure that causes pain, long-term harm, and violates a child’s right to bodily integrity.”

Lawn Griffiths of Tempe praised the Arizona decision, saying, “I’m relieved my state no longer pays for such intrusive, maiming surgery. I left my son intact 27 years ago, and I shouldn’t have to pay to harm other little boys.”
Taxpayer complaints about government funding of infant circumcisions have stimulated legislative activity nationwide. Bills have recently been introduced in Missouri, Michigan, and New Mexico to cease Medicaid funding of these procedures.

North Carolina also has infant circumcision on its list of potential budget cuts. Keith Webb and his wife, Alice, were receiving Medicaid six years ago when their first son was born. “We weren’t provided any information, we were just asked to sign a form, and he was circumcised. We were appalled to later learn no anesthesia had been used. Our son had numerous complications that we had to deal with for two years. We had been grossly misled. If Medicaid hadn’t covered circumcision, we would never have done this to our son.” Taxpayers and those morally opposed to circumcision have joined together in North Carolina to protest this budget expense. A full-page open letter to the Governor and state legislature, published in the May 8th issue of widely distributed Raleigh news magazine and signed by 112 NC citizens, urged that public funds not be used for non-therapeutic circumcisions (www.cirp.org/news/ncopenletter05-08-02/).

Most states are experiencing budget deficits and increasing Medicaid costs. Grassroots efforts are escalating to eliminate tax-dollar funding of circumcision.

END

My son is circumsized and i'm glad that we had it done