« Academic Redshirting: should you hold your kid back? | Main
Circumcision: the kindest cut, or the cruelest?
Published 02.15.2008 | Permanent Link | Comments (39)
It's the day after Valentine's Day, and I'm thinking about circumcision. I assure you this is a coincidence.
So! Those of us who have birthed baby boys are faced with the inevitable question: to snip or leave intact? In most of the world, the majority of boys are left as nature intended, but here in the States, circumcision is a relatively routine procedure. As for our son, I was all for leaving well enough alone. My husband, however, is Jewish and felt strongly about the issue, so I deferred to his wishes. As I do in all things. Hang on, I have to plump his throw pillows.
And I'm back! So yes, our son was circumcised. I'm making light of the issue, as is my way; in truth it was a difficult decision, there were many heartfelt discussions, and in the end we made our choice. We didn't do a bris because I am a coward, and also because I wanted the procedure to be completed in a hospital and not in my grubby, germ-filled living room. My husband could have the circumcision, if that's what his bloodline demanded, but we would do it in a sterile environment, as my anxiety-riddled heart required. So it was done, and all was well.
Now, this all went down over five years ago, before I knew there were people who believed that male circumcision was a horrific, abusive procedure. ( I think the Internet didn't even exist then. We all wrote emails on our Etch-a-Sketches, which we then sent to each other via pneumatic tubes. I'm a little fuzzy on the past.) I mean, I knew there were arguments against it, because I'm not a complete moron, but I had only a vague sense of how heated the debated had become. The arguments against circumcision run the gamut from it being an unnecessary removal of part of a healthy organ, to the idea that it can cause significant disfigurement and impairment of sensation. Mothers Against Circumcision argues that circumcision does far more harm than good, with complications being vastly underreported.
What to believe? Recent studies have shown that AIDS transmission is much less likely among circumcised males. (The risk of infection, however, is actually increased if recently circumcised men don't wait until the wound is healed to resume sexual activity. Ow.) Other studies have shown circumcision is associated with lower rates of other sexually transmitted diseases and infections; the risk of penile cancer is reported as three times higher for uncircumcised men. Circumcision opponents, however, believe these studies are nothing more than scare tactics. In fact, the organization Doctors Opposing Circumcision implies that circumcision makes transmission of AIDS more likely.
The American Academy of Pediatrics is of little help in the matter, having taken a more-or-less neutral stance on the matter. Their conclusion is that although there may be benefits to circumcision, it should be a personal decision and not a routine procedure. By no means do they characterize circumcision as abusive or damaging.
So, dear readers, what's your take on the issue? Did you have to make this decision, and if so, which way did you go?
Co-Parenting: Dividing the Work at Home
About Alice
Wonderland is a lighthearted romp through the week's current events, especially news and issues relevant to parents. Wonderland is published on Fridays. Got a news item you want to share? A bone to pick with the site's author? Email bradley.wonderland@gmail.com
Disclaimer
This column is only for entertainment purposes. Any recommendations or information provided herein should not be used as a substitute for advice by a trained professional. For a full statement of our site policies, please click here.
Comments (39):
Anne Prince said:
When my husband and I were interviewing the doctor who ultimately became our pediatrician (19 yrs ago) he said neither yay nor nay, that it was a personal choice and that was that. Since hubby wasn't - we decided not to since after all he would teach him how to stand and pee (and miss the bowl!).
We just had to keep retracting his foreskin when we changed his diaper a little at a time and all would be well.
Well, at age 11 or 12 he had to be circumsized as the foreskin did not retract all the way. And of course I couldn't check it since he was "grown up" and when his father asked him if everything was okay "there" the kid always said yes.
So the summer before he started middle school he wound up getting snipped - he was uncomfortable for a few days but everything turned out fine. And since he is away at college I am sure he is putting it to good use - LOL!
Posted on February 15, 2008 12:14
Christine said:
I don't have children (yet) but my fiance and I have discussed this in passing, and we believe we aren't going to go with the big snip. If he were Jewish or Muslem or there was some big reason to do it, I would cave. As I see it, it seems pretty pointless and more about a vague idea of improved cleanliness and a bit about how it looks.
I think I made up my mind years ago though in a college lecture course where the guest lecturer was an OB/Gyn who said she was vehemently against it because they would send residents who had no sleep to perform the proceedings and that the results weren't always so good. And it seemed to me that it was a lot to risk when I couldn't see any real rewards.
Posted on February 15, 2008 12:42
Becky said:
All three of my boys have had the snip snip. We know a few adults (yes, more then one) that have had issues later in life and had to get it done as an adult. I wouldnt wish that on anyone.
Posted on February 15, 2008 12:44
Elizabeth said:
We were so relieved when the ultrasound tech said we were having a girl. No more circumcision debate!
Posted on February 15, 2008 12:51
becks said:
We circumsized our son. My husband was circumsized, so that was a major factor. I had never actually seen a penis that wasn't circumsized until I did research on the issue. I guess the bottom line for me was hygienically speaking, I think it's the right choice. My mother works in a nursing home and she says the old guys who aren't circumsized don't always recieve the proper care that the foreskin requires. Women I work with all have stories about nephews and cousins being circumsized at age 5, 8, 10 because of repeated infections.
I stand behind my decision. And I'd do it again, if we had another boy.
Posted on February 15, 2008 12:51
Fawn said:
Fortunately, I did not actually have to make this decision, but DH and I talked about it before our little girl was born and had decided we were against it. We're not Jewish, so there just didn't seem to be any reason for it. I understand that there are even Jewish families that are turning against the practice these days.
It just so happens that DH *is* circumsized; he remembers having it done (around grade 1, I think) because it was medically necessary (fuzzy on the details). So sometimes it is warranted, sometimes there are reasons.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:01
Gillian said:
In April or May, we will have our first child, a boy. At first, my husband was very pro and I was very against circumcision. I slowly won him over to my side. I view it as basically a cosmetic surgery, unnecessary. My husband did, too, he just liked the idea of tradition, and I really think he wanted his son to be the same as him.
I read in the NY Times Magazine recently that boys who have been circumcized, especially ones who did not receive anesthesia, are harder to console and cry longer several months later when they receive vaccinations. It was an article about pain, and how early a fetus or newborn can feel and process pain, and how the early pain experiences can color later experience with pain. Anyway, even after reading this I don't think of circumcision as brutal, just unnecessary, so we won't be doing it.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:02
Anonymous said:
We did it. His dad had it when he was a baby, and he's fine. I hear it's cleaner. Why does it have to be such a big deal? I think this is a private choice, not one that needs to be discussed everywhere.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:06
Ariel said:
Well some people think it's okay to cut the labia and clitoris on little girls too- which is repugnant in every way. I view it in the exact same light- i.e. something horrendous.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:10
roughmagic said:
My 5-year-old got snipped nearly first thing in the hospital for pretty much the same reason as your Henry -- his dad's Jewish and I had no compelling reason to object. My husband also made the perfectly reasonable point that he thought it would be important for my son to "look like his daddy". We live in the rural Midwest where the nearest mohel is 200 miles away, so a bris wasn't an option even if we wanted one, and we were meh on that. I'm not squeamish, but my husband is, so he got his dad to witness the snippage, which was done by my son's awesome pediatrician -- she assured us that she took pride in her circs and "liked to leave a good-looking penis." Everyone happy, as far as I can tell. There's no question my son is perfectly happy with his equipment. He'll cheerfully show it to anyone who asks -- or even if they don't.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:23
Mona said:
We did not circ our sons, even though my husband was as an infant. He actually made the call and I was glad that was what he chose. And like Alice, my husband makes all important decisions! No - but let's face it - I don't have a penis and most boys in the US still are circ'ed and I felt that the social pressures were something better weighed by someone who had the same equipment. I have no idea what it's like to be a 13 year old boy and the person who does gets a weightier vote, IMHO. The only qualm I have with the AIDS transmission research is that, as my husband put it, you still have to have sex with someone with HIV for this to be an issue, so maybe the emphasis should be on avoiding that part, however naive and simplistic that may be.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:31
Megan said:
I think we need more information about the studies linking intactness and HIV because anecdotally if you look at the US that has a high rate of circumcision among sexual active males we also have a tremendously high HIV infection rate compared to countries that not circumcise.
And while penile cancer may be higher in intact males its still an incredibly rare cancer. I do not think the benefit of preventing a very rare cancer is worth the risks of circumcision.
Mostly I think about the issue from genital integrity standpoint. Since there aren't any immediate medical benefits to circumcision or any immediate risk to leaving the child intact then the default is to leave the child as is. Otherwise you are putting your child through a cosmetic surgery often without any anesthesia. It seems cruel to me.
And I know to some people they consider circumcision a holy rite but the idea of cutting off part of my child, an intimate part at that, to satisfy God is confusing. The God I understand is loving and giving. He cares for us, especially children, and I can't imagine him requiring us to hurt out children for His sake.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:33
Will said:
I am neither a mother or a father. I am an 18 year old male who has negative views on infant circumcision.
There is no logical medical reason to circumcise.
Penile cancer is very rare
Girls statistically get more then double the number of UTI's of uncircumcised baby boys.
Any sexually transmitted disease can be almost completely blocked with condom use. And honestly, if your son is not practicing safe sex, you have bigger parenting issues you should be focusing on then circumcising.
Really what it comes to is that parents are scared, and they want whats best for their kid. And its easy to fall prey to the fears of a society that does not understand what a circumcised penis is.
But in reality, it works fine, there is much less cleaning you need to do with your baby boy, and much less to worry about (no complications from surgery, no adhesions). You just take your baby home and treat his penis like you were cleaning a finger.
Once people can break free of there fear they can see its fine, and even better to leave a boy intact.
In the end circumcision is just a cosmetic surgery, its body modification. And just as you would not tattoo something on the stomach of your baby, or force your 14 year old daughter to get breast implants, baby boys should have the right to decide how their body is altered.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:33
Mallory said:
We had to make this decision four months ago, when our son was born. I had been on the fence about it, but my husband (who is circumcized) was adamantly against it. I'm really glad now that we didn't have it done, primarily because it isn't medically necessary, and I don't feel like I have the right to make that choice for him. It's not *my* body. If our son chooses to get circumcized when he's older, that's his perogative.
Posted on February 15, 2008 13:56
Annabelle said:
What an interesting and timely post! I'm pregnant with our first and asked my husband about this very issue about a week ago. he said that the issue came up in a group conversation a few months ago (I was not there) and after a bit of discussion one of the other guys said, "likelyhood of getting a blow job is dramatically increased... I'm for it." That seemed to settle the issue in the minds of the men present.
Posted on February 15, 2008 14:04
Slim said:
We didn't, because we are goyim who would prefer our sons use other methods of reducing the risks of sexually transmitted diseases.
Isn't the penile cancer thing a myth? Or is the myth a myth perpetrated by anti-circers? My mind reels. My boys romp on, sans foreskin. All is well.
Posted on February 15, 2008 14:11
Aimee Greeblemonkey said:
I really believe circumcision is a personal choice for each family, but yes - we did *not* do the ole snip snip. We had read the the literature (also 5+ years ago during the stone ages of the internet) and came down more on the side against it, but I also left it up to my husband - who was surprisingly *more* against it than I was. Then our son came 8 weeks early and we got caught up in the NICU for 6 weeks. Did you know circumcision is that LAST thing they do when your baby has been in the NICU for an extended period of time? That was the last straw, we just couldn't face any more poking or prodding and did not even blink when the nurse asked us what we wanted to do.
Posted on February 15, 2008 14:30
Annemie said:
Same situation, different decision. I told my husband when we got pregnant that it was his call, and his immediate response was that if we had a boy, he'd be trimmed. (Jewish upbringing, Jewish mother, 'nuff said). However, as we neared our due date, I started to encourage (read: nag/beg) him to think it through more carefully. When he claimed Judaism as a reason, I asked when he had last gone to synagogue. Why not just have him wear a yarmulke? How is this any different from infant baptism, with the obvious exception of blood? His argument about looking the same spurred me to suggest we get the baby tattooed to match his dad. Of course, it didn't help that I had to sit at work looking over the enormous mound of my belly and watch circumcisions happen every day... hormones + crying babies + scalpels = lots of passive aggressive pressure. In the end, Matt came around to my way of thinking. His mother pitched a FIT - much worse than we thought she might - and that made the early days kind of rough, but since then, neither Matt nor I have looked back once.
Posted on February 15, 2008 14:37
Beth said:
We chose not to circumcise our son, and although it was a pretty easy decision for us and he's doing great, I respect others' decisions to circumcise (except in cases in which circumcision is forced on an older child -- completely unacceptable and traumatizing). As for the study on AIDS transmission being less likely among circumcised males, going by the article cited, the study was conducted in Africa and the other variables are not mentioned, so I wouldn't put a lot of stock in it. It's very easy for people to hear one piece of information and neglect to get all the facts before taking a position.
Posted on February 15, 2008 14:50
Lisa C said:
As a friend of mine put it, "I don't make decisions about parts I don't have." She let her husband make the decision, as did I. It was still dreadful. I gave my husband the duty of changing the gauze and applying the vaseline. I didn't feel too badly about the deciion, though, because my brother-in-law had just been circumised due to a series of infections. Apparently the healing process takes a lot longer when you're in your late 20s.
Posted on February 15, 2008 14:54
Sara said:
We didn't do it. I didn't want to. Husband did. It came down to whether or not we wanted to add the expense to the list of hospital bills already accrued from the pregnancy, since for insurance purposes, the C word is an elective procedure. I did leave the decision up to my husband, and he made the final call in favor of our budget.
I think he's not entirely happy with the decision, though. So we don't talk about it much. It is what it is. And fortunately, he does at least defend our choice to family--not telling them that it was a money thing, but that we found no proven benefit to circumcising, and chose not to. I am grateful for his support in that capacity. Family can be weird about those things, too.
As for me, I'm glad that my son is intact, and if he wants the cut when he's old enough to make that choice, then we'll happily give him the option. Or if some kind of issue arises, we'll deal with it then. I just felt really weird about making that kind of decision for someone who wasn't me. And regarding a part of the anatomy that I don't possess, but from what I hear is a pretty sensitive one. Even on a little baby.
Posted on February 15, 2008 15:05
fredr said:
Although there is much denial, Circumcision causes the masculine prepuce to dysfunction. The function of the male and female prepuce is to enhance sexual desire. Its nerves link to the reproductive parts of the brain. Severing these nerves at birth leads to reproductive brain chemistry malfunction from disuse atrophy. Brain chemistry malfunctions lead to anti depressants. When people go off their medications, leads to campus shootings like VA Tech and NIU. When left undiagnosed, circumcision induced suicidal depression can lead to paranoid delussions leading to 9/11. There you have it in a nut shell.
Posted on February 15, 2008 15:24
Dwayne Waggoner said:
I have heard of this argument in regards to circumcision and hiv transmission prior to your blog. Being both a man who has HIV and an uncircumcised penis, it has perked my interest. Unfortunately, I am not educated well enough in the subject to have a stance, and there are a lot of biased opinions out there on the issues, as you noted.
The reason I'm writing, however, is not because of my opinion on the matter. I'm writing because I find it extremely offensive when people misuse "AIDS" when they mean to write "HIV." It's such a horribly common misconception that HIV and AIDS are interchangeable terms. It's simple, HIV is a virus, AIDS is a condition caused by HIV that isn't always attributed to patients with HIV. If anything is transmitted, it's HIV, not AIDS. If you go get tested, you are tested for HIV, not AIDS. The article you linked used the term both correctly and incorrectly. This is most likely due to copy and pasted facts (which used HIV appropriately) and the author of the article's own banter (which used AIDS inapprorpriately).
I would figure you as an independent blogger would want to be better educated on the subject. Please help in decreasing the amount the media misuses the term AIDS when meaning HIV.
Posted on February 15, 2008 15:26
Noelle Carrino said:
I had my son circumsised the day after he was born four years ago. The only reason I did it was because my husband insisted. We are not remotely Jewish, my husband just wanted it done "so he would look like everyone else". When I got my very upset infant back from the nursery that day and after I looked at that chopped monstrosity that his little penis had become I swore I would never do that to another child of mine. If I ever have another boy, he will stay just as he came into the world. By the way, I volunteer at my son's preschool and I've had to change a few kids diapers, and my son DOES NOT look like everyone else. He is the odd man out now.
Posted on February 15, 2008 15:37
Someone Being Me said:
Its not something I felt particularly strongly about. My husband was the one who actively encouraged the circumcision as he didn't want his son to be made fun of like the guys he knew in high school who weren't. I also looked at it from a religious standpoint. My husband's father wasn't circumcised until he was an adult and he explained to my husband that is not something you want to put off. Best do it when they won't remember it. My husband was in the room when they did my son's and he barely cried. He was asleep when they brought him back to me. My sister is vehemently opposed to circumcision so her sons are both not circumcised. To each his own I guess.
Posted on February 15, 2008 15:38
Liza said:
During my first pregnancy, the impassioned pleas of people on both sides, especially anti, kinda made me nervous.
I ended up declaring that no one was going to know the answer to our decision unless they were on sufficiently intimate terms to find out directly. Change his diaper and the information is yours.
Posted on February 15, 2008 16:05
Stacey Green said:
We had our son circed 7 years ago on the advice of all 5 pediatricians I interviewed, and my brother who is a nurse. He has horror stories of elderly adult males getting nasty penile infections because it is so hard to maintain the hygiene of an invalid. Add to this that the American Academy of Pediatrics states that there are valid medical reasons to consider circing, and that the Centers for Disease Control is currently considering strengthening their recommendation of circing because it reduces the likelihood of HIV and other STD transmissions, and I think circing is definitely the best decision for the parents of male infants.
Posted on February 15, 2008 16:30
caramama said:
Although my husband and I ended up with a girl, we had discussed this issue prior to knowing the sex of our baby. I didn't have feelings one way or the other, but my husband felt strongly against circumcision for our children. He does not agree with it even for religious reasons, as he equates it with female circumcision/genital mutilation/cutting, which is also done for traditional and religious reasons. Also, his research suggested that there was no significant health difference as long as proper hygiene was practiced. There are plenty of men who are not circumcised who have never had a problem, so the preventive aspect does not seem necessary to me.
I hope that all parents look into the issue and facts around it, men and women should be educated about an elective surgery being performed on your infant. I just don't feel that looking like daddy or other kids is a compelling reason to have a surgery performed on children. There are plenty of ways in which one's kids will and will not resemble their parents.
Posted on February 15, 2008 16:37
Kathy said:
I did not circumcise my son. My husband and I did a ton of research and found that there are no medical benefits even though there are a ton of claims to the contrary. The American Academy of Pediatrics is saying there aren’t any medical benefits. We also found that leaving the skin protects the glans (head), which is a very sensitive area. Uncircumcised males apparently have greater sexual pleasure. We decided to leave it as is. It’s probably that way for a reason.
We haven't had any issues with infection. He's 2 1/2.
Posted on February 15, 2008 16:46
anonymous said:
i find it disturbing when someone thinks that FGM(female genital mutilation) and male circumcision are the same thing. FGM removes all the surrounding tissue including the clitoris. male circumcision only removes the foreskin which on women equates ONLY the the clitoral hood.
if intactivists want to have a SERIOUS debate then they need to make sure they are comparing apples to apples.
btw...i have two sons and both were circ'ed shortly after birth.
Posted on February 15, 2008 16:51
Sara said:
so I can't believe I'm going to complicate the issue BUT-- my husband was not circed originally (being Italian). At 9, he had to be. BUT the drs did a hemi-circumcision. That's right. This type allows for increased sensation but solves the whole cleaning thing. We opted for the same for our son. Ta da! There is a third option!
Posted on February 15, 2008 16:55
rathernotsay said:
This is such a stressful decision! I sincerely hope that our second is another girl and we don't have to worry about it. My two cents is that I dated a guy in college who was not circumcised (b/c his dad was a European Catholic) and I found it a little unpleasant. There was always a distinct smell even though he was an obsessively clean person and I had lots of yeast infections which stopped when we stopped dating. Also, it tore at one point and he had to have a really painful surgery. Purely anecdotal, I know, but I will take it into account if we have to make this decision.
Posted on February 15, 2008 17:24
Jocelyn said:
We saw no reason to circumcise our son. He'll be his own person. I don't expect him to instantly have long hair or a beard (as his father does), so why should he have a damaged penis (and the potential for irreparably altered synaptic connections in his brain)? We wished for his entry into our family to be full of love and warmth and shelter, not painful betrayal. Birth is hard enough. His genitals are his own. The integrity of his body is a personal responsibility, not a familial "choice". The atrocities of previous generations need not be inflicted on the current and future ones.
Posted on February 15, 2008 17:26
edj said:
I think it's a personal decision. I really don't think it's fair to compare it to female circ, however, which is brutal and always causes problems later in life. Male circ seems to prevent some problems later in life.
My fav take on the problem is an old article by Dave Barry, about a group called RECAP. I have it in a book, but I'm sure it's somewhere on the internet, as is everything else.
Posted on February 15, 2008 17:31
emjaybee said:
See,just having the same equipment still doesn't entitle you to decide for another person, in my view, and I have never understood "looking like Dad." A young boy does NOT look like his dad in that respect, and after puberty, they aren't going to be showing their stuff to each other.
It's my son's body, and his choice, when he's grown, whether to keep it or trim it. They used to take kid's tonsils and appendixes out a lot more on the principle that those things tended to get infected, but they don't now. I feel the same way about the prepuce; it might cause problems later, like any other body part, but I'm not going to slice it off just in case. I've seen no evidence (but heard plenty of "it happened to this boy I know" secondhand stories) that leaving boys intact is any kind of true risk factor.
And yeah, I'm kind of judgemental about this choice, because causing kids unnecessary pain seems hard to justify. Same reason I don't like the way some families pierce the ears of baby girls.
Posted on February 15, 2008 17:53
Veronica said:
I don't think I would have my boys circumcised (I only have a little girl at the moment) unless there was a medical reason to have it done.
That said, I am not going to question someone elses decision to have it done.
However, I am in Australia and it isn't really a common procedure here anymore.
Posted on February 15, 2008 18:28
Christie said:
You're definitely right that the AAP is of no assistance. However, the World Health Organization, who is more reputable and less worried about being PC than the AAP, is pro-circumcision. You can look up their stances if you're curious.
As far as the comment from someone else, the funniest thing is I'm AGAINST infant ear piercing. You're right, it's pain for aesthetics. However, circumcision is not.
Nor is it mutilation.
Anyway, to the OP, probably the best thing you can do is do more research, from UNBIASED organizations and science journals. Doctors Against Circumcision would say that it was torture and horrible even if it was found to CURE cancer. They're not a good source.
On the same token, though, pro-circumcision websites aren't the best either.
You want to look at things like UNICEF, the World Health Organization, and other medical journals and studies.
Good luck with your decision and thoughts.
Posted on February 15, 2008 18:37
Howard said:
When my son was born there was no question that he would keep all his parts. A foreskin is a very useful and extremely erogenous structure. All mammals are born with one. Are we so arrogant that we think "nature" made a mistake?
Circumcision is irreversible. Once the foreskin has been wacked off - it is gone for ever, and there are many men out there who are really bitter that someone stole that choice from them.
Scandinavia has a circumcision rate of 0.006%, so they obviously treat problems medicaly, not surgicaly. It seems that in North America most "problems" diagnosed by our doctors are not problems at all, and those that are, can be easily treated by far less invasive procedures than amputation. Our medical community needs to be educated.
I believe that circumcision is a decision that only the owner of the penis should make - after he is an adult.
Posted on February 15, 2008 18:50
amy said:
I'm having a hard time reading any of the comments about having to have circ's later in life due to non-retraction (normal until/through puberty people) or infections (not related to foreskin... circumsized men can get infections too). I personally think babies go through enough rings of he!! to get here that they don't need yet another procedure done once they make it. Needless to say I'm not fond of piercing infant girls' ears to make them pretty either... make of that what you will.
My son had a bladder infection, that my MIL tried to tell me had to do with his foreskin. Really? In his BLADDER?! From his FORESKIN?! HER doctor also informed me that because his foreskin doesn't retract yet (he's 5yrs) that I had to bathe him daily (yes, DAILY) and forcibly retract/stretch the skin until it was easy to retract.
Sooo... I had to fondle my son's penis and cause him undue pain by forcing his skin back when it naturally will loosen and retract on it's own when he goes through puberty... hmmmmm. So the person who's 11 or 12 yo son wasn't retracting yet? That was normal. Unless he'd already gone through puberty.
Posted on February 15, 2008 18:52