The case against circumcision

[christine_t1]

For those not decided, here are my arguments against circumcision.  Tell me what you think.

Circumcision forever changes the male genitals - for the worse.  See this page for the difference between intact and circumcised:
http://www.drmomma.org/2011/08/intact-or-circumcised-significant.html

Cleanliness and care: Not circumcising is easier
Regarding cleanliness, there is a lot of bad information. I'd recommend you read an anti circumcision site's rebuttal of the claim that circumcising makes the penis cleaner:
http://www.circumstitions.com/Mayo.html
Smegma is normal, women have it too and it is beneficial. It keeps things moist and is harmless:
http://www.circumstitions.com/Clean.html
You should be aware of circumcision complications also. The serious ones such as death or a dead penis (pic: http://www.circumcisionquotes.com/images/slide14.jpg ) although rare, can happen.
Care is a lot easier for an intact baby. The American Academy of Pediatrics gives advice on how to care for a penis that isn't circumcised. It isn't great advice though because the intact penis really doesn't require any care. Here is a critical appraisal of the AAP's advice from an anti-circumcision site:
http://www.circumstitions.com/AAP-care.html
So if you choose not to have your baby circumcised, just leave the penis alone. Just wash the outside like all other body parts. The foreskin is attached to the head of the penis in early life and doesn't become retractable until later, so just leave it alone. There is nothing to do really.

Care for circumcised penises is actually harder. There is an open wound to be aware of. This is obviously more prone to infection.
There are also the complications. I would recommend you download this PDF file to see the graphic illustration of what actually happens to your baby during circ and the complications that can occur:
http://www.coloradonocirc.org/files/handouts/Circumcision_Techniques_and_Complications.pdf
Also see this page:
http://www.catholicsagainstcircumcision.org/cac_complications.htm  

There is also the psychological and emotional effects of being ripped away from your mother and being put in pain just shortly after your child is born. There will also be discomfort for a long time afterwards as the wound is healing. So it will obviously affect the bonding process. Is this really the best start for a young man? Wouldn't your little son be better off starting off in a more positive light? Don't you just want to take him home and love him?
See this study for the traumatic effect circumcising has on a boy and how it affects the bonding process with his mother, including breastfeeding:http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/goldman1/
See this site for regret stories from mother who circumcised:
http://www.circumcision.org/mothers.htm
So if you want an easier life, the best option is not to circ.

The negative sexual effects
If you don't know what a normal intact penis looks like then see this page for a graphic illustration of what the foreskin looks like and its role in sex:
http://www.circumstitions.com/completeman/  (contains pic of penis)
The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis. Men get pleasure by moving the foreskin up and down. This tugs on the frenulum.
Intact boys and men find it easier to masturbate because all they have to do is move the foreskin up and down. Circumcised boys and men have to resort to artificial lubrication or else they can make the penis sore from friction or damage it by putting too much pressure on it.
The foreskin also helps women. It makes it more comfortable during sex because the gliding motion reduces friction and helps maintain moisture in the vagina, preventing dryness. The rhythm of the man's thrust is is different too.  He is more sensitive, and his penis is less hardened so he doesn't jab as hard and is more sensuous. See this site:
http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/  (contains pic of penis)

Health concerns - is my baby at a health risk of If I don't circ? Will I have to worry?
The answer is no. Most men in the world aren't circed. The circ rate in Britain France Ireland Germany and Canada and Australia is less than 10%. It is a dying practice. The most recent statistic for the USA is that around 60% are circumcised. It is coming down all the time. So it is around half and half.
No medical association recommends circumcising - merely leaving up to the parents to decide. If you asked most informed doctors they would tell you not to do it. I'd recommend you read this site to see how it got started - basically to reduce masturbation by taking away the most pleasurable part of the penis and the part that moves:
http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/
Won't it have to be done later?  I hear stories of it having to be done later?  A lot of the time it didn't have to be done.  Remember, doctors get paid to do these operations.  Most intact men never get infections in their whole lifetime.  If they do, it is easily cleared up with antibiotics.
The American Academy of Pediatrics review on the pros and cons of newborn circumcision was done in 1999. You can read the AAP's review on circumcision along with an annotated critique here
http://www.circumstitions.com/AAP-ana.html
The best way to prevent STI's is condoms and not sleeping with prostitutes. As for cleanliness and urinary tract infections, they are easily treated with anti-biotics and are rare anyway. The idea that uncircumcised boys get more infections than circumcised boys is false. See this study:
http://www.cirp.org/library/complications/vanhowe/
So your child is in no health danger if he is not circumcised. See a critique of the most recent AAP policy statement:
http://www.drmomma.org/2012/08/aap-circumcision-policy-statement.html

I'd recommend people watch this video by NOCIRC:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHVvB1oHAgg

[koffeewitch]

Great information, thank you!  I am so embarrassed to live in a country that considers cutting a baby's genitals to be an acceptable practice.  Truly circumcision is a personal choice...meaning the person with the penis makes the choice for himself at the age of consent.

[adgal]

I'm not certain why we cannot just leave decisions like this as a personal choice.  I live in Canada where circumcision is not that common anymore.  We personally chose not to circumcise our son.  However, pediatricians here will explain the pro's and con's, and make no mistake, there are pro's.  My 9 year old nephew wound up having to be circumcised at 6 due to chronic infection.  We are waiting to see with my son as his pediatrician has noted a "too watch" situation in that his foreskin is not retracting they way it should.  I certainly feel that if he was going to be circumcised, it would be better to have had it done at birth.

It is a personal choice, and a good parent researches their choices, then makes their decision.  There is no huge downside for a boy being circumcised, and I'm sorry, but no one will ever convince me that infant circumcision causes any long term emotional damage to a child.  They have no memory of it.  If you feel strongly against it, then certainly that is your decision, however, if tradition, religion, or just wanting to makes you decide to go ahead with it, then that is what you should do.  There is no comparison to female circumcision, and unless evidence comes out that it is physically or emotionally harmful, then personal decision should be left at just that.  A personal decision.

[specialmom]

Agreed!

[mrsdgls]

My boys are circumcised, and they don't complain, it's like this it's your child do what you think best. The input of other don't matter

[specialmom]

I think people who posted here know each other from outside of this site.  One time posters that have an agenda.  Luck to all who read this.  I've been very happy with my decision to circumcise and it is backed by the medical community in my area.  peace

[specialmom]

PS:  education goes both ways.  Here's some unbiased information that has pros and cons:

http://www.medicinenet.com/circumcision_the_medical_pros_and_cons/article.htm

[specialmom]

This thread is very entertaining.  Parents should do what they feel is best for their children.  No judgement for or against.  It is culturally the norm where I am from and am very glad my husband and I chose to circumcize our children.   Worked out well for us.   Luck to all.  

[specialmom]

Oh, not nice to call people ignorant.  I'm actually pretty smart and well educated and am happy I circumcized my children.  Thanks.  

[Leilabedeila]

Obviously these people did not look at the links. Other than that, I think you e done a very thorough job. I'm sorry so many people are willfully ignorant on this subject. It makes me very sad.

P.S. IT'S *HIS* BODY, *HIS* CHOICE. IF IT'S NOT YOUR PENIS, LEAVE IT ALONE!

[becca326]

Thank you for the article. It saddens me to read so many comments from people defending their choice to chop up their sons genitals and take away their choice to have their whole bodies. I see a lot of misinformed people who shy away from the truth.

[Jacklynr]

I agree 110%, not to mention how much better sex is with a normal guy (not cut). Talk about amazing scream all night love:). I never understood why ppl want their kid to have a smaller non functional penis... Seems cruel guys and gals forskins fun and you are soooo missing out. O and a baby can die from a circumcision that's just a dumb risk I'd never take with my child!

[LexieR]

The only unbiased sources are from countries which don't routinely perform this non-medically necessary surgery on minors using their parents as scapegoats by putting this non-decision in their hands. As with anything, follow the money trail.

This pathologist will explain what the make up of the foreskin is (it is not redundant shaft skin but a separate organ entirely): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD2yW7AaZFw

This educator discusses the history of male circumcision: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceht-3xu84I

[LexieR]

Funny, I've never heard anyone in my family say they wish they didn't have foreskin, men included. Oh wait, we're not from America.

[dreamer_fla]

Do you realize that personal decision is a decision that you take for yourself, and that by deciding for your sons, you take away their own personal decisions. Now they don't have a choice.

[dreamer_fla]

Is it biased to advocate no unnecessary surgery?

Are we biased against amputated hands when we leave our children with their hands as they are?

Are we biased against circumcised vaginas when we leave our girls with their labia and clitoris?

Are we biased against mastectomized breasts when we don't amputate the breasts of our daughters?

[dreamer_fla]

I dislike being circumcised. I know many who do as well.

See, in order to agree with our circumcisions, we have to believe that it was somehow beneficial. I, however, have learned that the reason given by the pediatrician, was phony. My circumcision was performed because he did not know enough about care for an intact child. So I lost a perfectly healthy functional part because of a professional's ignorance. How am I going to be happy about that?

[Judithdl]

Oh, and Christine, you obviously put a lot of thought and research into your argument.  Obviously more than the women who have responded saying they circ'd and have no regrets or found no downside.  wtf?  Obviously no research done by those people. Bravo to you for taking the time to write this and share it.  :)

[Judithdl]

Wow, It's amazing how many pro-cutters are on this site.  You are all obviously biased toward cutting your boys, so who are you to complain about the bias of women who want to protect their sons from it.  We should not need to prove why healthy tissue should be removed. You need a better argument why it must be sliced and crushed off the genitals of a newborn. So far, none of the BS I've read does anything but convince me there are a lot of misinformed and tragically sad people becoming parents.

[specialmom]

Norm in my area for sure.  Docs pretty much assume.  I was very very happy we did it.  

[christine_t1]

Actually specialmom, it isn't that normal anymore, it is becoming more 50/50.

[specialmom]

I am very pleased with the circumcisions both of my boys had.  I have no regrets and feel it was the absolute best decision for them.  It's the norm in the US and found absolutely no downside to doing it.  luck to all.  

[christine_t1]

At the end of my post I did post a link to a rebuttal of the AAP statement.

[AHP84]

I also disagree with most of the information (some of it is valid). Like searra and MamacitaTP said, the info you posted if from sources that are advocating their cause, and it is biased. Some of it may be accurate, but not all of it is.
The most unbiased sources you can research about circumcision are from the CDC and WHO.
I have two boys and had them circ'd, and I have a third boy due in April and we will be having him done as well. My husband is circ'd and my ex (father of my first son) is circ'd. They've not once complained about sex being uncomfortable or unpleasurable.
I dated one guy ever who was not circ'd, and he had complaints and non-complaints about it. His complaints about it were that he always had issues keeping a condom on because the foreskin movement from thrusts would often cause it to slide off, interrupting the sexual pleasure. Non-complaints were mainly centered around how most women he dated had never been with a guy who was intact, so they liked to "play" with him and wanted to "experiment" to see what it was like to have sex--and he'd say, what guy is gonna complain about that?!
Personally, I prefer the feeling of sex on circ'd rather than intact. Intact caused too much extra movement that I found distracting and it took away from the experience. That's just my experience and opinion.
But for the decisions made to circ my sons, it is all based solely on the fact that the statistics from CDC and WHO show it is less of a lifetime risk for urinary and sexual health than staying intact.
Also, the AAP currently neither recommends or discourages routine infant male circumcision. This was in national news less than a year ago, and here is a reference:

Nearly six months ago, the American Academy of Pediatrics’ (AAP) Taskforce on Circumcision released a long-awaited revision to their previously neutral stance on male neonatal circumcision. With this new policy statement, the AAP has shifted their 1999 statement in which “the risks do not outweigh the benefits” to state currently that “…evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it.” (For the full report, please visit http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2012/08/22/peds.2012-1989).

While the AAP contends that the statement is not “pro-circumcision,” many of its members state that the purpose of the change in language is to reverse legislation in a number of states in which MC is no longer covered by Medicaid. For example, the AAP Taskforce noted that “…although health benefits are not great enough to recommend routine circumcision for all male newborns, the benefits of circumcision are sufficient to justify access to this procedure for families choosing it and to warrant third-party payment for circumcision of male newborns [italics added for emphasis].”

http://qucollegeofartsandsciences.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/male-neonatal-circumcision-debate/

[MamacitaTP]

Thank you for the information, but I disagree as well. All of the information is from a very biased source.