Pros:
His penis will look like the majority of other children and most likely not have to worry about ridicule in gym locker rooms.
It is easier for cleaning.
If you are religious it is a thing God said to do.
Cons:
He will look like the majority of other children.
If you don't watch it carefully right after surgery, it could get infected.
I don't really know what else to say. Let me know if I could be of anymore assistance.
Best of luck,
Nire Nella
2007-01-14 12:53:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
I think it's a personal decision to be made by the parents. As a nurse, I have researched this before and found that as long as you keep the penis clean then there is no increased chance of infection. All it takes is teaching the child/children how to properly clean themselves. Which is something that you would be doing anyway, whether circumcised or not. Also, as a mother of 2 sons, my husband and I made the decision not to have this done to our boys. Not just because my husband isn't, but because we couldn't see putting them through that kind of mutilation. It is painful, I have been in the room when these procedures have been done and it's not a pretty sight. Even if they do give an anesthetic, the baby is still screaming at the top of it's lungs. I guess because I had seen it done before I had my sons, that was the most influencing thing that turned me against it. I don't think that anyone should be made to feel bad because they choose this for their sons. Like I said, it's a personal decision. And about it cutting down on STD's........if you teach your child about safe sex and to be very picky about "where" they stick it, then he won't have that kind of problem. My husband is 49 and he said just now that he has never had a problem with his. Our boys are 3 and almost 5 and have never had a problem as of yet. Hope that this helps, good luck and congrats on the babies!!!!
2007-01-14 21:11:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Crystal 5
·
2⤊
3⤋
Ooh, you opened a can of worms there. There are heated opinions on both sides. Those against say that circumcision is genital mulitation. Those for say that circumcising keeps the boy cleaner and helps prevent STD's. Just beware, insurance does not pay for it nowadays because it's not considered medically necessary. We have fantastic insurance but it still did not cover circumcision. I found that out in 2004 when my son was born. We decided to have it done anyway for a couple of reasons. I did ask the urologist that if, when my son is 14 or 15 and he's in the locker room after a soccer game, what percentage of the boys would be circumcised. The doctor claimed it would be about 50/50. And in early 2005 when we had it done, the cost was $300.00, so you're looking at $600.00 right there, out of pocket for twin boys.
2007-01-14 20:54:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Stimpy 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
It's your personal choice. I can tell you this, I work in the OR as a surgical tech and have assisted in many, many, many of these procedures and it is not as painful as people make it out. I hardley ever see a baby cry from it. I usually talk to them while assisting and they for the most part most of them never even flinch. Some of them that cry start crying as soon as they are uncovered from their nice warm blanket and put on the table but stop when the light is turned on and they are warmed up. Some babies cry just becuase they are criers, they usually start before the procedure is started as soon as you lay them down. Anesthetic is used at the mother's request, usually a topic analgesic but only on request becuase it's usually not needed, like I said it's not that painful. Anyone who knows their anatomy should know that a newborn's penis is not developed enough to have any nerve endings in the tip of the penis to even cause any pain. This is a common procdure I see routinley on a daily basis and people go to the extreme on this pain theory to try and make their point that it is wrong, but they are wrong. If this is something you want to do then do it. Working in the OR I have seen many men, as well as teenagers, come in that have serious infections etc. from an uncircumsized penis. I have also seen men that were circumsized come in with infections and problems so nothing is to say that having it done or not having it done will stop such problems from happening. Everyone is different and what is right for one baby may not be right for another.
2007-01-14 22:35:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by shannonmangan 4
·
2⤊
3⤋
Our Pediatrician told us that the statistics are about even for circumcised and un-circumcised , so in later life he will see equal numbers of both, what he counseled was whatever we chose should be the same for all the boys born in the family. Some people worry about the sons looking like the father, so I would talk it over with the pediatrician and your wife and decide what you prefer. By the way, circumcision is not medically necessary, and medicaid no longer covers the procedure.
2007-01-14 20:56:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Sarah H 2
·
3⤊
2⤋
Oh no never! Later if there is a medical reason but that is sooo! rare. My dad and brother are not and have had no problems.
My husband was and they cut his frenulem (sp) and his sensitivity is very low now that he is getting close to 40. He asked the docotr why and he told him his fren. was severed during infant circumcision. we have 4 boys and 2 girls and none of my boys are done. they are natrual. none have had any infections or problems. i keep them clean though or taught them how.
Before marriage I was only with 2 others but both were natural and, I think I liked the feel of the skin sliding during intercourse and play over the cut one.
My oldest was able to retract his skin at 7 and the next boy at 4.
My current prediatrician is also a psychologist for kids and blieives that infant circumcisions cause trauma in a boy many times. She said about 60+% of modern parents are choosing natural over the last 5-6 years.
That's my opinion based on experience with both sexually and as a mom
2007-01-14 21:23:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by winfielder74 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
Oh please don't!
Things are better natural. the equivalent of the mutilation of young boys known as circumcision in a female would be to remove her clitoral hood!
Both the glans (head of penis) and the clit are mucus membranes meant to be protected by either foreskin or the hood.
Circs can go very bad and the frenulum can be cut and more often is than not during this procedure. This is a very sensitive area where men get great stimulus.
If hygiene is taught and practiced only rarely wil a boy ever need to be cirked, and then mostly only in the case of too tight a foreskin (rare).
Check out these sites and their links.
http://www.noharmm.org/
http://www.birthpsychology.com/birthscene/circ.html
The most important thing to know about the uncut penis is to not force your boys foreskins back before it is ready on its own.
usually at about 5-6 but can be sooner or later.
Infection risks in clean uncut boys is no greater than and in fact mat be less then in cut.
Congratulations on the twins!
2007-01-14 21:00:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by rumbler_12 7
·
3⤊
4⤋
That is really a personal choice that only you and your wife can decide. Does she know that your opinion on the matter is being influenced on what people are telling are their opinions on this forum?? Im sure you had a gut decision when you think about it. Thats what you should go with, or at least read up on it a bit instead of relying on other feelings when may or may not have ever had to actually make the desicion themselves. Good luck.
2007-01-14 20:54:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by frostedbetty 3
·
1⤊
3⤋
I am a father of a 3 year old uncircumcised boy.We didn't get him cut cause we wanted him to be natural and were worried about pain.When we change his diaper we clean him very well,he gets a bath almost every night.he has had two infections where his poor little penis has swollen to 3 times it's normal size,filled with puss.The poor little guy was in severe pain and I feel guilty that I did not get him cut when it would have been easiest.Cleanliness is a defendant issue,and I think he would have experienced less pain with the circumcision than with the infections.
2007-01-14 21:07:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by LIBS Make ME Sick!!! 1
·
3⤊
3⤋
Unlike the old days, circumsision is now done for cosmetic purposes and is considered elective surgery. Most doctors won't do it until a problem arises as in continued infection of the foreskin. In my opinion I would go ahead and have it done to keep from having probs later. If not done right tho there can still be probs as in my case.The doctor didn't cut enough off and I had to have it done again at 7 y/o and can you say OWYYYYYYYYYY.
2007-01-14 21:08:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by n0s 3
·
1⤊
3⤋