2007-02-20 15:57:30 · 14 answers · asked by kimmi_c1981 1 in Pregnancy & Parenting ➔ Newborn & Baby
This is a very hot topic with a lot of people, people get really angry that they are "right" about it.
I spoke with my dr. and did some research and we chose not to have it done and many people think that it was wrong but with proper cleaning and care there is no reason for it other than social and religious acceptance.
I can't believe the number of people who hate me for not having it done- like it's their penis or something.
However I would suggest that you google it and speak with a dr. about it and make sure you are well educated on the subject. It is believed that men who have an uncircumsised penis contract STD's and infections more than the man who has a circumsised penis. However there is much research to the contrary and really in the end it boils down to what you think is best.
Circumsising your baby will be a few weeks of making sure it has healed well and then it's over, not much more care after that than the general wiping and bathing. So it's easier.
2007-02-20 16:40:42 · answer #1 · answered by momofthreemiracles 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
ONE study showed the circumcised baby's have a slightly lower incidence of UTI. Intact (not circumcised) baby's have a 1% chance of getting a UTI.. Very Very small chance. And the surgery itself carries risks (as any surgery does) Especially now that the hospitals are so rampent with MRSA (a resistant strain of staph), why would you create an open wound for it to get infected?
A cut penis is not any cleaner than a eyeball would be if you cut off the eyelid.
The foreskin actually covers the glans (head) and protects it. At the end of the foreskin is the rigded band, which is a one way 'valve' that lets urine out but keeps feces or other material from getting up into the pee hole.
The only thing you have to do to clean an intact baby's penis is wipe off the outside. Never pull the foreskin back to clean under it. When they get older (2-5 years old) the foreskin with separate from the glans and become retractable. Then all that needs to be done is pull it back and rinse it in the tub during bath time. However, most circed men still have to pull back their shaft skin in the shower anyway (especially if they didn't have a super tight circ) So it isn't any more work to keep clean.
With a circed penis however, you have to change the dressing and apply vaseline and all that until it heals. And then you have to push back the skin at least once a day for the first year so that the circ site does not heal onto the glans (ie adhesions) Many parents fail to do this, and adhesions form on the circed penis and they have to be either manually, or even sometimes surgically re-circumcised.
So much more work....I just don't see why you would want to go through all that trouble, instead of just leaving it be, like God and nature meant for it to be.
2007-02-20 16:23:45 · answer #2 · answered by EMT_and_Mom_to1 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Does it decrease the risk of infection? Yes, there is some reduced risk for UTIs and STDs. However, being a woman and having a vagina makes you much more likely to get UTIs and STDs. I wouldn't consider cosmetic surgery to prevent things like that, I've had yeast infection and UTIs, they're not a big deal. I've certainly never considered getting cosmetic surgery on my genitals to prevent them. I've been with my uncircumcised husband for ten years now and while I've probably had several yeast infections and UTIs during that time, he hasn't had any.
Is it cleaner? Cleaner than what? Is it cleaner than an uncircumcised penis? I haven't found there to be much difference, maybe a little more likely to smell like pee due to the extra skin. But again, is it cleaner than having a vagina? Well, vaginas bleed, have lots of discharge, bacteria (natural flora) and a delicate pH balance which is upset by something as simple as taking a bubble bath or popping some antibiotics. Seems the penis is much cleaner, whether it's circumcised or not.
2007-02-20 18:08:28 · answer #3 · answered by BabyRN 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hygiene and morals will keep the penis clean and free from infection, foreskin or no foreskin. The American Academy of Pediatrics finds that "the benefits are not significant enough for the AAP to recommend circumcision as a routine procedure". Just a thought...circumcisions are done not by the pediatrician or a surgeon but by the labor and delivery doctor. While researching this for my own son, my pediatrician told me that if I put my son in a 400 degree oven, he would not scream any louder than during a circumcision.
2007-02-21 00:17:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
extra to the factor, whether it does shrink the threat of HIV in Africa, what does which could do with circumcising newborn American boys who won't additionally be sexually lively for yet another 15-2 an prolonged time? additionally, why does u . s . a ., which has the optimal circumcision fee of all industrialized worldwide places, even have the optimal HIV fee? the folk who tout HIV prevention via fact the latest reason to circumcise on no account seem to have an answer for that. infinite "study" have been performed interior the final century to aim to discover motives to persevering with justifying circumcision. on each occasion a study comes out that seems to coach some wellness income, even nonetheless small, the circumcision proponents eagerly spotlight it on a similar time as they forget approximately approximately all the different study that confirmed no income. a similar is real for those HIV study. those that confirmed an substantial alleviation at risk have been given so lots extra exposure than those that did no longer. there became yet another study in Tanzania in 2009 (with the aid of Stallings et. al) which got here upon that ladies human beings who had gone with the aid of woman genital mutilation had variety of 0.5 the HIV danger of unmutilated women human beings. humorous, i do no longer pay attention every physique using that study as a reason to circumcise American toddler females.
2016-11-24 21:23:36 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
from my experience with my son yes.
and from a situation that happened when my husband was 4 yes
He had to be circumcised at the age of 4 due to continuous infections even tho my MIL is a clean freak
and personally i think it looks nicer...well as nice as they/it can b
2007-02-20 16:02:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
If you stretched them out the amount of nerves in the foreskin of a penis would cover a football field. A football field worth of nerve endings! Why would you chop that off? The risk of infection is from putting an open wound on the most sensitive part of your child and having fecal mater from his diaper enter the wound.
2007-02-20 16:22:54 · answer #7 · answered by Sara 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
circumision doesn't stop in fection.. it just means that you dont' have to clean as well and is easier to take care of.
Interesteingly enough, back when sex was seen as sinful.. circumsision was pushed by religion to stop the sensation. Woman are now not circumsized in many counteries anymore and it is just starting to be questioned with men. My son is not getting circumsized. I think my babies are born without flaws.. why would I give birth and then try to change them?
2007-02-20 16:04:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
why do woman always say this? i've never had an infection and it gets washed just like everything else in the shower. not had a single problem getting laid either jewish women too you name it.
2007-02-20 19:01:47 · answer #9 · answered by owi1925 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes, and yes, but most circumcised guys wish they had a choice to keep their foreskin rather than their parents making that decision for them when they were a baby.
2007-02-20 16:01:08 · answer #10 · answered by joedude471 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋