It will cost around $500. It is painless and will take about two weeks to heal completely. As someone who had foreskin problems - yes I would recommend it. It is actually a very small op but makes a big difference.
2007-10-01 06:10:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by istaffa 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Nope I wouldn't recommend it. It's the child body and I think he should decide what to do with his penis. Many people regret being circumcised - a teen boy posted here very upset about it yesterday. Only about 50% of newborns in the USA are currently circumcised and it is rare almost everywhere else in the world (apart from Muslims and Jews) - all those men are fine, it is not dirty or smelly or ugly like some people think.
Although there are some studies showing that there is a slim chance circumcision might do stuff like reduce risk of getting STIs from women, this has not been proven conclusively, and condoms, washing and abstinence are all far more effective than surgery. Sensation is lost with the surgery too.
it takes a few weeks to heal. During that time it is way more susceptible to infection (and complications) than an intact penis; harder to look after; a surgical wound in a dirty nappy isn't a great idea.
Bottom line is though that it's the child's penis. An intact man can always choose to get circumcised if they are unhappy for whatever reason (and as jkels attest it is not unbearably bad as an adult) but a circumcised man can never get his foreskin back.
OK given your further information have you taken him to see a doctor? Where do you live? Many in the USA just recommend circumcision anyway but it is easy money for them. I think you should take him to a doctor and look at the options other than circumcision before you get it done, it will be really painful for a child at that age, and it is so rarely medically necessary.
2007-09-25 05:23:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋
It sounds like he has an infection or maybe a fungus. Having his penis circumcised won't do anything to cure the infection! He needs to see a doctor ASAP to find out what it wrong, but he doesn't need to have part of his penis chopped off -- circumcised guys get infections, too.
He is just entering adolescence and is very conscious of his body, especially his genitals. To cut him now would be psychologically devastating, and he could end up really resenting you for doing this to him. Cure the infection and leave his foreskin intact. If HE wants to have it chopped off when he's an adult, fine. But for you to make that decision for him at 13 is just not moral.
If a money-hungry doctor wants to circumcise him, go for a second opinion, even a third opinion. Do not opt for surgery until simple medical steps have been taken. Most doctors would refuse to cut him while there is an active infection anyway, and once the infection is gone, there's no earthly reason to put him through that physical and psychological trauma.
2007-09-26 15:57:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by Maple 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I would investigate all other possibilities before circumcision. It's a surgical procedure, and like all surgical procedures, should be the last (not the first) choice. Go for more conservative treatments such as cortisone creams, gentle stretching, and checking for infection. Circumcision is a last resort.
2007-09-25 21:17:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by celerybad 2
·
4⤊
0⤋
PLEASE DON'T DO IT!
It has been medically proven that the removal of the foreskin can remove 50-80% of pleasurable sexual sensations in an adult. You are taking a knife to a totally healthy little baby boy, and withough his concent, causing him possible sexual difficulties in his adulthood.
It makes perfect sense. The foreskin is there to serve a purpose, it protects and keeps the very sensitive tip of the penis covered and moist. The foreskin (like the head of the penis) is covered in millions of concentrated nerve endings, when you cut it off you remove the sensation those nerve endings create, as well as exposing the head of the penis, causing it to dry up and become de-sensitised from constant friction (underpants etc).
There is no medical need to circumcise your baby boy. Some people say it's for hygene reasons, but I think it's just a matter of teaching your child to keep clean.
2007-09-25 03:25:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by Adar 3
·
5⤊
2⤋
I don't know what the cost is, but if you were to do it, the best time would be when he is first born.
If he's any older than that, it will be more painful, more likely to not heal as well and he will remember it.
Circumcision is not as typical today as one might think. It's really not necessary. It is NOT true that if they arent circumsized that they are more prone to infections or STD's. That is not true if they bathe properly and use condoms during sex.
As someone who works in the medical field, I wouldnt recommend it. If he wants it when he is a legal adult, then he has a right to that decision himself.
2007-09-25 01:50:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Paramedic Girl 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
Well it will hurt like hell for a 13 year old, I got mine when i was a baby, so i dont remember it. I think, a rabbai will come and do it for free. if not 50-100 bucks
2007-09-30 08:49:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well Ive had sex with both (two circumcized and one uncircumcized) and even though I always thought I wouldnt like an uncircumcized guy, that changed once I had experience with one. I really liked the foreskin so Ive decided that once I have a son he wont be circumcized. Its not popular anymore anyways and they look similar when hard from my experience
2007-09-25 09:08:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Stacy 3
·
5⤊
1⤋
That sounds like gaul stones .. i had it when i was 18 .. it felt like someone was stabbing my urithra everytime i pee'd and my head was swollon due to the burning..
Dont have him circumcised .. its morally wrong to do that
2007-09-26 19:10:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by Cristian 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
The cost for circumcision and time to heal varies by region and age. I mean, a newborn doesn't get put to sleep (since 'he won't remember it') so it's a lot cheaper then. Then again, you have some insurances that don't cover it anymore. In general, circumcision is not as popular as it was before; it's lost a lot of popularity (the USA is the last developed nation doing it and some of our states have reached as low as 14% compared to being over 90% in the 1960s and 1970s). I wouldn't recommend the surgery, simply because it's not necessary and has risks. Circumcision's advantages are exaggerated and often proven false in the end, if you do a little research you'll see (such as the USA having the highest HIV rates in the developed word, and circumcision reducing sexual pleasure). This doctor gives you a good general review:
http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/circumcision/against-circumcision.html
Circumcision is a traditionally Jewish and Muslim surgery, although it was introduced and encouraged to the Western, developed world (North America and Europe, but especially the USA) as a way to stop masturbation, especially with the help of Dr. Kellogg. (see link 1) However, although scientific studies have discovered that circumcision harms masturbation by up to over 60% (2), needless to say, it doesn’t completely stop masturbation. Many circumcised guys just find it more convenient to use a lube like KY or lotion as a result (3) since the typically moist foreskin (like the eyelids) is not there to rub the head of the penis with (4).
Most developed nations quickly rejected circumcision after noticing its ineffectiveness against masturbation (they were quite religious back then!), and as a result the United States remains the last developed nation doing it to a significant percentage of newborns. (5) This was done as a result of the for-profit American health care system promoting myths about benefits of circumcision (6), such as preventing penile cancer (6a, 6b), preventing HIV (6c, 6d) despite the USA being the developed nation with the highest HIV rates and circumcision rates (6e, 5), and preventing STDs (6d, 6f). As a result, circumcision now brings in hundreds of millions of dollars to doctors and the American health system. (7)
However, circumcision has been becoming less popular as years have passed by. In the 1960s over 90% of guys were circumcised in the USA, now circumcision rates are as low as 14% in some states. (8) More and more parents are discovering that circumcision carries more risks than benefits, and realize that by leaving their sons uncircumcised, their sons have the choice of choosing what they’d like, since the surgery is irreversible (you can't go back if you don't like it or if it goes wrong).
Circumcision risks include the loss of sexual pleasure according to multiple studies (2, 9, 10, 11). Those studies take into effect many sensation points, including the foreskin, and they involve many participants. There have been other studies that claim no difference, but they don’t even take into effect the nerve endings on the foreskin, which as seen in one study, are some of the most sensitive points on the penis (10). One study even found an increase in erectile dysfunction rates after circumcision (10a). In another study, it was found that females ended up reaching orgasm with and preferring uncircumcised males in 9 out of 10 cases (10b). In addition, circumcision is extremely painful on newborns (12, 13, 14), and you risk many bad conditions, such as a buried penis when too much foreskin is removed and limits the size of the penis (15), or adhesions or skin bridges that develop from the head to the shaft when the skin heals after the surgery (16), meatal stenosis [occurs in up to 10% of circumcised males!] when the opening of the penis becomes irritated from too much exposure and rubbing and begins to close up (17), and meatal ulcers (18). All those risks are, of course, not including the possibility of having too much skin removed, which can cause discomfort during erections due to lack of skin to allow the penis to expand, and could consequently cause a hairy penis by pulling pubic hair and skin to the shaft. Often a circumcision scar develops around the penis after circumcision. In addition, circumcision has negative effects on breastfeeding. (18)
To conclude, here is a link that describes the anatomy of the foreskin (19) and the development of the foreskin with infants, a link especially helpful for parents (19a). Ultimately, one survey found that although uncircumcised guys are a bit more satisfied percentage-wise, it’s within the margin of error. (20) The only difference is that those unsatisfied uncircumcised guys can simply get circumcised and end up satisfied either way. If you're cut or uncut and happy, you'll say that side is better. If you got cut later in life, you'll say cut because you had problems with your foreskin before. If you're cut and had something go wrong or wish to have had a choice, then you'll say uncut. One survey found that up to half of circumcised guys wished to have had the choice themselves (as in, been left uncircumcised and they could have chosen to get circumcised if they wished later on in life). That's a huge number. (21) That, along with the risks and negative effects that are being seen more with the help of the Internet, may be what is bringing down circumcision rates.
2007-09-25 09:12:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jorge 7
·
4⤊
1⤋