Who thinks that circumcision should be the choice of the individual and not the baby?

Question

Should the law be changed so that only a person of age (18) could request a nontheraputic circumcision?

Answer 1

Personally I dislike circumcision and think it is barbaric.

Answer 2

This is a tough one. I really didn't want to circumcises our baby if she ended up being a boy but my boyfriend who was circumcised was VERY adamant about the circumcision. Its so tough. I felt unless it was necessary I wouldn't do it because its not up to me. I wont even pierce my daughters ears! I'm just glad this one was a girl. I don't know what we'll do if we have a boy next. I'm sure it will be heated arguments again.

Answer 3

That would be a very good idea! Actually all that needs to be done is to give baby boys equal protection under the law so that they would get the same protection that girls get.

Girls genitals are protected by federal law even though they get ten times the number of UTIs that complete boys get. If girls with all their problems can be treated without cutting, why can't boys?

Excessive cleaning and harsh soaps are responsible for all those "infections". If your eyes get sore when you get soap in them do you have your eyelids removed? The glans of a complete boy is meant to be a very sensitive organ, treat it gently. It is designed to be used for intimate touch not to be rubbed endlessly against cotton underwear.

"Tight foreskin" this is natural, just let him work at stretching it, that is what all the "tugging" is about. It is nature's way of getting the foreskin to loosen up as the boy matures. When it is still tight it is natually sealed to keep dirt out. Do you use a bottle brush to clean inside your daughers vagina?

Male "circumcision" is as likely to cause complications as it is to prevent a UTI. UTIs can be treated with antibiotics in boys just as successfuly as it is in girls. Complications from "circumcision" are very often not very correctable and if they can be corrected at all it would require more painful surgery.

Answer 4

No. If you ask the law to intervene on what is a very hot, individualized topic, you're asking for trouble.

Circumcision is already declinining rapidly. Perhaps in a few more decades it will be in the extreme minority-- and THEN legal intervention can take place. Right now, though, it would not be a good idea.

Answer 5

Yes. Baby boys should have the same right to genital integrity as baby girls now have in most countries. All the same excuses used by people who want to cut their baby boys, from hygiene to religion to aesthetics, are used to justify female circumcision as well.

Let's give ALL children legal protection from medically unnecessary genital alteration!

Answer 6

Absolutely. If its illegal for a girl, it should be illegal for a boy.

And, before anyone starts spouting inaccuracies about female circumcision (not infibulation), DO SOME RESEARCH. http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html

As far as "The Y!ABut" person goes. If people would leave the boys foreskin ALONE and stop tearing it away from the glans before it has NATURALLY retracted, it wouldn't be infected. It is SUPPOSED to be tight! Phimosis is not and accurate diagnosis until it interferes with a man being able to preform sexually. Even then, stretching exercises and topical creams are usually enough to resolve the situation.That's how it keeps feces and foreign matter out of the meatus. Ballooning is NORMAL, it helps SLOWLY separate the foreskin in its own time. I'd hate to think what you might be advocating for the baby girls with frequent infections and antibiotics that you come across.

My3Boys needs to read up on NORMAL development and structure and function of the foreskin too. PLEASE stop advocating surgery for normal penis' based on someone else's medical history. Your brother's foreskin restriction was probably the result of some genius yanking it back before it was naturally ready to be retractable. And unless your boys ACTUALLY had it, you had NO reason to cut them!
Why not Google " damage caused forced retraction of the foreskin?"
After all, I'm not advocating preemptive hysterectomies even though all the women in my family have needed them soon after age 45. Nor am I advocating having arms amputated, even though my grandma had cancer and had to have hers cut off. I had UTIs all my childhood, but no one ever gave me genital surgery. Why not? Hell, I'm not going to get my babies' tonsils out even though it hurt like heck when I had mine out at age 16 and they are prone to infection.

No one should be allowed to alter the size, function and structure of a baby's healthy, normal genitals!

http://www.icgi.org/information/full-disclosure-informed-consent/
http://www.math.missouri.edu/~rich/MGM/primer.html
http://www.icgi.org/2007/04/medicalization-of-circumcision-an-online-slide-show/

Answer 7

I think that the decision is up to the parents...but I think Quirky is being honest. A lot of the time it is for aesthetic reasons and not because they truly think it's better health wise. It's not up to me to tell a parent whether or not to do this and that to their child, nor should they tell me this and that regarding my son. He is NOT circumcised because his Daddy isn't and hasn't had a single health problem. Also, the majority of the world isn't and hasn't had many health problems either. Studies now show it to be medically unnecessary and I agree...although others may not.

Answer 8

Oh, 'quirky', and others who feel this way...(poster above)...in most cases, circumcision is so not about how the penis looks.

Some people use that silly reason - which I don't think is a good reason to circumcise...but there are those of us out there who chose to circumcise our boys because of existing family medical history.

"The Y!ABut" is describing a very similar situation to what we experienced.

Research 'abnormal foreskin constriction'. My brother went through it when he was 2 or 3 - it was horrible. He finally had to have a circumcision to fix it. On the chance that my children could go through that same thing (if it was passed down by chance), we chose to circumcise to avoid that terrible, terrible experience for them. Our pediatrician, who is typically a 'don't circumcise' guy, told us that's a perfectly good reason for circumcision in our case. It is rare, but when it occurs, it's awful for the child. Since we had a family history, we made the best decision we could for our boys. Other people can circumcise or not - what they do is up to them.

I could care less what my boys penises look like...but I don't want them to have to go through the trauma my poor little brother did. I remember that very vividly, as I'm 7 yrs older than him.

Answer 9

A God fearing man should not do it. Do you think God has given that so you can cut it and manage? Let the baby decide when he grows up and find out which course would be better for him.

Answer 10

I did NOT have my son's done so he "Would look a certain way." My husband had one when he was born, but he was not wanting to have our son done at first. I had it done because my son was a preemie and had several UTIs while in the hospital. He is now 3 years-old and has never had another one. People that think it is all for cosmetic reasons do not understand how painful a UTI is for a baby boy. My son would SCREAM bloody murder every time he peed his diaper. I think that is more cruel than the short-lived pain of the circumcision.