will you circumcised 7 months baby ??? why?

Gina - posted on 12/06/2010

danielle they are born with a penis with foreskin it is normal to be there why get it removed unless there is somthing wrong with it but otherwise why put your baby though such pain for no reason

Danielle - posted on 12/06/2010

It's considered cosmetic surgery after 2 months of age where I am and it costs $2000 because they have to put the baby under. My friend is going through this right now. Her baby was born prematurely and he wasn't healthy enough to undergo the procedure until now. If it were my child, I would choose to do it. Maybe it'd be different if they weren't going to put my son to sleep for it though. My son was circumsized at 2 weeks old. He slept through the entire thing because they use a freezing cream on them.

Jennifer - posted on 12/06/2010

If it's for a medical reason I would but if not then no. It's an unnecessary procedure and if you had been that bothered about getting it done surely you should have had it done when he was a newborn?!?

Gina - posted on 12/06/2010

i think this is sick why get it done when it is totaly normal and why put such a little baby though such pain i think it is dam right nasty DONT DO IT!

Crystal - posted on 12/05/2010

im reading alot of these responses, and if you want to circumsize your son then do it dont make a decision based on what others say. but im not sure if any doctors will do it at 7 months

Sierra - posted on 12/05/2010

To esmeralda: This is from a website:
Circumcision applied to the slaves of Jews. Apart from that, circumcision never applied to people outside the Jewish faith. The first covenant was not with other nations. All other people were described as uncircumcised, even those who practised circumcision (Jeremiah 9:25-26). Circumcision never applied to Christians (Acts 15:5-11). The Apostle Peter, who was circumcised, said:

... we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.
(Acts 15:11, New RSV)
Should Christians follow the Law of Moses?

No. Christians were freed from the Law, including circumcision (Acts 15:1-20). It was described as an almost unbearable yoke on the neck (Acts 15: 10). The yoke, of course, was a sign of slavery and Christians were told not to become entangled with 'a yoke of bondage' (Galatians 5:1-2).

The Law as we read it contains things that appall us, such as forcing a rapist to marry his victim (Deuteronomy 22:28-29) or rejecting people born out of wedlock and their descendants (Deuteronomy 23:2). However, almost all of us read the Law in translation, which inevitably changes and distorts the text. Even fewer read it with a background of the checks, balances and insights of the Jewish oral and legal tradition. This has contributed to atrocities such as when Christians used Exodus 22:18 to justify the slaughter of 'witches' or other verses to justify slavery and the slave trade (e.g., Exodus 21:2-11, 20-21, Leviticus 25:44-46 and Deuteronomy 20:10-15).

What does this mean for Christians?

Christians must be wary. Many of these laws, including the food laws, were repudiated in the New Testament (Acts 10:1-33). Jesus himself criticized the scribes and their traditions. (e.g., Matthew 15: 1-9, also Isaiah 29 :13). Jeremiah's assessment of the Law must also be pondered.

Esmeralda - posted on 05/24/2010

here is another passage:

Genesis 17:9-149God said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep my covenant, you and your offspring after you throughout their generations. 10This is my covenant, which you shall keep, between me and you and your offspring after you: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11You shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you. 12Throughout your generations every male among you shall be circumcised when he is eight days old, including the slave born in your house and the one bought with your money from any foreigner who is not of your offspring. 13Both the slave born in your house and the one bought with your money must be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant. 14Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.”

Esmeralda - posted on 05/24/2010

God said to the Israelites, I have given you the land to possess it, however, the promises of God always include personal responsibilities for the receivers of those promises. Before going further into the land, the LORD said to Joshua circumcise again the children of Israel. "At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time. And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins. And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt. Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised." (Joshua 5:2-5).

The right of circumcision had been instituted by the Lord with Abraham, the father of the faithful, as a visible sign of the people's Covenant relationship with Him (Genesis 17:9-14). Circumcision of all males was required before eating the Passover (Exodus 12:48). After being circumcised, the new generation also became identified as the Lord's Covenant people and was qualified to keep the Passover. "And it came to pass, when they had done circumcising all the people, that they abode in their places in the camp, till they were whole. And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day. And the children of Israel encamped in Gilgal, and kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the month at even in the plains of Jericho." (Joshua 5:8-10). The Passover commemorated the Lord's deliverance of His people from Egypt and pointed the way to the coming messianic Deliverer. Circumcision and the Passover foreshadowed the commands of believer's baptism and the Lord's Supper for the Church.

Esmeralda - posted on 05/24/2010

lisa, can you state where in the bible that was writen? maybe in the catholic church they believe that, but not in the pentecostal church. on the catholic church they also believe that jesus is still on the cross, and the pentecostal church we believe that jesus has risen up after death. i can actually back it up with some scriptures if you want to back up what i just said.

Amanda - posted on 05/22/2010

I am not going to say whether or not circumcision is good or bad..Every parent has a different belief or opinion on this and I think its horrible how people can put mother's down for the decsions they've made with their children. Its one thing to state your opinon on a matter and quite another to bash someone just because they dont share your viewpoint.

That being said, I think that if he isn't already done it might be better to leave it. We had to get our son before he was 3 weeks or they wouldn't do it at all, and I am sure they have the timeline in place for a reason.

Minnie - posted on 05/22/2010

Um, no. Jesus was circumcised to comply with the law. He was Jewish. According to the apostle Paul, for a Christian to be circumcised after Christ's death and resurrection, was to deny that he had finished God's plan.

Christians who circumcise because they think the Bible tells them to are not familiar with the Bible.

Esmeralda - posted on 05/22/2010

for some ladies who said that kids cannot sleep through it, it is true! i live in ireland, and when they circumcised my 2 oldest sons, they put them too sleep with a general anaestetic.
and also in a few countries (mainly muslim) they do female circumcission. i have a daughter and she is NOT circumcised. my husband is nigerian. all men in my house are circumcised, but not my daughter. so it is not all african countries that do female circumcission. it is even written in the bible that males should be circumcised, as jesus was circumcised. for that reason as we are pentecostal christians we circumcise our sons. everyone should respect all oppinions. no matter if they are pro or con.

Michelle - posted on 05/19/2010

My nephew was asked Once why is ur penis different to mine, (as he has been circumcised) and my nephews reply was why is ur face different to mine, everyone is different.

Brenda - posted on 05/18/2010

@ Carolyn. I'm sorry that you had to witness your son go through horrible pain like that. Circumcision has evolved from what it used to be. It used to be just a slice, for religious practice, and then somewhere along the line the whole foreskin got removed. I agree with Shannen, do we mutilate baby girls when they are born? No. So why do you have to remove a piece of skin from the genitals of a baby boy?

@ Heather: Not once in my post did I mention mutilation or butchering. Carla simply asked for some advice, and she will make the decision in the end. You are right, people are entitled to their opinions, and this is mine. I went through a LOT of research, talked to my doctor and midwife (they both advised me against it), looked on the internet, and in the end, I feel wonderful about my decision. The stats actually show that approximately 73% of boys now are NOT being circumcised. So, it may be your decision now, but what about when your son is older and he is in the changeroom during gym class, and he is the only one circumcised? He'll wish you didn't do it. This was actually the doctor's analogy, and it took me a while to accept it, but I did. Also, there is no dark and moist area under the foreskin that could be hard to dry. IT IS STILL ATTACHED TO THE PENIS AT THIS TIME! I checked again on my 9 month old son today, just to confirm what the midwife told me, and what do you know! It's still attached. As I said in my previous post, it starts to loosen when the child gets older, and its just a matter of teaching your son how to clean it properly. Carla, good luck, and I hope you feel comfortable with what you decide.

Michelle - posted on 05/17/2010

My son got done when he was 2 weeks old, i think it is alot healthier and cleaner being done. but everyone has there own opinions and i respect those that dont believe in it and i expect the same respect back.

Heather - posted on 05/17/2010

I know i was not going to write anything else but i want to clarify that i am not on either side. i have three sons two are circumcised and my last is NOT. so to Shannan i do not think uncirc is unclean my point on the ear piercing was to say that mutilation is a cruel word to use. the baby and i mean baby not toddler is not given a choice and was comparing that to the babies not given the choice to be circ. The bath thing all i can say is that is what he told me when i asked how i care for my uncirc, son. the difference is that there is a dark moist nutricious area for water and bact to get under the foreskin and it can be hard to get dry. i am not saying 100% of the time there will be an infection just that it increases the chance if you are not careful. so he told me to take showers with him. No i do think that the foreskin is unclean the hygiene part comes into play depending on the boy/man who is taking care of it. I never quoted anything to do with STDs or UTI's. So sorry to all if anyone got offended. i just really dislike mean opinions and cruel words. To carla who started the post. Go with your gut. You are the only one that can decide and no one else

Amy - posted on 05/17/2010

I just had my 5 month old son done and we had no problems at all.
Linkon (my son) was mad while it was being done only because they were holding down his legs, and he cried when he got the freezing. After the procedure was done, you wouldn't even had known he had anything done.
I waited this long only because I was nervous about having it done, should we or shouldn't we. We decided to go for it for many reasons. Everyone will have their own reasons why to do or not to do it. If your that scared about it, then that's probably a sign that you really don't want to do it.
I guess what I'm saying is yes, I personally would do it. I wouldn't wait to long tho.
My husband works with a guy who had it done at 8 years old which to be is basically torture.

Sarah - posted on 05/17/2010

Shannan...no problem. I just didn't want you to think that I was referring to uncircumcised babies as unclean. I would never want another mother to feel bad. I actually don't think of uncircumcised babies as unclean at all...in fact MY son is NOT circumcised either! He has a medical condition called hypospadias, which didn't allow me to get it done at birth. My little one has to have surgery sometime in the next several months to correct it & they actually use the foreskin to help in the correction process.



Hearing it from your point of view, I can see where anti-circ parents might feel as though others are saying that their boys are "unclean" and "dirty." And that is hurtful too. :(

Carolyn - posted on 05/17/2010

for those who believe that the term "mutilation" is too harsh... I watched my son get circumcised and I would describe it as torture and mutilation. They strapped him down naked to a cold, metal tray, tied his arms and legs down, inserted needles into his penis, forced a metal instrument between his penis and foreskin, clamped it shut, then sliced it off with a knife. He screamed so loud and for so long that he lost his voice.

Shannen - posted on 05/17/2010

Sarah, I wasn't aiming that at just the 3 i named, Sorry if it came accross like that. I did say " All those women out there who..." Again Sorry, But it's really annoying the heck out of me that alot of women are so upset by people using the words "mutilation & Butchey" But are free to throw around that Hygene is a matter when its not done. And when they say that they got it done for hygene reasons it seems as if they are saying that there children are going to be more hygenic then children who have not had it done.



I do agree with you as i don't care if people do have it done thats their choice and for women who choose not to have it done thats also their choice. Neither side should be raming it down each others throats and i am sorry if you feel like i was doing that.

Sarah - posted on 05/17/2010

Shannen, if you go back and read my post, I NEVER said anything about an uncircumcised penis being less hygenic. In fact, from what I've heard, it sounds like an outdated argument. All I said is that my circumcised husband doesn't sit around all day and whine about his "mutilated" penis. I doubt it even crosses his mind.



Like I said before, if you choose NOT to have your son circumcised, that's cool too. I consider myself to be a very open-minded person. And I'm sure you are a very clean person like you stated and I know you will teach your son to be the same way. It's just the words "mutilation" and "butchering" really get under my skin.

Shannen - posted on 05/17/2010

Heather- I have NEVER and will never clean my bath after washing my son everytime! And yes that is utter bull to think you have to to make sure your child gets no infections from being uncircumsised. My daughters ears are peirced but she asked for it. So i Did not "mutilate" my child i let her decide for herself. I am not saying that you are not educated but that whole bath thing is a load of BS. But if you believe it then why don't you do the same thing for circumsised children if its all to do with hygene, shouldnt we teach them all the same way?



Heather, Sarah & Melany, I have said this before but you feel that the people who are saying it is mutilation are saying you did the wrong thing and making you feel bad. Well what about all those women out there who keep saying it is more hygenic? How do you think that comment makes us mothers who didn't get it done feel? Cause i sure as hell know i am a clean person and so is my hubby! And thats where i start to get annoyed.



Lets get one thing straight The only reason for hgiher risk STD And infection comes from NOT being clean! And that is not the penis thats the man who should be keeping it cleans fault.

The skin is there for a reason, to protect the penis and as far as i am concerned it should be left there. ( No i don't consider it "mutilation" and i have never said as such either)



Do we tamper with a girls genitals so that they don't get STD's Or UTI's? No we don't we teach them about hygene even though they still get just as many if not more STD's and UTI's!

Melany - posted on 05/17/2010

@ Sarah- I agree with you.





My son is circumcised due to the fact of belief. I know very few men that arent circumcised and it hurts them to have sex- they want to-but cant because of how bad it hurts them. If you decide to circ you are doing something that is easier for the child to take care of. If you dont you run a much higher risk of infection, std, ect.



I know a mom with 2 boys a year apart; the older one is having trouble pullin it back to wash, he used to have bad diaper rash on the opening-nothing helped- after he went poop he would scream when his mom went to clean. The other one however, IS, they are having no problem with him. The dr said for the older one that if this goes on then doing the circ would have to be done with as much problem as they have now.

Sarah - posted on 05/17/2010

Okay, I can 100% guarantee that my CIRCUMCISED husband is NOT moping around right now saying "Oh woe is me!! I wish my parent's had NEVER cut off my foreskin waahh waahh waahh!!" I have been with my husband for 8 1/2 years & I have never once heard him mention anything about his circumcised penis and how he wishes he had never been "mutilated" and "butchered." He has more important things to worry about in life than whether or not his foreskin was cut off.

I DO NOT think circumcision is genital mutilation as some of you have so quickly pointed out. I don't care what you do to your son's penis...if you want to keep it intact, then more power to you. That's your decision. But, when people start ranting and raving about how we are mutilating our sons by getting their foreskin taken off, then that's when I start getting annoyed.

Heather - posted on 05/17/2010

Brenda and Shannen- Yes I know that Dr.s say it is cosmetic. My main point is that this is a person by person choice and I think telling women that it is mutilation or butchering is wrong! Point taken on the tatoo part but do babies get to choose to have their ears pierced or is that the mothers decision? I would say mother. So if I take what you are saying correctly that would be considered mutilation. I would never tell my sister that she mutilated her daughter by peircing her ears at 2 months. That would be mean and hurtful.

As for the bathing point I just was at the urologist two weeks ago and he did say that you had to bleach the bathtub after use and prior if you want them to have a bath or they can get an infection but that I did not have to worry about it at pools since there is chlorine. So to tell me that this is not right is not nice. I am a educated person who does not make things up. That was hurtful. I think the main point to this discussion is everyone has their own opinions and should not be made to feel bad about what they choose to do. (I will not be defending myself further since that would be pointless and ridiculous)

Terri - posted on 05/17/2010

@ Brenda Pearson. Yes Brenda my son slept through it I was there! And if you read the post correctly, he was NOT cut at all but a ring was placed on it!

@Heather, I agree with you. :)

In the long term, it has to be the parents decision and the baby isnt gonna care either way, because he wont know any different!!!

Brenda - posted on 05/17/2010

This subject upsets me so much! There is NO medical reason to circumcise your son! I asked the same question when we had our son (9 months ago), and even the doctors said no! There is no risk of disease or infection, as the fore skin is attached to the penis. As the child grows, it gradually becomes looser. All you need to do is teach him how to pull it back and clean it properly. Please, I find it hard to believe what that one woman said, that the babies just lie there while it's being done, and some even sleep through it?!?! Are you kidding me? It is a VERY sensitive part of the body, and there are hundreds of nerve endings there. Please don't think that this doesn't hurt. That would be ridiulous and poor information. If it's not broke....don't fix it!! Good luck with your decision...

Shannen - posted on 05/16/2010

Heather how do you bath a baby/toddler or even in general a child? How can bathing them different ways cause infection. Get a grip that is the biggest load or C**P i have heard.

My son is 2 and has had NO problems and my hubby is 29 And also had NO problems Std's OR UTI's.

With western culture tattoos and peircings are by choice. Do those women who choose to get their child done give them a choice?

Heather - posted on 05/16/2010

To Tracey's husband...I think telling people it is genital mutilation is wrong. Everyone is allowed their own opinions. If that is how you feel that is fine but you should word it in a different way. Do you think that people who tatoo and or pierce their bodies is mutilation? I would think you would feel this way since people are not born with tatoos or piercing . But for some reason in our society that is not mutulation but having a little piece of skin removed is. If you don't think that piercing/tatoos are not mutilation then you should not have such strong words to say about people who want to circumcise. I have know of a few who have gotten infections and have had to have it done when a lot older. What is more tramatic? Under a year old or 13! I was even told by my sons urologist that you have to be careful and not bathe them this way or that or it will get an infection. To me that means there is a health reason for it. You can have your opinion you should just phrase it in a way that is not mean or offenesive to others!!!!!!!!!!!

Tracey - posted on 05/16/2010

It is genital mutilation... no matter how one tries to justify it. Some cultures try to justify female genital mutilation as well. Just do your research and if you do decide to mutilate your son, except that is what you are doing to him. Genital mutilation was pushed by religiously biased doctors in the first part of the 20th century with purpose to inhibit masterbation. Of course, it did not work...just caused funtional problems( let us just say uncirc. men do not need hand lotion ). If you teach them to wash their penis as with any body parts, they will have to problems. Concerning HIV... Risky unprotective sexual behavior is the paramount concern with contracting HIV and any other STD, not whether one is circumised or not. Most of those studies have been proven flawed.



If it ain't broke--don't fix it!



-Tracey's Husband

Terri - posted on 05/16/2010

Both my sons were done within a week of being born. But they dont cut here anymore. They use a little plastic ring which falls off with the skin in about 6 to 10 days.

My second son didnt even wake through the procedure, so there was no "butchering" involved!

Two of my friends had their boys done when they were older at 2 years (they couldnt get it done earlier due to other reasons) and they still had relatively little pain and healing time was fast. Personally I would get it done as young as possible, but 7 months is still relatively young.

And the reason we had it done, was because we wanted them to look like their daddy, hygiene and personally I dont find uncircumcised ones attractive. We got flack from my hubby's side of the family and the same stupid comparison of "female circs" but we just laughed them off and said it was our decision.

Amber - posted on 05/15/2010

We had our son circumcised mainly due to the fact that Daddy was and we didn't want him seeing Daddy (in the shower for instance) and wondering why he was different. Also, due to the hygiene issue when he gets older and mommy and daddy cannot help him we did it. We did it when he was 1 week old. If I were having another boy I would do it again. I know of a friend's son who did not have the procedure done and he has had more infections (and they are good about cleaning him). BUT this is your decision... DO NOT DO IT BECAUSE SOMEONE TELLS YOU TO!

Kandy - posted on 05/15/2010

Yes I would. When he get older, I feel it would be easy to keep clean. When the Dr. circumcise, they put a numming cream on so it don't heart the baby.

Eve - posted on 05/15/2010

My husband insisted on it. however there was no cutting nor traumatizing pain. they used a plastic thing n put it over tip of penis. He didnt even know it was there. 5-8 weeks later it fell off with the skin kind of like a dogs tail. however he was newborn at this time. but if you dont see the need in it n you dont have a significant other insisting on it dont stress it. /if he doesnt like it when hes older he can have it removed

Shannen - posted on 05/15/2010

Erin- You didn't sound forcful. Its not only you i am aiming that at. Are we in a 3rd world country? No i don't think we are, so therefore the whole STD thing is just Not valid. We are taught how to have safe sex and what thats all about while we are still at highschool. We are also taught all about hygene as we grow up, Its never ending. And thats why it isn't the penis that is unhygenic its the man who has to keep it clean.

So thats why it is purely up to the individual these days as to what they want.

And i don't think COM's is a good place to try and look for this information as people just arent willing to agree to disagree. It is something that any mother who is looking into it should discuss with their other half and Dr and do their own research. Not on here!

Erin - posted on 05/15/2010

sorry if my post sounded forcful, it wasnt meant to at all, but loads of studies have done that have proven a link between uncircumcised males to an increased number of UTIs,and of course there are condoms out there to prevent the risk of catching/ spreading STDs, but circumsion is used in other third world countries to help combat their ever growing STD infection rate. i wanst trying to be forcful with my opinion, just express the lighter side of the argument!

Shannen - posted on 05/15/2010

Ok so i don't really care if its done or not. In my family it is done but on my hubby's side it isn't.

BUT i have had it with the whole more hygenic thing. Its friggin natural for crying out loud. so how can it be seen as more hygenic or not its not the uncircumsised penis that hygenic or not it's the man who has to care for it!

Erin- You also need to stop telling people that it is more hygenic just as much as those mothers need to stop telling people its mutilation.

Urinary tract infections come from up higher they don't start cause your circumsised or not. More women then men get UTI's and we don't make a big deal out of that. So Stop using useless information.

And the whole thing of STD's well safe sex can prevent most of that also.

It is a personal decision and thats all that should be said.

Erin - posted on 05/15/2010

hey all,

alot of people here sound totally against circumcision, and ill probably cop alot of slack for saying this, but we got our lil man done at 2 weeks of age. Circumcised penis' are alot more hygienic helps to reduce the risk of urinary track infections and it can decrease the risk of catching some STDs, it is a personal choice and some people are very quick to judge when it come to this subject and force their opinions on others. As i said we got our son doen at 2 weeks of age (they can do it at any age, its just the cost goes up a tad as they get older as they use different anesthetics.) He has no complications and he didnt even cry as the anesthetic they use works brilliantly. I recommend not "googling" to look at vidoes of the procedure, by all means read as much as you want to understand how they do it, but the videos i found all tended to be published by people who where "anti-circumcision" and were of babies have ing the procedure WITH NO ANESTHETIC. So cannot be relied upon when trying to understand how your baby will cope. There quite a few other lil bubs having it done when we went, they were all in and out in less then 5 mins and not a peep out of any of them. It really is a personal opinion, and if i have another son, i will get him done too, i think some of you need to take step back and realise that some of your statements (mutilation and disgusting just mentaion a few) here are quite strong, and not everyone feels this way, and those looking for information on this subject need both sides of the story, instead of just being told they will be mutilating their baby if they get it done.

Eve - posted on 05/15/2010

My husband insisted on it. however there was no cutting nor traumatizing pain. they used a plastic thing n put it over tip of penis. He didnt even know it was there. 5-8 weeks later it fell off with the skin kind of like a dogs tail. however he was newborn at this time. but if you dont see the need in it n you dont have a significant other insisting on it dont stress it. /if he doesnt like it when hes older he can have it removed

Nichole - posted on 05/15/2010

Natanya very well put!

Nichole - posted on 05/15/2010

I am saying it is personal choice and NOBODY should be talked down to about it. Some people are able to be uncircumcised and are able to pull the forskin back to clean but others are medically not able to do so! I think it is a personal choice and definately depends on the child!

Natanya - posted on 05/14/2010

carla your not alone. My husband also wants the procedure done but I keep on changing the topic. I believe if my son wants it he will go to the doctor when he's older. he can decide for hi,m self. The only time when I will agree is if the doctor tells me its a risk for him then only i will do it.
Good luck.

Faith - posted on 05/14/2010

my son was circumcised at birth (couple days old) now a days they use anesthetics. i had to sign a release for the dr to do the anesthetics plus the circ...im glad i did it, and any future sons i should have, i will do the same.
as far as women circs, they are very barbaric...they cut the whole clitoris off...which then leads to unpleasurable sex...it can also lead to death...look it up on google. pictures are bloody...and its an africa thing...not so much a us thing, though they are trying to make it that way!

Vicki - posted on 05/14/2010

No, I'm not saying that. I'm not saying anyone's a bad mother or made a bad decision.Nor am I saying your hubby is a dirty person. I'm bringing up the reasons why I decided to do it.

Shannen - posted on 05/14/2010

Alot of the women who have had it done are going on about how they are made to feel like bad mothers for the words "Butchered" and "mutilated" being used.

What about us mothers who havent had it done you have all said that it is more hygenic so are you calling me a bad mother for choosing not to have it done and therefore saying that i am not teaching my son properly or that my hubby is a dirty person for not having had it done?

Vicki - posted on 05/14/2010

That's interesting about the glans, Lisa. I'm perfectly happy with my circumcized husband, and my uncircumcized exes kept giving me bacterial infections (no matter HOW much we followed doctor's advice, washed together beforehand, treated them, etc.) We had to use condoms. I know that I'm very sensitive though. Sorry if that's TMI. Not all women are like me, of course. My doc told me I'm just vulnerable.

It's not like I gleefully handed over my baby boy to be cut. It was actually really hard to do and went against my gut. (What new mom has a gut instinct to send their newborn baby for surgery? Noone!!) But I did it for him and I don't regret it.

I think this has become a rather heated conversation because we've all made our decisions already... except the person who posted the question! I hope she's reading, because she's the only person who'll benefit from any of this.

Minnie - posted on 05/14/2010

Vicki, the foreskin most definitely IS there for a reason. It contains a muscle layer, nerves, and a mucosal layer. It keeps the glans moist and soft, it provides sensation, it keeps the glans clean and it provides natural lubrication. An intact (not un-circumcized, as if circumcision is the norm) male does not need to make large movements during intercourse and does not draw out necessary moisture from the woman. More contact is kept between the two bodies and the responsibility of lubrication is not placed solely upon the woman.



There are different degrees of female circumcision. Yes, some remove all possibility of sexual pleasure on the part of the woman. Other forms remove the prepuce, just like in male circumcision. But this isn't the point. The point is that an unconsenting human being is held down, against his or her will, and has a functioning, purposeful body part removed.

Asma - posted on 05/14/2010

I got my son's circumsision done at 4 months. Its good to get it done as soon as possible so he doesnt remember it. even at 4 months my son recognised the docters when I took him back for check up afterwards.



i got it done for religious reasons but im also aware that there is benefit in doing this from a medical perspective.

Nichole - posted on 05/13/2010

well Tamara I am not sure that anyone is offended by you voicing your opinion, only by how you are going about it! I am the mother of 2 circumcized children! With the first one I felt it was unneccessary until he wa 4 years old and had to have multiple doctors visits because he was not a well child and that promoted infection. As for cleaning I am a very clean person but my boy is just that, A BOY! He likes to run around and get dirty and I will not keep him in a bubble! At 4 he had to undergo a major surgery! He was drugged and put to sleep! He also had to experience thoroughly and REMEMBER the pain! I remember having to detach the gauze from his penis after it had stuck post surgery! I cried histerically because I felt it was my fault for not having it done in the first place!!!! Maybe you should learn that your opinion is not always right for everyone! As human beings and children of GOD we should be sensitive to others needs and experiences and remember that we are not the only ones who matter!!!!

Nichole - posted on 05/13/2010

I definately would but that is because I experienced waiting with my oldest son and he suffered! At 4 years old it became medically neccessary for him to have it done and it was super painful for him and he stills remembers it. It took about a month and a half to fully heal because at that age he was so active. On my baby it was an easy procedure and it was healed within the week!