Circumcision

I think you should do some research on the net. I have 3 boys all of which were cicumcized when they were born in the hospital. I think for health when they get older it is best to have them cirumcized when they are babies. My sons don't remember it. The main reason for the proceedure is to prevent infection from neumerous bacteria that can get into the foreskin. I have babysat 2 boys who were not circumcized and cleaning the foreskin was such a task with diaper changes. I would also talk more in depth with your doctor about the proceedure and ask weather or not he uses a ring or gauze for the healing process. I have seen with friends and family who their doctor used the gauze and the boys ended up with it infected. My doctor used the ring which worked alot better, and easier to keep clean. To me the gauze was like having a baby with an open wound and having to keep gauze clean is a pain as well. With the ring you only use the gauze for a couple diaper changes and then its better for them. Once the proceedure is done they will give the baby motrin for the pain. You can also request for you doctor to give your son meds for the proceedure as well. Congrats on your new baby boy!!!!!

ok... first rule: the internet is full of stupid things and crap... second rule: never trust 100% in internet advises... third rule: talk to a doctor... i don't know what kind of doctor, but try... I don't think circumcision should be a hurting experience and not even that is an indispensable thing... i don't know why it's done for, and also, I don't know if it's a good thing... may be you will remember it... but that's not the point... i mean it's ok to remember... cos it's not a mutilation or something like that... I think is considered just a routine operation:) but don't trust me... talk to a doctor:)

My son was circumcised in the hospital the day after his birth. I was a little squeamish about it (this being my only boy), and also I didn't want him to have to experience pain at such a young age. They gave him Tylenol (that's not much, I know). But looking back now, I'm glad it was done. It's easier to keep his clean and as it turns out, there really is a link (scoffers proved wrong again!) between uncircumcised men and an increased risk of STDs.

I find circumcision necessary, only because I feel it's easier to take care of. (I personally prefer circumcission as well). When my son was born he was a preemie, so he could not get circumcised right away. He was actually 3 months old when he was circumcised, and I was able to watch the procedure. Let me tell you, it was VERY WEIRD seeing how they did it. My son was in minor pain, and they did 'freeze numb' it before they cut it. It was a very fast procedure and I think well worth it. You don't have to have it done, but I think the benefits outweigh the pain that is felt during the circumcision.

I remember when i was 9-10 yrs of age when i have my circumcision, i remember during that time i cried due to the pain but then afterwards, i realize the pain is worth to experience for, it boast my confidence and my friends wont tease me anymore......circumcision is part of the manhood process that all man should undergo.....

My mother didn't circumsize my brother when he was younger because she just couldn't do it. She said she saw the thing that they put him in to do it and there was no way. Well he is 18 now and last year he had to get circumsized becausae he kept getting yeast infections. He hurt so much and they even had him on codine for the pain. He has said over and over again thet he will insist his sons are circumsized. My boyfriend also made a good point, in the locker room, what if the other boys noticed.

Did you watch the youtube video, that is barbaric. My son was circumsized, he wouldn't have been if I had seen that video. My son had it done to his first 2 sons. The docs messed up, my sons 3rd son is not circumsized. My husband was cicumsized when he was about 9 yrs. old. He was awake and they did not give him anything for pain. On top of that the doc messed up and cut the vein, he had a big scar. Babies do feel pain, if they are going to be circumsized they should be given something for pain.

Thats totally wrong of your husband to decide for both of you without even talking about it...If it pains you see it done then it will haunt you...It is not a necessity to have it done and the figures show that it is half done and half not..I have a son and it never even was an issue with both of us, there is no need to interfer with nature..If you teach him to clean it properly there is no need for concern. I really hope that you both can talk it over and make a uniform decision..I know that i would never willingly put my son through unneccessary pain on purpose...But thats just me..

The British Medical Authority and most if not all Medical Authorities around the world do not recommend circumcision except in exceptional circumstances. There is some evidence that circumcision leads to trauma in some individuals All surgical procedures are harmful. Such harm is justified if and only if the benefits outweigh the harm. To inflict harm on a child where their is no benefit, as is the case with circumcision, and where the child cannot give informed consent is abuse. Therefore, circumcision is child abuse. all the best urban

There was a recent discussion about this under the parenting interest called Boy O Boy...I don't remember the rest of the title. It was showing up under the list of discussions below this one. You should check it out if you haven't already. It had some very good opinions. To answer you questions...Do they need to have it done?-No, they don't NEED to. Why don't they give them something for the pain?- Some do, some don't because they think it's too risky, others don't because they actually still believe that babies don't perceive pain. The Bible question is tricky. #1-If you aren't particularly religious then my opinion is that it doesn't apply to you. #2- It was written a long time ago, many of the practices they did then aren't done now. #3- I think the circumsision rule applied in and after the New Testament too for Christians. I heard the explanation once but don't remember it anymore. Yes, you will remember it. My first son was done and I didn't question it although I did feel bad that he had to go through that. My second son I questioned it a little bit but still went through with it. My third son I questioned it a LOT. His dad still insisted since all the other boys had been done and I felt really bad about it. My fourth son wasn't. I had planned on insisting that he not be circumsized but it ended up being out of my hands anyway. He has a minor defect called hypospadias and so the foreskin has to be saved for reconstructive surgery on his urethra should we chose to have that done. If he has the surgery he will appear to be circumsized though. Since your son isn't born yet and you're already uncomfortable about circumcision I would strong recommend you try to convince your husband that it is unnecessary (and painful). I wish I could go back and not have had it done to my older three boys and if it wasn't for a medical reason I wouldn't have my youngest's operated on either.

It's definitely not necessary & someone above me mentioned something about it being more hygienic, well that's not true either. The foreskin doesn't really move much until the child is older, so nothing can get under there to make it dirty, then when the skin does move some, the child will be old enough to clean it for himself. They have done studies that prove there's no benefit to having a baby circumcised. A person above me also mentioned something about them looking better when they have no foreskin but looks is 1 thing, apparently it feels better for the male to keep the skin! It's definitely a personal decision but i don't think i would ever do it to my child because it's not necessary & it's just unecessary pain. I'm sure the bible does say something but it really doesn't apply to you unless you're jewish anyway - i don't know too many people that bother with circumcizing these days, it's more of an old fashioned thing i think. Good luck with your decision.

What nonsense! Who do you know who can improve on God's creations? What Priest or Doctor has that capability? Its mutilation, pure and simple! I am natural, and so are my 4 boys. None of us have ever had the slightest problem with our uncut forskins. Anyone who advises Circumcision is a sicko! Anyone who would mutilate their young son is Sadistic. How many women would get the same operation performed on their clitorus? Whats good for the Men is Good for the Women!

Just one other point... When the men in our generation were children, it was common for circumcision to be done, they all looked pretty much the same in the locker room at school. These days, it's not so common, most boys will go through school with their foreskin in tact. Think of how your son will feel if he notices he looks so much different, or, if the class bully decides it's a teasing point. A sad, but realistic, fact of life. Kids pick up on these things, I've seen it happen!

Well, maybe if there is confusion within the family, then it is best that the boy be allowed to decide when he's older. Here in my country, most of the boys are circumcised and they did decide for themselves when they want to. Usually at the age of 10 or 11. I have read some articles showing whether or not it is necessary. But it is stated there that not all need to but there are some who need to. So, maybe it's good to consult your local doctors too. But for me, based on the article, babies don't really need to be circumcised because the foreskin is only retractable and more susceptible to infection when he's older. Babies foreskin is still attached so dirt could not really access it yet. As quoted in the article: The normal prepuce gradually becomes detached from the glans, and thus retractable, as keratinization of the epithelial layers occurs, aided by smegma, which helps to dissect the space between the glans and the foreskin, preventing re-adherence.2 Gairdner1 and Øster7 found that the prepuce is retractable in only 4% of newborn males, 20% at age 6 months, 50% at 3 years and 99% at 17 years of age. Therefore a certain proportion of any age group have a non-retractable foreskin, especially before 2 years of age.8 Little is known or written about the etiology of true phimosis, despite the supposed frequency of phimosis varying from 4 to 10%.9 reference: http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/dewan/