[donna v]

we adopted a now three year old boy and his bmom signed up to have him circumsized, but never followed through. i feel so torn as to do it or not. i have heard good and bad, but it makes me feel no better about putting him through this pain. everytime i think about it, it makes me angry with her because it would have been so simple then, but really seems like a big deal now. i guess at this age, they will stitch him, correct? how long will it take to heal? i have two girls and have no idea what to expect.
donna

[FatBirdy]

With the exception of medical or religious reasons....I would NOT do it. The foreskin of an infant male is about the size of a thumbnail; yet, this highly sensitive skin grows to about the size of half hand in an adult male. One really needs to ask why on earth one would take this away from any baby/child/man? It serves no purpose and more and more people are recognizing this and circumcison rates are drastically decreasing. If I have my stats correct, the United States has the highest circumcison rate in the Western World......please help lower these stats and save your son from an unecessary procedure that, in my opinion, mutilates an 'important' part of his body.

[riley6]

As a nurse I would STRONGLY discourage you from having it done. I couldn't even imagine putting my adopted sons through that. For what purpose? I had my bio sons circed so they'd "look like their dad" and not feel different. I never even thought that maybe they'd NEVER even see their dad! Sometimes we do some stupid, barbaric things! (I'm not criticising anyone who does this for religious purposes!) I just wish I knew then what I know now.

There is no medical reason TO circ! It's taking away part of the organ that helps produce pleasure for the man. There are more studies that show that the original study done that showed circed men got less cancer is FALSE. Taught to properly clean themselves, there is no higher risk of infection. Most pediatricians now recommend NOT circing. They don't get paid for it btw, the OB/GYN's do, and they are the one's who WILL recommend it.

[hpoefull2003]

I would not circ. him unless there is a medical reason. I feel that it is a personal decision at birth to have it done or not. But from what I understand it is a very painfull procedure the older they get and he is at an age where he could possibly remember it.
By the way we have 3 boys and they are all done two of them are 23 and one is 11 months, my little guy was done at 1 month before he left the nicu he was a 32 weeker, and I felt really bad doing it then if I knew what he had to go through I would not have done it. He actually vomited from the procedure or the crying it caused.

[mlb]

My husband and I adopted our son when he was 13 months old. I felt strongly about having him circumcised so he would look like his father. We had to wait until he was 2, but did have the surgery done.
This is really the only decision regarding my son that I truly regret. He was in pain for a week (he was constantly shielding himself to prevent any pain) and was very uncomfortable for an additional 3 weeks. To see him lying in the recovery room crying makes me tear up now. I wish we had decided differently, and if we adopt another boy, we will not be having it done.

[Colorbind love]

At his age, you are talking about having to actually send him to surgery and put him under general anesthesia. Why on earth would you take the risk of anesthesia and the pain for something comsmetic? Circumcision is NOT a simple procedure on a 3 year old. Its done in-office or in-nursery for newborns and very young infants. Its not at age 3. There is no way I would subject a newly adopted 3 year old child to such pain. I think you may find the betrayal of his trust absolutely not worth the effort to make him look what you consider 'normal'.

Besides, in the newest generation of baby boys in this country, only about half are circumcized. Its not nearly as common anymore.

So no, I wouldn't have him circumcised. But then, I'm still trying to figure out why my oldest was circumcised in Africa, since I'm pretty sure his first family wasn't Muslem. My bio son is intact and I have absolutely no regrets. No, he doesn't look like Daddy, but he's not a mini-me in other ways either, so it hardly matters that much.

[mj77]

We had our son circumsised at 18mo. old (adopted at 13mo.). Though I would have had him circumsized as a newborn, I would not have had this done at such a late age had it not been nessesary. It had been recomended for a long time but the foster family didn't have it done. He was having infections that we couldn't treat because of his extremely tight foreskin. The state health insurance even covered it which they don't cover circumsisions unless medically nessesary. He had to be put under for the surgery and it was very difficult for me to hand him over for that. When I finally saw him, his poor penis was so red and swollen and had stitches. Poor guy. But he did recover well. Was slow the first day, got energy the second and by the third day wanted to play normal. I think I took the surgery harder than he did. I know every child is differnt though.

When my ex-uncle went into the military, he wasn't circumsized. They required him to get it done before he went off to war because of the lack of sanitation and risk of infection. Does anyone know if the military would still require this?

[FatBirdy]

I don't know for sure - but I would be totally stunned if the military still required circumcision.

"Unsanitary" foreskin is a thing of the past. With proper and regular, not to mention normal, hygine - foreskin does just fine. Our ears get dirty too but no one cuts those off...soap and a wash cloth always does the trick!

With the exception of medical and religious reasons....this practice is, in my opinion, barbaric.

Just an intersting bit of info: I have read some articles lately that even some Jews are shying away from this practice. A few boys that I know of have had a prick to draw a bit of blood instead of the full circumcision to fulfill their covenant with G-d.

[lucyjoy]

No, the military does not still require this. Two of my sons were circumcized in foster care. One was 2.5 and one was 7. The younger has nomemory of it, the older has a traumatic memory of it. My youngest was circumcized at 3.5 due to medical reasons. He didn't seem too affected by it.

[camilleh]

My husband and I have talked and talked about this and although I'm still not sure what I'll do I thought I would share his perspective.

He said the guys who were not circumcised were put through hell in the locker room at school. He is adamant we can't put any sons we may have through that. I know the rates are dropping of people who do so this treatment may change some day or be changing now, but he is terrified about the horrible harrasment that he witnessed. It won't tell me in detail what happened to these kids so I know it was awful.

Anyway, those are his reasons for having it done.

Good Luck to all! Even with that info I struggle with the idea.

[FatBirdy]

The U.S. is the only country in the world that routinely circumcises most of its male infants for non-religious reasons. Over 80% of the world's males are intact (Wallerstein, E., “Circumcision: The Uniquely American Medial Enigma,” Urologica Clinics of North America 12 (February 1985): 123-32.)

In 1999, 65.3 percent of all male newborns born in [US] hospitals were circumcised. While the overall percentages of circumcised infants have remained relatively unchanged throughout the past two decades, ranging from a low of 60.7 percent in 1988 to 67.8 percent in 1995, different patterns emerge when these estimates are further examined by race and geographic region.
Over the past 20 years, proportionately more babies in the Midwest received circumcisions than did newborns in any other region - However, the most notable change occurred in the West where newborn circumcisions dropped from 62 percent in 1980 to 37 percent in 1999. (National Center for Health Statistics - US Department of Health and Human Services).

[hpoefull2003]

Donna, What if any is the reason you are considering circumcising your son?

[Anigel]

I understand that circ. is very much an opinion based topic. But please allow me to share my experience.

My ex, whom I was with for 3 years had not been circumcised. Was this a problem for me? NO, but what I do remember is the scar tissue where the foreskin would pull. This was a 24 year old man, and he would sit on an almost daily basis pulling off the scar tissue that built around the foreskin. I repeat he had not been circumcised, his parents decided not to. No attempts where ever made to circumcise him.

Yet there was nasty scar tissue along the head where the foreskin attaches. This may not have been normal, but I always felt so bad for him. I know it caused him pain.

[donna v]

thanks for all the post on the subject. i really don't feel one way or another about it for any particular reason. i grew up in a time when boys were "supposed to be circumsized". my brothers and cousins, etc. were and i just thought they had to be. from everything i have seen this morning, things sure have changed and i will be the first to admit, I AM SO RELEIVED!! i had been so torn over the whole thing mostly because i kept hearing about the risk of infection and "looking funny", etc. i am so glad to know it just isn't done to be done anymore. and no, my reason wasn't for cosmetic purposes - i hope he doesn't just go around showing it off anyway LOL!! thanks for all the feed back-please keep it coming because i am looking at it from both sides.
thanks
donna

[riley6]

Anigel, I'd bet you anything that the scar tissue was caused by forcing the foreskin back. People think that that's the way to keep an uncirced boy clean, but there is good bacteria in there that takes care of the bad bacteria. You don't have to scrub it clean!

Here's a website that describes how to clean an uncirced boy.

Hope this helps:

http://www.medem.com/medlb/article_d...&sub_ca t=108