• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Infant circumcision

This should be pretty straightforward for skeptics: If the current body of scientific knowledge points toward circumcision being strongly beneficial, then maybe it should be routinely done at birth. If not, then it shouldn’t.

The current body of scientific knowledge suggests there is little to no benefit.

So, parents who have their children circumcised are either doing it for reasons other than health benefits, or they’re kidding themselves.
 
Femke said:
Thank you O. It suddenly dawned on me that both major religions (islam, judaism) that mutilate male genitalia, originated in a desert region. Maybe it is evolution in action: a culture that practises a tradition that causes less water to be "wasted" on hygiene, might have an advantage on others.

ETA: so we should regard c'sion as a vestigial tradition. It should gradually get weeded out.
Click to expand...

I've heard that irritation from sand getting under the foreskin has a lot to do with it. Dunno if that's true, but also I've also read (I think) that Brit soldiers serving a long time in the Middle East were often left wishing they were circ'd.
 
Cainkane1 said:
Infants sshouldn't be circumcised because they deserve to grow up and be able to choose whether they want to be circumcised or not.
Click to expand...



I begin to shudder and shake at the thought of entering the circumcision debate again. It was full-on horrible the first time. However, if there is one thing that scientific study has shown, it's that adult circumcision carries far greater risks of all sorts than infant circumcision. If one were to consider circumcision a choice, parents choosing to circumcise a newborn are exposing the baby to far lower risks than he would face if he chose circumcision two decades later as an adult.
 
TheDaver said:
This should be pretty straightforward for skeptics: If the current body of scientific knowledge points toward circumcision being strongly beneficial, then maybe it should be routinely done at birth. If not, then it shouldn’t.

The current body of scientific knowledge suggests there is little to no benefit.

So, parents who have their children circumcised are either doing it for reasons other than health benefits, or they’re kidding themselves.
Click to expand...

Why then should it be left to the parents to decide? If there is little to no benefit (which seems to be true), and there are definitely risks, then why do doctors perform routine circumcision on healthy newborns? Why do doctors still advise people to do it? I have a hard time faulting parents who have only heard the "pro" side of circumcision from their doctor and don't know the "con" side.

Most people do believe their doctor knows what he's talking about. The medical community needs to stopp promoting it, and needs to let inquiring parents know that it is no longer recommended. Even if the parents are insistent, it should be considered unethical for a doctor to perform an unnecessary cosmetic procedure on an infant.

Loss Leader said:
If one were to consider circumcision a choice, parents choosing to circumcise a newborn are exposing the baby to far lower risks than he would face if he chose circumcision two decades later as an adult.
Click to expand...

Is this a frequent problem in countries that do not practice routine circumcision?
 
Last edited:
iknownothing said:
Most people do believe their doctor knows what he's talking about. The medical community needs to stopp promoting it, and needs to let inquiring parents know that it is no longer recommended. Even if the parents are insistent, it should be considered unethical for a doctor to perform an unnecessary cosmetic procedure on an infant.
Click to expand...

I can't speak to individual circumstances parents may encounter, but this appears to be the latest stance of the American Academy of Pediatrics:

AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS
Task Force on Circumcision
Circumcision Policy Statement

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficent to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In the case of circumcision, in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. It is legitimate for parents to take into account cultural, religious, and ethnic traditions, in addition to the medical factors, when making this decision. Analgesia is safe and effective in reducing the procedural pain associated with circumcision; therefore if a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided. If circumcision is performed in the newborn period, it should only be done on infants who are stable and healthy.
Click to expand...

http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aap1999/
 
JLord said:
What are your thoughts on cirumcision of infants?

Most people seem to agree that femaly circumcision/gential mutilation is a bad practice, but many are still fine with male circumcision of infants. I suppose it might not be as horrific with males, but the reasons for it are more or less the same.
Click to expand...

Wow... you gals let that slide?
 
Loss Leader said:
I begin to shudder and shake at the thought of entering the circumcision debate again.

<snip>
Click to expand...

Then don't. I'm not going to waste any time on it again. All I say is that circumcision is an excellent example of why Sam Harris is talking crap.
 
Perhaps my situation was unique. However, both doctors that delivered my sons seemed quite pleased with my decision, which was that there was no other option, they would not be circumcised.

When I was about 10 or 12 years old I attended the Jewish ceremony for my cousin's circumcision. I believe he was 3 days old. Horrible. Simply horrible. I just could not grasp the joyous celebration the followed while the baby continued to scream.

Julia
 
When Ivor and I agree to sit a circumcision thread out, you can just unsubscribe and trust you're not missing anything. Though I do have to reply to this:


wasapi said:
When I was about 10 or 12 years old I attended the Jewish ceremony for my cousin's circumcision. I believe he was 3 days old. Horrible. Simply horrible. I just could not grasp the joyous celebration the followed while the baby continued to scream.
Click to expand...


I've attended many circumcisions, including the two for my two sons. A Bris takes place at 8 days of age (with very minor exceptions that would never push it forward, only back). At every Bris I've been to, the majority of the crying takes place before the circumcision, when the baby is uncovered. He usually doesn't like that. At every Bris I've been to, the actual circumcision is accompanied by crying that lasts for less than one minute.

My oldest son cried for less than ten seconds and was sound asleep within five minutes. My younger (who to this day does not sleep), was nursing within the same amount of time.

And please don't argue that either child was drunk. First of all, doing so would implicitly accept that the baby does not continue to scream. Second of all, a drop of wine on a napkin touched to a baby's tongue is not enough to induce any level of intoxication.

The "joy" of the celebration was probably for the health of the new baby and mother. In case you hadn't noticed, Jews aren't the largest segment of the population. So, our excitement is understandable when we get a new guy in.

You say your cousin's circumcision was horrible. Does he remember it that way?
 
Please tell me you're not about to start an argument along the lines of "if he doesn't remember being hurt, what harm was done?"
 
Loss Leader said:
When Ivor and I agree to sit a circumcision thread out, you can just unsubscribe and trust you're not missing anything. Though I do have to reply to this:





I've attended many circumcisions, including the two for my two sons. A Bris takes place at 8 days of age (with very minor exceptions that would never push it forward, only back). At every Bris I've been to, the majority of the crying takes place before the circumcision, when the baby is uncovered. He usually doesn't like that. At every Bris I've been to, the actual circumcision is accompanied by crying that lasts for less than one minute.

My oldest son cried for less than ten seconds and was sound asleep within five minutes. My younger (who to this day does not sleep), was nursing within the same amount of time.

And please don't argue that either child was drunk. First of all, doing so would implicitly accept that the baby does not continue to scream. Second of all, a drop of wine on a napkin touched to a baby's tongue is not enough to induce any level of intoxication.

The "joy" of the celebration was probably for the health of the new baby and mother. In case you hadn't noticed, Jews aren't the largest segment of the population. So, our excitement is understandable when we get a new guy in.

You say your cousin's circumcision was horrible. Does he remember it that way?
Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing your experience. I don't believe I ever suggested the infants were drunk, nor did it even cross my mind until you said something. Other then the adults toasting, I have no recall of alcohol.

On a different thread I talked about having pennies thrown at me in high school while the kids called out that I was a "n***er loving Jew". So, yes I have noticed that Jews are not the largest segment.

Asking me how my cousin feels about his Bris now is just silly. And of course your excitement when you "get a new guy in" is understandable. Is it the same when you get a new girl in?

Julia
 
Loss Leader said:
The "joy" of the celebration was probably for the health of the new baby and mother.
Click to expand...

The post you were responding to suggested that the "joy" followed the lopping-off of a piece of the baby's skin.

Just how this event suddenly focussed attention on the health of baby + mother is a mystery.
 
I have no problem with circumcision, as long as it can be done with a local anesthesia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom