To circumcise or not to circumcise?

Question

I am having a baby boy in early March, and the biggest question I have right now is about circumcision.

The father is NOT circumcised and wants to have the baby be the same. I am concerned about cleanliness and the higher risk for sexually transmitted diseases later in life (there is new information out there about how the mucous around the foreskin makes a man more at risk for heterosexually transmitted HIV and other diseases).

Should I try to talk the father into being okay about circumcising the baby, or should I suck it up, make sure to keep the baby clean and then make sure to adamantly teach hygiene to the baby when he gets older?

Answer 1

You are misinformed. having a foreskin does NOT increase your chances of getting an STD or diseases or infections.

I am circumcised and have had 7 infections in my life time. My doctor said I never would have had then if I wasn't circumcised and he's a circumcision expsert. The esposed head is more likley to become infected because it doesn't have any protection.



Also you don't have to keep the baby clean. NEVER retract his foreskin NEVER. When a baby is born his foreskin is attached to his glans like your fingernail is attached to your finger. If you try to pullit back and clean it that's like ripping your finger nails up to clean under them. This causes tearing, bleeding and phismosis, and infections. Plus not to mentiona hell of a lot of pain on the babies part.



Circumcision does nothing for a child. There are studies out there that say it's a lot better. But just as many studies out there say it's worse to be circumcised. There have been no studies that have proven anythign without flaws. EVERY study done on circumcision has some biased flaw in it. This is because there is nor difference in hygeine between a circumcised penis or an uncircumcised penis. They both are the same.

It take under 30 seconds to clean the foreskin everyday.



Do you stand in the shawer and take soap and wash between every fold of your vagina? Also do you clean in your vagina? Adns crub it down?



No you don't. And female genitals collect more smegma and lubricant, and have a 10 times higher risk of infection than a males.

So if you wouldn't cut up your genitals why why would you cut up your sons?



It's his body and only he has the right to cut a part of it off.



Also ask the father if he has had any problems with him foreskin. I bet he will tell you he hasen't. 90% of intact men have NO issues with their foreskin later in life. So why cut up your sons foreskin for something he is very unlikley to get anyways?



Teach your son to wear a condom and have proper hygeiene It's not that hard.

Don't tale the easy way out.

Plus if he get's and STD that's HIS problem NOT yours.

That's because of his stupidness.



He is the only person incarge of being responsible when it comes to sex. You aren't in charge of that.

Just make sure you teach him to use a condom.



Plus he is going to get an STD if he doesn't wear one anyways. It doesn't matter if he has a foreksin. He has unprotected sex with someone who has something then he's gonna get it. It doesn't matter if he has a foreskin.



And you have to know that if you plan on breastfeeding then don't circumcise your son. Studies have shown that most circumcised infants refuse to breastfeed. And 98% of uncircumcised men breastfeed. Circumcision causes so much pain it interfreres with breast feeding. ITt's true look it up.



Also your apendix is apart of your imunesystem and it aids it. IT protects you against disease and helps you digest sertain foods. Believe me it's not an unnecessay body part.



A foreskin is a needed body part because it keeps the head of the penis moist and sesntive. When you take that away the head becomes dry and tough. it also rubs against clothing and this makes the head MUCH less sensitive. So sex is less enjoyable for the male.



I am re-growing my foreskin and have found out the longer my head is covered. (I have had it covered 24/7 for two months now) the more and more sensitve it gets.

Believe me it's not an unnessisary part of the body. IT's very much needed adn should be there.



Leave the choice up to your son.

After all it's his penis not yours.



-Connor

Answer 2

I'm not a natural advocate, I've just done a lot of research on circumcision and it seems unnecessary to me. It's easier to take care of a non-circumcised penis in a baby than a circumcised one. You just have to wipe the outside, don't pull the foreskin back. When the boy gets older he'll be able to pull it back but by then you can remind him to do it and he'll be able to. It's not much harder, circumcised guys need to wash in the shower too and pulling back the foreskin is just automatic to non-circumcised guys.



About STDs, I didn't find that evidence very convincing as a new study released this year followed a whole bunch of boys for a long time and found comparable rates of STDs between the circumcised and non-circumcised boys. The PDF is hosted on an anti-circumcision site but it was published in the Journal of Paediatrics.

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/pdf/2008_Dickson.pdf



Anyway, that won't be an issue for your son for 15-20 years by which time things may be different (e.g. more vaccines). Your son should be able to choose if he would rather get part of his penis removed, or use a condom. Bear in mind circumcised guys have to use condoms as well, and even if they do have a slightly lower risk of getting an STD, the risk is still there and very real. I would say a 7/10 risk of getting an STD and a 9/10 risk of getting an STD are pretty much the same in practical terms. Besides, the father made it through ok didn't he? So he knows it's not necessary. To be honest, I would be a bit offended if my mother had chosen surgery when I was a baby on the assumption I would be promiscuous and careless.



Both the appendix and wisdom teeth are removed if/when they have problems (though there is evidence showing the appendix does have a function, as does the foreskin), not at birth.



BTW most guys aren't circumcised any more here in Australia and we have lower rates of STDs than over in the US where circumcision is common, same with Europe. So I think behaviour is more important.



Harriet

Answer 3

For your information, it's just been in the news a couple of months ago that they now find the appendix has been shown to be important to regulate the healthy bacteria in the colon which help us digest our food.



The foreskin is not just "extra skin," it's an inherent part of the penis, and essential for 100% complete sexual sensitivity and ability.



If you feel that circumcision is so beneficial, get yourself circumcised, yes, a female circumcision, and then after you're mutilated and scarred and deprived of sexual sensitivity, maybe you won't be so anxious to mutilate a male's penis. Yes, female circumcision is mutilation, and male circumcision is equally mutilating; genital mutilation is genital mutilation, regardless of which sex it's perpetrated on.



HIV is not prevented by circumcision, nor are STDs or UTIs, those are old wive's tales and lies promulgated by the medical community, where doctors make money from circumcisions and also are members of the religions that try to mutilate all males.



I suffered complications from circumcision, which are far more common than the doctors would want people to know, and I hate my parents for mutilating me.



You don't have a penis, and can't possibly understand how it feels to have a part of your body chopped off as a helpless infant, a part that is the most sensitive and is a part of being a complete man.



You do not pull back the foreskin of an infant or toddler, and must make sure that noone else does, whether it's a doctor or nurse, or relative.



The foreskin is not supposed to be retracted for cleaning, any more than you would douche an infant girl. Nature takes care of these things.



The foreskin will seperate at about the age of 8-12 or so, and he will be able to take care of it himself.



If you have questions about the intact infant, you can contact NOCIRC, or CIRCUMSTITIONS for more information.



Leave your son intact. You don't have the moral right to chop off a part of his body, simply because of the way it looks, or because you have some idea that it "looks better."



Denmark is trying to pass legislation to make male genital mutilation of infants illegal, and other countries will probably follow suit.



The practice of circumcision is cruel, barbaric and archaic.



Circumcision is the worst hoax ever perpetrated on the male sex.



A foreskin is not a birth defect; it is a birthright.

Answer 4

What on earth are you talking about HIV and transmitted diseases?



What makes you think circumcision prevents ANY of those things? If that were the case America and several countries in Africa would be STD-free, or at least, STD-low. But they're not! The US, a circumcising country, has more adults with STDs than countries that don't practice circumcision like Brazil and the UK!



If the father is not circumcised and YOU thought he was safe to sleep with, what makes you think it should be mandatory for your son? You need to suck it up and get over the circumcision fetish.

Answer 5

Leave him intact. There is no medical reason to circumcise. A few bull reasons for the argument for...

-it's cleaner

Not really, you have to take care of the wound after. If he's left intact you wash it like you would a finger.

-it looks nicer

what grown parent looks at their child after babyhood to say "you have a nice looking penis"? Penises don't look nice, they're utilitarian. If when he’s older and has a partner that doesn’t like it, then that person isn’t right for them

-he'll be made fun of in the change room

The rate of circumcision is dropping, so by cutting your son is actually going to make him the odd one out. Plus most boys are too embarrassed to go buck naked in the change room anyways. The fear of being small or having a spontaneous erection is more embarrassing than a foreskin

-he'll be less likely to get STDs

safe sex protects against STD, not being cut

-I want him to look like Daddy, because Daddy is

Unless daddy gets a regular Brazilian or baby come out with full pubes they won't look the same. By the time they look the same they'll be able to communicate their differences



It’s your son's penis, not yours. Let him choose when he can decide for himself.

Answer 6

I'm 24, and have a natural penis,... that is.. with a foreskin, and natures best design for the best possible sexual performance, enjoyment and experience. Your boyfriend probably realizes how much he enjoys as well as functions sexually and doesn't want your son to loose that level of feel good.



The foreskin has critical feelings in it, and it covers the knob of the penis, keeping it from drying out and rubbing on the environment of clothing etc. It has a membrane with the sex sensation nerves at the surface, giving the best possible feel good with the condition of slippery, and right to the sex center of the brain. Circumcision causes that membrane to become multiple layered dry skin with the sensing nerves underneath those several layers of skin, so it doesn't take a genius to figure out the outcome to his sense of feel good....greatly reduced!



This isn't about you or the other women who are telling you to sneak and get it done behind your boyfriend's back. It's about your son.

It should be his decision, and when he understand what he has, I doubt that circumcision would be his choice. It would also equal to you having your labia cut off.



A baby has the knob of his penis and the foreskin bonded together at birth and it stays that way until around age 8 to 13 years. The bonding keeps it clean and prevents infection as well as requiring little care aside from the soak in a bath.



In most instances of infant infection and problems, it results from someone not knowing what to do with it and trying to slide the fused foreskin back and causing tissue damage which in some cases results in an infection.



A foreskin is not a defect but normal. If your son was born without a foreskin, it would be recorded at the hospital as a birth defect.



HIV and STD are a result of having sexual activity with an infected person or getting infected blood, and not from having a foreskin. Common sense escapes much information that is being presented.



Hope this helps bring it all clearer for you, and a Huge Congratulations to You! ;-)



Me! :- )

Answer 7

I believe the father is 100% whole-heartedly right in not wanting his son to be circumcised, first of all no offense, but you don't have a penis, therefore you don't know what it's like to have one, nor do you know what it's like to have one that had it's foreskin cut off. Your partner knows best in this situation. In your case suck it up and just teach the baby to clean himself properly, it's not difficult and is entirely beneficial to him to keep his foreskin.



The thing about the intact (uncircumcised) male is that he has the choice at any time in his life to get circumcised if he wants to do so, men who are circumcised at birth or without consent can never have the option to know what it's like to be intact, sure they can regrow a foreskin, but after the foreskin is cut the first time the many nerve endings and receptors within it are severed forever and those can never grow back even with foreskin restoration.



I ask you: if you had a daughter would you get her circumcised, your most likely answer would be no, so then why should that be any different if you had a son? Think about it, think deep, think, does allowing someone to bring a knife to your son who has no say in the matter really seem right to you. The truth is most all circumcisions are done in a room off from where the parents are, so they cannot watch, because even if anesthesia is given, your baby still feels it and cruciatingly so. Some people on here will tell you "It's a quick snip, simple and safe" the truth I'm afraid is that it is not. It may be quick enough, but simple or safe no, I wouldn't call slicing off millions of perfectly healthy and fine nerves of the body simple or safe, I would call it complicated and dangerous. You would never willingly put your baby in harm's way would you? Having him undergo a circumcision right after birth is exactly what that would be doing, you would be allowing him to be put in extreme danger, pain, and trauma. There is also argument that it is cleaner and prevents infection and STDs but all of that has been disproven, and as with anything if cleaned properly it will have nothing wrong with it.



Also think about this, if you believe that God made the body perfect then why circumcise your son at all? I see it this way, if man was supposed to be born to have his foreskin cut off, then wouldn't the body be created without one to begin with? The human body knows itself better than we think we know it, it can do amazing things, things we can't understand ourselves, and it created the foreskin just the same, because it does have a purpose, because it really is supposed to be there, otherwise it would not be naturally occurring as it is.



The thing is if you do have him go under the knife, he may hate you later on in life for not giving him that choice, for allowing a perfectly natural, normal, and healthy, and evenmoreso a beneficial body part to be cut off. Then again he may never care much about it at all, but do know this, no man on this earth will thank you autonomously for circumcising him when he was a baby, some men may be thankful as adults, but of course they don't want to feel that there may be something possibly missing from their penis.



So I hope you let it slide and let the father who knows what's best in this situation keep the boy intact. Below are some links you should definitely read. The first one I posted is by many medical professionals and covers topics such as how it is beneficial not to circumcise, if the boy is left intact how to care for him and how to teach him to care for it himself. Read all of these articles together with the father of the child and he will verify all of the benefits I guarantee it. Good luck and congratulations on the pregnancy as well.

Answer 8

So, lets say you could potentially reduce the chances of getting UTIs and STDs by removing around half of the labia and some of the skin around the clitoris. There would be slightly less smell and it would be a bit easier to clean. However, potentially by doing this you would reduce sexual pleasure for you and your partner. Notice both instances of "potentially", there are only conflicting studies that show no, minimal, and decent benefits/drawbacks.



Would you get this done? Would your answer change if half your friends were doing it and some guys (including your lover) preferred the look? Would you get this done for your daughter as an infant (with minimal pain meds)?



Hopefully this puts what you are trying to get done for your son in perspective. The foreskin isn't a birth defect, nor a useless body part. The choice should be left up to him.

Answer 9

Circumcision is an unnecessary medical procedure that significantly reduces sensitivity of the penis. The foreskin is there for a reason! Think about it, why would it be there if it had no function? The foreskin functions to allow the penis to grow to its fullest length, protects the head of the penis from urine and feces as a baby, works to keep the head of the penis moist and sensitive as an adult, and allows greater sexual functioning (during sex it works to draw lubrication out of the female, making friction less of a problem). I say don't circumcise him. My sister was considering whether or not she wanted to do it, and ultimately decided yes because of pressure from her mother, and said she immediately regretted it.



Whatever you decide, make sure you go online and do your research. What is the point of a foreskin? What could be the side effects of not having one? That's what I did, and I learned alot about why circumcision is an unnecessary practice, and on the decline. Also, go on youtube and watch a video of a circumcision, it's absolutely awful!



The foreskin is a natural, working part of the functioning penis. He can always get a circumcision when he's older, but it can't be undone. I would advise against it, just based on what I've learned.

Answer 10

There is no good reason to circumcise a boy, listen to your boyfriend he seems to know.



The cleanliness thing is simply a myth, there is no special care necessary other than occasionally giving your baby a bath from time to time and I know you'll be doing that. You just clean his penis with a quick wipe, like a finger, just clean what you see. Reference [1] will discuss the myths of cleanliness. Once a boy's foreskin is retractable, and the boy should be the one to first retract his foreskin, he can occasionally do that in the tub or shower, it take only a second. Reference [2] discusses normal development from birth to 18 and retraction.



Circumcision also doesn't really protect against STDs, the problem is that anytime a study shows a slight benefit to circumcision, it is up sold in the US media but not when the opposite results are found which occurs often.



For example, a New Zealand study was recently published in the March 2008 Journal of Pediatrics, "Circumcision and Risk of Sexually Transmitted Infections in a Birth Cohort" by N. P. Dickson, T. Van Roode, P. Herbison and C. Paul, J Pediatr 2008;152:383-7, shows that circumcision does NOT prevent STDs. These findings are consistent with recent large population-based cross-sectional studies in developed countries and found that early childhood circumcision does not markedly reduce the risk of the common STIs in the general population in such countries. Dickson followed his cohort for 32 years and found no association with circumcision an STDs. Read that one here [3].



The large studies that Dickson's results match up with include the results of an Australian study (International Journal of STD & AIDS 2006) of over 10,000 men which found found after correction for age, circumcision was unrelated to reporting STI found at: [4]



It also corroborated the results of a smaller British Study (STI 2003), a mere 2,000 men, which also did not find any significant differences in the proportion of circumcised and uncircumcised British men reporting ever being diagnosed with any STI. Found at:[5] And the results from a study of the US Navy population (XV International AIDS Conference 2004). Found at:[6]. I should add that the Navy also checked for HIV in that study and found no correlation.



In a 2005 article, Dickson et. al. also looked specifically at HSV.[7] Following a birth cohort of boys to age 26, they tested for HSV serologically and found no association with circumcision and HSV. These results were similar to a separate serological trial conducted on a clinic population India.



The link to HIV is also not relevant to boys, especially those in first world countries. For example, the Australian Federation of AIDS Organizations in their July 2007 statement said:



* “Male circumcision has no role in the Australian HIV epidemic”,

* “African data on circumcision is context-specific and cannot be extrapolated to the Australian epidemic in any way.",

* and perhaps their best observation “The USA has a growing heterosexual epidemic and very high rates of circumcision”.



Read the rest of the Australian statement here:[8]



While the French National Council on Aids (Conseil national du SIDA) in their August 2007 report concluded:



"The recommendations of the WHO state that this strategy is aimed at countries with high prevalence, and not at countries with low prevalence or in countries where it relates specifically to one part of the population such as in France or the United States." Read the rest of the French statement here[9].



Other first world countries have come to similar conclusions, and in the US context even if you believed the purported benefit up sold in the mass media, in real numbers it is vanishingly small for almost all countries.



So take your boyfriend's suggestion to heart. He has a foreskin and knows it's benefits. The vast majority of the world's men are intact and only a very small percentage ever need or want a circumcision. By leaving your boy intact you also give him options.



And not to nitpick, but even if we don't know that a part of the body has a function, that doesn't mean it doesn't. It just means we haven't figured it out yet. For instance, you mention the appendix for which we may have found it's intent[10].

Answer 11

O.k., my husband and I have recently had this conversation, we are having a boy as well (on monday actually!!) anyhow, we decided not to have him circumcised, I did some research myself and found that with proper hygiene everything will be fine. I also have a best friend who has 2 boys (3 and 5) who are not circumcised and she has never had a problem with cleanliness, she taught her boys how to keep it clean themselves. I think it's really mean to do and would rather not do it but I have to admit for some reason it still crosses my mind that it should be done, I don't know if this is because it's something that every one seems to do and it just seems right. Anyhow, as it is right now we have decided not to but are willing to change our minds after we talk to someone from the hospital. Hope this helps. good luck!

Answer 12

Don't do this. The research you quote is not valid. It's been proved that those African HIV studies were biased and all the studies done in the west show no difference in aquired HIV.



Since its introduction into the west as an anti-masturbation measure in the 19th century, circumcision proponents have trotted out endlessly changing justifications for the procedure, as earlier ones are disproved. Most of these proposed reasons have later been proved to be based on flawed studies but the myths continue. Even if the claims for benefit were accepted the level of any protection from disease is so low as to be easily outweighed by the risks involved in the surgery. A few babies even die each year from circumcision complications and some lose their penis from necrotic infection. More common complications of infant circumcision, like skin bridges or too much skin removed, do not show up until much later in life. So the statistics do not include them in the complication rate. (A penis with a skin bridge is much harder to clean and causes major sexual difficulties.) However even on these artificially lowered statistics all the major medical authorities in the world now say that these risks outweigh the dubious benefits of routine infant circumcision.



Circumcision removes over half the skin of the penis (about 15 square inches or 40 square centimetres, in an adult) and it's not just simple skin. It's packed with nerve endings, special anatomical features like the ridged band and has a unique elastic gliding action, allowing it to slide on itself and act like lube. This action is what most males use to masturbate with. Circumcised males use what skin they have left, except those who are cut so tightly that they have to use lube or just rub it dry. The intact male can stroke the entire length of his penis using his foreskin and also has the option to use lube too, if he wants to. During intercourse the foreskin acts like lube on entry and may act as a dam, preventing lubricating secretions escaping from the vagina. In one study women reported that sex with an intact partner was gentler and more satisfying since he doesn't have to thrust as hard to feel enough stimulation. Removing the foreskin turns the surface of the glans from an inner mucosal membrane to outside skin. Newly circumcised adults usually go through some weeks of intense discomfort as the glans is constantly exposed to rubbing on clothing, until it develops a thicker keratin layer and becomes less sensitive. A recent study has shown real differences in fine touch sensitivity between circumcised and intact penises and that the most sensitive parts of the intact penis are those that would be removed by circumcision.



Another very recent study in New Zealand followed a cohort of boys through life from birth to age 32. About 40% were circumcised. The intact males had a slightly lower rate of sexually transmitted infections than the circumcised but there was no significant difference.



A few intact males have problems with tight foreskin but this is only a tiny proportion of intact males. The condition can now be almost always treated with simple stretching exercises, sometimes in combination with a steroid cream that speeds up the process. However doctors who do not value the preservation of the foreskin often still trot out circumcision as a first-option treatment in the US and even some other countries.



I myself am circumcised. I have hated it ever since as a 12 year old I saw a mate masturbating with a foreskin and realised a little of what I had lost. I have never been able to last a long time during intercourse as I have to thrust hard to feel anything much. Now I am older I can't feel much at all and I suffer from ED.



Many men resent being circumcised, some so much that they stretch to try and regain some of their lost foreskin's function. They can never recover all the complex anatomy and lost nerve endings though. Infant circumcision is a violation of a man's right to intact genitals and I will never forgive my parents and the medical profession for doing it to me.



Your son will undoubtedly have some intact friends and there is every chance that he will hate it and feel mutilated if you do this to him. Since not one major medical organization in the world recommends routine infant circumcision anymore you will have a hard time defending your decision if he questions it. If you leave him intact he has the choice.

Geoff

Answer 13

my genitals are mucosa but I like them like that. sex wouldnt be fun with dried out bits. even if it did make getting a disease less likely.



where I live nobody is circumcised and everybody has heard how it can lower your hiv risk etc. however nobody cares. none of these adult men are getting it done and nobody is doing it to their babies. I even heard guys laughing about why would they make sex less fun just to slightly lower their chance of something which they can prevent 99% by having a clean partner or a rubber. safe sex is more important. my boyfriend is not circumcised and has no hiv and no stds and always used a condom until we were tested

Answer 14

Either you or his father will be able to teach him about cleanliness when the time is right. Its not difficult, and babies and very young boys do NOT need to have their foreskins pulled back and washed. More info:

http://www.circumstitions.com/Care.html



Being circumcised does not protect against STDs later in life. That's what contraception is for.

http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(07)00707-X/abstract

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN0345545120071204



The foreskin is not an unnecessary bodypart. It has many protective, sensory and sexual functions. I'm sure your boyfriend will agree on that!

http://www.noharmm.org/mothering.htm



Will you be having your son's appendix removed at birth, then? I'd recommend you support your boyfriend's stance. He is right not to want your son circumcised.

Answer 15

I am a firm believe that what is 'natural' is right. To be circumsized is not natural, if it was natural then a baby boy would already be born in a circumsized state (if you see what I mean). I think in this case it is the father's decision. I mean he's a man and probably knows what is best over you. Sorry if that sounds harsh but I really think you should go with what your husband thinks 'in this case'. Congratulations on your baby by the way. I'm sure whatever decision you make will be the right decision in the end for both you and your hubby.

Answer 16

I would recommend NOT circumcising your son. The benefits do not outweigh the risks. One analysis found that for every 9 boys who might be spared a UTI by circumcision, another 12 boys at the least (the upper estimate was 40 boys) will experience severe complications from the circumcision. Thats great if your boy is one of the 9, but horrible if he's one of the 12. UTIs can be treated by antibiotics quite effectively. Botched circumcisions are much more difficult to fix. Its also worth noting that 99% of intact boys will never get an infection, compared to 99.9% of cut boys. That means you would have to cut 100 boys to save just one of them from infection. Thats 99 boys cut for no reason at all. Out of every 1000 boys who are cut, one will contract a UTI anyway.



Only 50% of boys nationwide are circumcised. Girls of your son's generation will likely have an entirely different view of circumcision as girls from yours. Just because you think intact is "gross" and "unsanitary" does not mean the women of your son's generation will. afterall, think of all the differences between you and your parents. Did you know that when your grandparents were young, circumcision was very uncommon?



Next, it is VERY painful to an infant. Most doctors still don't use any anesthesia, those that do rarely offer adequate anesthesia because the only stuff that works is not safe enough to use in infants for such a "minor" procedure. Further, some of the pain meds offered to infants aren't even recommended for use on babies! Some doctors argue that it has been done "for thousands of years" without anesthetic- what they neglect to tell you is that a medical circumcision can take over 15 minutes to complete. A Jewish ritual circumcision, by contrast, takes under 60 seconds to complete (and the baby is given wine) Here is some info on the pain.....

http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/

http://www.circumcision.org/response.htm

http://www.cirp.org/library/pain/taddio2... (note in this one that even infants offered pain meds for the procedure showed signs of post traumatic stress!)



You should also know that studies have shown that the most sensitive parts of the male anatomy of ON the foreskin- NOT the head of the penis. By cutting off the foreskin, you remove a mans most erogenous genital tissue. Here is a study about that.... (note that other studies found no difference, but they neglected to test the sensitivity of the foreskin- they only tested the glans penis of intact and cut men and didn't pay any attention to the foreskin at all) http://www.nocirc.org/touch-test/touchte...



You should know that infant boys are EASIER to care for when they are intact. The foreskin does not retract until late childhood or even puberty, so you do nothing special, just wipe the outside of his penis clean and leave it alone. Furthermore, to prevent painful and bleeding erections later in life, doctors are now commonly leaving more skin behind- in a cut boy this means you may have to push the left over skin back at every diaper change and clean beneath it to prevent it from adhering or infecting. The very thing that mother's think they avoid by circumcising! In short- Intact = wipe like a finger, NEVER retract Cut= vaseline, clean thoroughly, push back remaining skin to prevent adhesions etc (the last step perhaps for several months or years)



Here is an excellent tutorial on the basics of intact care and circumcision....

http://www.lactivistintactivist.com/?pag...



Another factor in your decision is that circumcised boys experience a 12% increase in their risk of MRSA infection. MRSA is commonly picked up in hospitals (where circumcision is performed in non-sterile conditions) and has been known to kill adults. I wouldn't want to deal with it in an infant. 12% is a BIG risk, the risk of a boy "needing" a circ later in life is WELL below that- under 1%. http://www.nocirc.org/publish/12-Answers...



The so called "benefits" of circumcision are generally trumped up. A big one now is that it "prevents" AIDS. All the studies showing "benefits" like this have been poorly designed and inconclusive. Also, for every study that finds a "benefit" there are more studies that find no benefit. http://www.icgi.org/



It is rather eye-opening to see how circumcision first became popular in the US to begin with. It was virtually unknown in this country until the 20th century. This slide show takes you through the rise of circumcision.... http://youtube.com/watch?v=f4unKTMpBGA



Finally, you should watch a video or two of the procedure so you are fully informed of what your infant will go through. I will warn you that these are graphic. If you can't handle watching them as an adult, why would you expect your infant son to endure them?



Gomco Clamp- http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...



Plastibell- http://newborns.stanford.edu/Plastibell....

Answer 17

I don't see the point in circumcising a baby. There are thousands of men who get through life without a single problem! So long as you teach your son to clean himself he will be fine. Unless it is for good medical reason or religious beliefs I think it is an unnecessary pain for the baby.

And please don't get it done because 'it looks better'.

I'm not sure what country you are in, I am in Australia, and not one of my friends or relatives have had their sons circumcised and they are all 100% healthy. Including my son.

Answer 18

Have you seen a baby get circumcised? Are you really to put your son through that pain for more or less..no reason?



Not all health professionals agree there is a lower chance of disease being circumcised, but either way they're STDs, why not teach your son safe sex instead?



It is NOT hard to clean an uncircumcised penis.



Babies are our children, but their bodies aren't ours to be performing such surgeries on.

Answer 19

Honestly, let your husband make this call. he knows the parts there better than you, and you can always get it done later or he can choose to get it done when he is older.



check this out too:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions/archive/index.php/f-44.html

Answer 20

I have 3 sons all of which are circumcised, because their father and grandfather were.

I truly believe that whatever the father is (being that the father is a full functioning parent in their lives) that's what the son should be.

Because the son relates with his father, wants to emulate him and be like him.

Its a healthier way of building his self esteem when he is more like his dad.

I have a very good friend that is adamantly against circumcision and he himself is not. He claims that you can take very good care of the penis and have no problems whatsoever.

Also an extra note: having to put my sons through circumcision was a horrible experience!

Answer 21

don't do it! notice how every one saying you should are female who don't know what it is like...and those who say it looks better? better be uncircumsied and have 8 inches than circumsized and have 5 inches

Answer 22

don't do it it will be a diservice to him later didn't your husband make it through ok

Answer 23

My son is circumcised. I don't have that male part so I didn't know if I should or should not do it. I let the decision rest on my fiance's shoulders and he choose to get him circumcised (my fiance is also circumcised). If he said he didn't want it done, I would have listened to him.

Answer 24

i did it to my 1 month old son last 2 weeks....the process it self not taking time ..just 40 SECONDS and he was cry when the first time he pee and 2 days after everything OK...no cry anymore......so dont worry to much about this one.



one of the reason for me to do it the same like your reasons...so just go ...and do it..(my sin done it using the manual one, without laser or anti pain cream)

Answer 25

i had mine circumcised you just need 2 decide

Answer 26

sounds like the two of you need to really decide before the time comes but if it were me i would get my baby boy circumcised

Answer 27

If you have one moment when the father isn't around get the baby circumcised it will be better and he won't get made fun of.

Answer 28

my nephew is not circumcised and he is 5 years old and forever having problems with infections because it is really hard for a little boy to keep it clean and to clean it right. My opion I would have it done I think its much cleaner and safer. and it looks better when they are grown.

Answer 29

have him circumcised.

its better for the baby and what you want is whats best for him.