What about circumcision and pain relief for baby

LisaBell wrote:

How about infant girls with pierced ears? Quite a few seem to think
that is attractive.

I don't find that attractive. It upsets me to see it. I think people should
get to make their own decisions about body modification.

--
tristyn
www.tristyn.net
"i have heard the mermaids singing, each to each.
i do not think that they will sing to me."

Having said that, perhaps a better reason for me to use for having the
procedure done would be to prevent chronic urethral infections. Without
high hygiene maintenance this is a common occurrence.


As a mother of 2 intact boys, I can say with all honesty that "high hygiene
maintenance" is an extreme statement. Do you know anything about the care of
an intact child? It requires NO more care than any other body part. Soap and
water.

Neither have had an infection, neither have had any problems whatsoever. Yet
I have heard horror stories of the infections, pain and swelling friends'
babies have had with being circumsized.

Ya know, if parents want to do it, that's fine but they should really do
their homework first and THEN decide. Not based on "it looks unattractive"
Someone hand me a 10 foot pole please...

Additionally, I think it would be far more painful for him if he had to do
it as an adult.

But that would be HIS choice, and his choice to have pain killers where a
baby has NO choice, NO say in the matter.

Kari
mom to Kaylie (7) Noah (4) and Xander (2 mos)

Anti-Circumcision Nazis
say in here (I guess I could have just said people) about it being torture
and traumatizing you know yada, yada, yada.

I guess that would be me! Lol. Let me ask you if you have EVER seen a baby
being circumsized..because it really does look like torture. I personally
can't stand to see my child in pain. If you could stand there and watch
someone do that to your baby, then wow, that's all I have to say.


And my DH went on to tell them that I find the strangest people
online. LOL........

Ok, I guess Im strange now too LOL!!! And men who want to restore are weird?
That's harsh dont you think?

Do you realize that the US is the ONLY country who still circumsizes baby
boys for non-religious reasons? Do you realize that the rate has
dramatically dropped in the past few years and on the West coast only 30% of
boys are still circumsized? Just something to think about before you go
making assumptions that we're all Anti-circ nazi's. Oh, and most people I
know who have researched the procedure, chose not to do it (at least that is
what I have found, not only on here but in the "real" world) and the ones
that do, do so for religious reasons.

Kari
mom to Kaylie (7) Noah (4) and Xander (2 mos)

As for female circs - I think that is mixing apples with organges
(or.....no, won't go there).

Bananas and donuts?


LOL! :P


PF

"T" wrote in message . net...
I am having sons circumcision tomorrow. I had one other question.
They do not use pain killer because of swelling, is there something that the
doc can use that will not swell. I heard of a cream that they can put on to
minimize pain.

Also, why is it best practice to NOT do circumcision. I figure since my
first son is circ. I should have 2nd son also. I know they are doing the
circs now but taking less foreskin off.

I am in US.

Thanks again in advance

Two months ago I was all for circumcision. Now I am not so sure. If
you are a Christian (not making any assumptions here), there is no
religious reason to have it performed. I think the only religion that
"requires" is it Judaism.

If and when I have a son, I probably will not have him circumcised.
Just my attitude (after much reading on the topic).

BTW- I am, and I don't think of myself as being "mutilated" in any
way. That's a pretty harsh way of putting it.

In anglo-saxon countries circumcision is frowned upon.

Our religion teaches that God created us in his own image. To change it is
to criticise God.

Not so sure about that. Read Gen 17:11-12.

I have actually been struggling with this same decision. We are
expecting a son. I am not circumcized, and as you have stated, it is
generally frowned upon in the US.

There are claims of some medical benefits, actually for the women.
There is a MUCH lower incidence of cervical cancer for women in
cultures of circumcision.

There is not a real good reason for the men themselves to be
circumcized, other than religous.

Jeridiah

"Carol Ann" wrote in message news:e7cCb.514598$Fm2.500466@attbi_s04...

I don't see how you could ask such a silly question. I would want my child
to be as attractive and "normal" as possible. I have not met one woman
personally who found an uncircumsized penis attractive. On the contrary,
they found it a turn off.

I think this is pretty cultural, though. I'm in my mid-thirties,
and the vast majority of guys my age were circumsized automatically.
For that reason, I didn't see an uncircumsized penis until more than
a decade after I became sexually active, and yeah, it looked weird
to me (although not a turn-off, just odd). However, I suspect if
I'd grown up with mostly uncircumsized penises, a circumsized one
would look equally weird, and now they both look normal to me.

I agree that most of us want our kids to be as attractive as
possible, but attractive is in the eye of the beholder, and
I think it'd be sort of silly to perpetuate something pointless
just because it was done once, so it was the norm for that
group, so the next group did it because it was what they were
used to, so the next group did it... and so on.

I do know that I once helped take care of an adult friend who
had to have his circumcision repaired (adhesions removed), and
penises with bandages and post-surgical yuck are *really*
unattractive to me.

Beth

"CBI" wrote in message
link.net...

"Deirdre" wrote in message
...
http://www.fathermag.com/health/circ...r/horror.shtml

Please research this more in the time that's left. Your son will thank
you.

Doing some research is a good idea. Sites like medscape, webmd, the
AMA(http://www.ama-assn.org/), or the AAP (http://www.aap.org/) would
probably be better sources than a site that uses the word "horror" twice
just in the URL.

--
CBI, MD

You're absolutely right. I didn't offer up that URL as the pillar of
objectivity, however, and should have offered a disclaimer as such.
Regardless, my personal opinion is that this procedure is commonly dismissed
as routine and harmless when there are ample tales to the contrary, just
some of which are relayed at that particular site. I would sincerely hope
that any parent considering circumcision would investigate all "sides" of
the issue before launching headlong (pardon the pun) into the procedure. To
do less would be an injustice to the child.
Just my (not so) humble opinion.

On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:55:40 -0800, "Circe" wrote:

Not that I think circumcision is such a good thing. I've no idea why
anyone with no religious decree to do it would chose to circ infant
boys. However I disagree that US law should outlaw it, not only
because it is now an American cultural (as well as religious)
practice, but because I believe that to do so would be incredibly
hostile to extensive religious communities in the US. Not a handful of
immigrants from some 3rd world tribe, but upstanding Americans of
several generations.

Ah, I see. Since it's just a few uneducated immigrants from underdeveloped,
backwater countries who practice female circumcision as part of their
religious observance, THEIR practice doesn't deserve the protection of the
First Amendment, while the Jewish practice of male circumcision does because
they've been American citizens for generations. I find that offensive on so
many levels, I can't quite find a proper response

Well I think it would be pretty naive not to recognize that even a
democracy (especially a democracy?) makes allowances for large, vocal
and influential segments of the population. Unfortunately. Often such
allowances are patently unjust, I agree. ( I was being somewhat
cynical above and I think you missed that. Maybe I should have said it
differently, or used some kind of symbol?)

However I don't think this is a case in point because, as I said
earlier, I don't feel female circ is equivalent to male circ. If it
were, I'd still think you should consider the merits of allowing all
your citizens the freedom to practice their various religions before
banning centuries old rites of passage without which some would be
rendered unable to practice their religion at all.

--Lisabell

"Carol Ann" wrote in message
news:e7cCb.514598$Fm2.500466@attbi_s04...

Having said that, perhaps a better reason for me to use for having the
procedure done would be to prevent chronic urethral infections. Without
high hygiene maintenance this is a common occurrence.



Not to be patently argumentative or anything, but do you have some kind of
data to support this?
I ask because it contradicts what I've been told by 4 OBs to date, as well
as what our research has led us to believe.