Should Routine Circumcision of Male Infants be Illegal?

Well, a condom is 99.9% more effective against contracting HIV than being circumcised, so I'd go that route and use a condom for disease prevention rather than snipping off part of the body!

lol you posted the same thing I was editing into my post about 2 seconds before I could hit submit.

Great minds and all that! lol

Apparently it was just such a standard practice back then that they felt it was a given that all parents wanted it done

I can understand the point the creator of the comic book is trying to make. However, I think it was distasteful in the way it portrayed Jews. There are better ways of expressing one's feelings about this subject that don't require the demonization of an entire religious group.

I think that is why I am so conflicted on this topic. I am very hesitant to completely support banning circumcision as a ban on it potentially violates the First Amendment rights of those for whom it is a religious sacrament.

Thank you!

Why, though? If there's no medical reason, what justifies putting a baby through a painful surgical procedure that alters his body for life? Not picking on you, but I genuinely want to know why some people believe this is OK (besides religion)-we've already established that cleanliness is a non-issue.

The David Reimer case is so sad. And so unnecessary. Most cases of phimosis can be treated with cortisone cremes.

When My Man (who knew nothing else other than circumcision when I was pregnant with our children, not realizing fewer and fewer American boys were being subjected to it) was upset about my not wanting our kids circed (if we had had boys) I showed him a couple of videos of the unmedicated procedure being done, and said, "If you want to do this to your son (as we never knew what gender baby we were having) you have to be in the room and hold him the entire time." The videos so upset him that he agreed he would not do that to our babies.

If you read the entire thread, you would have learned that MOST forms of FMG is not removal of the clitoris, but removal of the clitoral hood. Essentially the EXACT same procedure and part of the body as male circumcision.


Please read the entire thread to see.

NO ONE who works against male circumcision says "male circumcision is okay and if FGM is the same thing then it should be fine too." Nor do we want anyone to think that. I have no idea where you got that idea.

Fewer and fewer American baby boys are being circed, the latest data is somewhere between 25 and 50% of baby boys are cut. (Depending on the area, the more Conservative the area, the higher the cutting rate.) Europe, Australia and Canada and parts of Asia got smart sooner. Babies are rarely cut in these places.

Yes, the baby should have a say. So, wait until they can give their consent before doing it.

You have to clean it if he IS circumcised, too. And change the bandage over the raw hamburger meat looking penis, and administer a litany of creams and ointments, and give him Tylenol (which isn't great for a newborn's liver) for the pain, and deal with sucking problems and latch on difficulties caused by the pain and trauma. An intact penis is MUCH less work, for both parents and the male child himself than the aftermath of the cutting is. You just take a soft washcloth and clean the entire thing! No pulling or retracting or anything.

The foreskin of a young child whose foreskin has not yet retracted should never be forcibly retracted. The outside should simply be cleaned until the child retracts the foreskin himself. Usually playing with it helps gently break the adhesion (which in an infant is as strong as the adhesion that holds your finger nail to your finger) sometime between 2 and 14 years of age will take care of the retraction.

I have a few friends who had to physically restrain pediatric nurses from violently retracting her infant son's foreskin! The uneducated nurses (and I a nurse, but not an uneducated one, and they used to teach us barely anything about natural penises) told her "You need to pull this back to clean him." Absolutely wrong. The foreskin protects the glans, and the frenulum is there to keep the foreskin in place and protect the tip of the penis from rubbing, urine, feces etc. The frenulum is there for a reason and will retract the foreskin when the body is ready for it to.

OMG, I would be livid if a nurse tried to do that to my baby boy! It's really shocking that there isn't more education on the topic, especially at least in the medical community. Maybe one day!

I think it should be illegal as a hospital based "routine" procedure.

It's always hard when something is part of someone's "culture" or their religion.

However, removal of the clitoris and sewing closed the labia is part of some religions in parts of Africa and it certainly isn't legal here!

I know some Jewish families and some of my clients who practice a "Bloodless Bris" The ceremony, without any cutting or ripping the foreskin from the glans is performed, and if desired the father's finger is pricked to draw blood or nothing is done physically at all. It's a beautiful, painless and crying free ceremony. More and more Jewish families (at least in my social group of Aware, Attachment Parenting, Self Weaning, Child Centered families) are choosing this alternative.

Also, some Jewish people believe that all "Blood sacrifices" are no longer part of the Jewish faith and that circumcision is certainly a "Blood sacrifice."

Things change when we learn the actual science and truth about them.

I must say more Mohels do a better job than even the most practiced OBGYNs do. Usually less tissue is removed and it at least appears less painful, although not painLESS. I've seen hospital performed circumcisions where the baby cried so hard that he lost his voice and actually passed out. Many who were nursing fine before the procedure chose to sleep for day on end, making feeding difficult or even impossible, due to the pain and feelings of distrust from the procedure. There is simply NO need for that.

IMO, at least the "routine" circumcision of infants should not be legal. If someone feels their "culture" trumps the law, they can apply for an exception to be allowed.

As for Gall Bladders, we don't take them out at birth "just in case something eventually goes wrong" with them.

Yes, it is unethical and should be outlawed.

i personally have nothing against christianity... but this whole concept of circumcision came from dudes running around in the desert drinking wine... 2000 years ago-ish..

perhaps its time we come up with some weird new rules.