You may have noticed in past weeks that Wednesday posts have tended to be about nutrition or other various wholesome information. I have decided to declare my Wednesday posts to be "Wholesome". They may end up being about nutrition, medical decisions I have made (whether that be about vaccinations, natural birth, and the like), weight loss, and a variety of other topics. I think today I will start on a topic that involves medical decisions. A topic that can make grown men squirm in their chairs. Circumcision. As with homeschooling, there seem to be three groups of people when it comes to the topic: those who think it is the only way, those who are completely against it, and those who could care less one way or the other. I fall into the middle category.
While I would not consider someone who does circumcise their boys a horrible mother I do think it is unnecessary and more of a cosmetic procedure than a medical one. Many countries agree with me on that and do not cover circumcision under their insurance plans; if a parent wants that procedure for their child they have to pay for it out of pocket. There has been talk of insurance companies in the US dropping that coverage as well, but so far it is still covered.
I am against circumcision for the fact that it causes a baby a great deal of pain. Some hospitals do not administer any pain killers or numbing agents to a child being circumcised. And those places that do still see that the child is in immense pain during the procedure. The foreskin of the child is still fused to the glans of the penis at birth, and will not retract until later in life. So the first step is to force the two apart, which has to be a very painful thing. There are various ways to circumcise but the fact of the matter is that it all involves removing a piece of the baby's body in their most sensitive area.
Many will voice that it is the most hygienic thing to do. That infections of those who are not circumcised are more common and that it is impossible to keep the area clean. Apparently God made the foreskin on a male for a reason and it does have a purpose. Among other reasons for the foreskin, it keeps the area covered and protected from outside irritants and especially in the young, keeps the area clear from soiled diapers. I see it no different than females, and I am sure we are all against female circumcision, which is still being done in other countries. A woman can very easily get a UTI or other infections if they are not kept clean, and so good hygiene is important for women. The same can be said for any male, whether they are circumcised or not. Good hygiene is an important part of life and I am not going to circumcise my boys just in case they are complete slobs when they get older, just as I wouldn't do that to my girls. The actual chance of a serious infection in an uncircumcised male is very slim, but the cases of serious infections in an infant that was recently circumcised is well documented. Pros and cons must be weighed on both, but I hate to hear the reasons of parents circumcising their children because "it is dirty otherwise" is a truly false reason to do so.
"Because I want them to look like their father" is another reason parents decide on circumcision. I think this one is another silly reason. I'm sorry, but a young child typically doesn't notice differences in their parts to their parents. And even if they do, there is still a huge difference between a child and their parent which is apparent to any child who is noticing a difference. Until that child is a teenager or a grown man they will NOT be looking the same as their father whether they are circumcised or not, and at that age I really hope they are not comparing each others private parts.
AIDS and STDS. There have been a few studies that say circumcised men are slightly more protected when it comes to AIDS and other STDS. Is this not a completely unreasonable reason to circumcise? If my child is choosing to have unprotected sex with a person who he is unsure of their health history, he better be choosing better protection than just a circumcised penis.
Circumcision is on the decline in this country, with statistics pointing out that around 60% of male babies in the US are circumcised, meaning that 40% are not. It is being called a cosmetic procedure in most cases and doctors, if asked, will tell you that with the majority of boys it is a preference issue...there is no medical need for a circumcision. My doctor has said "Good for you!" during the physicals of my boys.
I do not want anyone to feel defensive if they have decided to circumcise their boys. But I am stating my reasons for why I feel it is unnecessary in the majority of cases (yes, there are a few cases where an infant, or even an adult, may have a need to be circumcised). Those are my views and the reasons my husband and I have decided against it for our boys. As with anything, I urge parents to look into each and every aspect of their child's medical decisions and not just go along with what the doctors say. Many parents assume that if doctors recommend it that it must be the best thing to do, which is not always the case. Before anyone has a boy I think it is best to read both sides of the circumcision debate and decide why it is/is not best for their child.