We are all against those things OBVIOUSLY.

why is this so obvious to you but cutting off a part of a babies penis isn't? That's my problem, you are either for individual rights or you are not. the baby is the individual having it's right to choose taken away, the parents are not the individual it is being done to. As pointed out by another poster, to back up the argument for by using dentistry etc you would have to prove the foreskin of every baby is defective in some way.

A parent performs their duty of care to their child when the child is in danger, pain or distress. They should not be causing these in their child. The talk about medical benefits is all very well & good but what about the well known & proven risks to the baby associated with the process.

If someone said to me, "hey we think you should agree to have a part of your child's penis removed, it has no immidiate health benefits for him but might possibly prevent the transmission of an std when he is sexually active, he would be at risk of cardiac arrest, infection & excessive blood loss if you agree to it but you know, it has a small percentage reduction in his chance of getting penis cancer so we think it is a good thing." I'd probably laugh in their face then call the men in white coats.

No problem. So YOU don't do authorize this for YOUR babies. Doesn't mean it should be illegal for all of humanity. BTW, you grossly twist the reality of the benefits of the procedure. If it was so horrible it wouldn't be nearly fully endorsed by the American pediatrician organization.

Again, one thing is not the same as another thing. Stoning adulterers not the same as infant male circumcision. Black and white non-thinking such as the shamelessly loaded:

That's my problem, you are either for individual rights or you are not.

has no place in the modern world of science and rationality. Each case must be considered for what it actually is.

If you guys want to argue that parents should think twice before ordering this procedure, you have my full support. Funny you don't support my desire that people not ordering the procedure should ALSO think twice, but whatever. My issue is the LEGALITY issue. Talk about not fair. It is clearly not fair to make illegal this procedure which has strong evidence that there are good benefits.

People who decide not to snip their children can rethink as often as they choose, and change their mind any time until the child is old enough to resist. Less so, for those whose children have been snipped

SC

People who decide not to snip their children can rethink as often as they choose, and change their mind any time until the child is old enough to resist. Less so, for those whose children have been snipped

SC

Just don't make it illegal for infants because like I said, in REAL LIFE, if this BENEFICIAL medical procedure is not done in infancy it usually never gets done for life. That's why this is a NUANCED social issue and simple minded black and white proclamations simply do not wash.

Also again, you don't like it, don't do it for your own babies and try to convince others don't do it to their babies. But don't make it illegal.

I am a male, 49 years old, never been circumcised, not got HIV and never had a STD. Therefore, like many, many millions of other males, the removal of my foreskin would have been a painful waste of time.

Good for you. Basically one irrelevant anecdotal report which is MEANINGLESS for public health and legal policies. From that, you would conclude you want to make infant circumcision ILLEGAL for all of humanity? I certainly hope not.

Seems a reasonable assumption to me. Yes..ban infant circumcision unless there is a compelling medical reason.

the LEGALITY is all to do with the individual rights. you can't see it cause it goes against everything you have been indoctrined to in your whole entire life. those of us with no vested interest can see the morality & legality issue regarding those individual rights very clearly.

...

My vested interest? What vested interest is that exactly?

In any case, you as a parent who made the decision NOT to do this cut are much more vested in this issue than I am! It must pain you every time there is a new news item on the new evidence for the wonderful medical benefits of circumcision for males and their partners as well. Also, deep down, you know once you made that fateful decision NOT to cut, it was never going to happen. Now it seems you are feeling the need to rationalize your decision with exaggerated moral outrage. This fantasy that older males are going to make this choice is just that, only a fantasy. It only happens when there are AGGRESSIVE public health campaigns to promote adult circumcision.

My point is the decision NOT to cut is just as fateful decision as a decision to cut given the actual reality in the real world. Cut at infancy or it doesn't happen.

I am a male, 49 years old, never been circumcised, not got HIV and never had a STD. Therefore, like many, many millions of other males, the removal of my foreskin would have been a painful waste of time.

Good for you. Basically one irrelevant anecdotal report which is MEANINGLESS for public health and legal policies. From that, you would conclude you want to make infant circumcision ILLEGAL for all of humanity? I certainly hope not.

Seems a reasonable assumption to me. Yes..ban infant circumcision unless there is a compelling medical reason.

Not logical. There are compelling medical benefits and the reality is cut at infancy or it almost never happens. Banning it is EXTREME.

the LEGALITY is all to do with the individual rights. you can't see it cause it goes against everything you have been indoctrined to in your whole entire life. those of us with no vested interest can see the morality & legality issue regarding those individual rights very clearly.

...

My vested interest? What vested interest is that exactly?

In any case, you as a parent who made the decision NOT to do this cut are much more vested in this issue than I am! It must pain you every time there is a new news item on the new evidence for the wonderful medical benefits of circumcision for males and their partners as well. Also, deep down, you know once you made that fateful decision NOT to cut, it was never going to happen. Now it seems you are feeling the need to rationalize your decision with exaggerated moral outrage. This fantasy that older males are going to make this choice is just that, only a fantasy. It only happens when there are AGGRESSIVE public health campaigns to promote adult circumcision.

My point is the decision NOT to cut is just as fateful decision as a decision to cut given the actual reality in the real world. Cut at infancy or it doesn't happen.

I don't think I've ever noticed a news item on the health benefits of circumcision. I've never thought "Oh, I wish I'd had my son snipped", and I don't think I'd put him down for it now without asking his opinion. And I'm not really that keen on having myself done, either.

SC

the LEGALITY is all to do with the individual rights. you can't see it cause it goes against everything you have been indoctrined to in your whole entire life. those of us with no vested interest can see the morality & legality issue regarding those individual rights very clearly.

...

My vested interest? What vested interest is that exactly?

In any case, you as a parent who made the decision NOT to do this cut are much more vested in this issue than I am! It must pain you every time there is a new news item on the new evidence for the wonderful medical benefits of circumcision for males and their partners as well. Also, deep down, you know once you made that fateful decision NOT to cut, it was never going to happen. Now it seems you are feeling the need to rationalize your decision with exaggerated moral outrage. This fantasy that older males are going to make this choice is just that, only a fantasy. It only happens when there are AGGRESSIVE public health campaigns to promote adult circumcision.

My point is the decision NOT to cut is just as fateful decision as a decision to cut given the actual reality in the real world. Cut at infancy or it doesn't happen.

I don't think I've ever noticed a news item on the health benefits of circumcision. I've never thought "Oh, I wish I'd had my son snipped", and I don't think I'd put him down for it now without asking his opinion. And I'm not really that keen on having myself done, either.

SC

Read the thread. Yes, it becomes a much bigger deal after infancy so it generally doesn't happen. Later circumcision generally occurs:

-- tribal and/or religious rituals where later circumcision is mandated

-- medical necessity with foreskin problems

-- aggressive public health campaigns such as in high risk African countries

Otherwise, it generally doesn't happen. So from a public health point of view, the parents decision cut or not is almost always a LIFETIME decision either way.

the LEGALITY is all to do with the individual rights. you can't see it cause it goes against everything you have been indoctrined to in your whole entire life. those of us with no vested interest can see the morality & legality issue regarding those individual rights very clearly.

...

My vested interest? What vested interest is that exactly?

In any case, you as a parent who made the decision NOT to do this cut are much more vested in this issue than I am! It must pain you every time there is a new news item on the new evidence for the wonderful medical benefits of circumcision for males and their partners as well. Also, deep down, you know once you made that fateful decision NOT to cut, it was never going to happen. Now it seems you are feeling the need to rationalize your decision with exaggerated moral outrage. This fantasy that older males are going to make this choice is just that, only a fantasy. It only happens when there are AGGRESSIVE public health campaigns to promote adult circumcision.

My point is the decision NOT to cut is just as fateful decision as a decision to cut given the actual reality in the real world. Cut at infancy or it doesn't happen.

I don't think I've ever noticed a news item on the health benefits of circumcision. I've never thought "Oh, I wish I'd had my son snipped", and I don't think I'd put him down for it now without asking his opinion. And I'm not really that keen on having myself done, either.

SC

Read the thread. Yes, it becomes a much bigger deal after infancy so it generally doesn't happen. Later circumcision generally occurs:

-- tribal and/or religious rituals where later circumcision is mandated

-- medical necessity with foreskin problems

-- aggressive public health campaigns such as in high risk African countries

Otherwise, it generally doesn't happen. So from a public health point of view, the parents decision cut or not is almost always a LIFETIME decision either way.

Why's that, then? Do educated adults only appreciate the medical benefits where other people who can't express an opinion are concerned?

SC

Older male CONVERTS to Juduasm and Islam also undergo later circumcision.

From a medical and psychological point of view, circumcision after infancy is more difficult and complicated so unless there is a compelling ACUTE medical reason, conversion, or the list above, it usually ain't gonna happen. Again, this is a nuanced social issue. Not black and white. If you're going to do it in your life, the sweet spot is INFANCY. Something like this with a long religious/tribal/ethnic tradition AND scientific evidence of proven medical benefits most definitely should NOT be banned anywhere.

Older male CONVERTS to Juduasm and Islam also undergo later circumcision.

From a medical and psychological point of view, circumcision after infancy is more difficult and complicated so unless there is a compelling ACUTE medical reason, conversion, or the list above, it usually ain't gonna happen. Again, this is a nuanced social issue. Not black and white. If you're going to do it in your life, the sweet spot is INFANCY. Something like this with a long religious/tribal/ethnic tradition AND scientific evidence of proven medical benefits most definitely should NOT be banned anywhere.

Why do you keep on bringing legislation into it? The question is whether it is fair to carry out operations which we believe to be beneficial, but are irreversible, on our newborn children, when no significant benefit will accrue to them until they are old enough that they could have made the decision for themselves in any case.

By the way, what are the additional risks from adult circumcision, in case I need to persuade my son against it?

SC

the LEGALITY is all to do with the individual rights. you can't see it cause it goes against everything you have been indoctrined to in your whole entire life. those of us with no vested interest can see the morality & legality issue regarding those individual rights very clearly.

...

My vested interest? What vested interest is that exactly?

In any case, you as a parent who made the decision NOT to do this cut are much more vested in this issue than I am! It must pain you every time there is a new news item on the new evidence for the wonderful medical benefits of circumcision for males and their partners as well. Also, deep down, you know once you made that fateful decision NOT to cut, it was never going to happen. Now it seems you are feeling the need to rationalize your decision with exaggerated moral outrage. This fantasy that older males are going to make this choice is just that, only a fantasy. It only happens when there are AGGRESSIVE public health campaigns to promote adult circumcision.

My point is the decision NOT to cut is just as fateful decision as a decision to cut given the actual reality in the real world. Cut at infancy or it doesn't happen.

lol, yes it really does pain me that I didn't have part of my sons knob lopped off, just as it pains me that I didn't get his nuts done too, you know, just in case he gets testicular cancer at some time in the future. fyi, there was no deep down descicion, it was never even a consideration, this is what you have to understand, not everyone is indocterined in this practice, it is not even part of our thought process when we have a child.

you really must try not to be so fanciful all the time.

lol, yes it really does pain me that I didn't have part of my sons knob lopped off, just as it pains me that I didn't get his nuts done too, you know, just in case he gets testicular cancer at some time in the future. fyi, there was no deep down descicion, it was never even a consideration, this is what you have to understand, not everyone is indocterined in this practice, it is not even part of our thought process when we have a child.

you really must try not to be so fanciful all the time.

Behave. Nobody is suggesting castration. You know that but you can't resist the drama Queene act. I totally understand much of the world does not even consider doing circumcision. I am suggesting that with new scientific evidence that they SHOULD consider it. Not necessarily do it, but consider it. I also agree that there is nothing wrong for people who are culturally inclined to do it, to also consider NOT doing it. As there are now good arguments both ways, and the decision not to do in infancy is almost always for life, there is nothing wrong with a growing social awareness of the pros and cons of it.

Older male CONVERTS to Juduasm and Islam also undergo later circumcision.

From a medical and psychological point of view, circumcision after infancy is more difficult and complicated so unless there is a compelling ACUTE medical reason, conversion, or the list above, it usually ain't gonna happen. Again, this is a nuanced social issue. Not black and white. If you're going to do it in your life, the sweet spot is INFANCY. Something like this with a long religious/tribal/ethnic tradition AND scientific evidence of proven medical benefits most definitely should NOT be banned anywhere.

Why do you keep on bringing legislation into it? The question is whether it is fair to carry out operations which we believe to be beneficial, but are irreversible, on our newborn children, when no significant benefit will accrue to them until they are old enough that they could have made the decision for themselves in any case.

By the way, what are the additional risks from adult circumcision, in case I need to persuade my son against it?

SC

Some posters here have advocated legal bans, that is why.

Not going to bother doing your research for you about adult circumcision issue because the chances that they will consider this for PSYCHOLOGICAL reasons are almost nonexistent.

Again, the argument ad nauseum that people are going to consider it later so you should never consider doing in infancy is ridiculous and empty. They won't except in the rare exceptions I listed. Infancy or almost never. Why is that so hard to understand?

Behave. Nobody is suggesting castration. You know that but you can't resist the drama Queene act.

pot calling kettle black again there jingthing. I'm not the one taking this as a personal affront. it is supposed to be a discussion of opinion. you have yours, i have mine but you have yet to provide any valid reason for it being done in infancy beyond it being a sweet spot.

you have also presumed to know what I thought when my son was born in relation to this issue & have alluded that I now feel some kind of guilt for not cutting my sons penis because you have stated that I should.

the phrase "get over yourself" has never been so apt.

lol, yes it really does pain me that I didn't have part of my sons knob lopped off, just as it pains me that I didn't get his nuts done too, you know, just in case he gets testicular cancer at some time in the future. fyi, there was no deep down descicion, it was never even a consideration, this is what you have to understand, not everyone is indocterined in this practice, it is not even part of our thought process when we have a child.

you really must try not to be so fanciful all the time.

Behave. Nobody is suggesting castration. You know that but you can't resist the drama Queene act. I totally understand much of the world does not even consider doing circumcision. I am suggesting that with new scientific evidence that they SHOULD consider it. Not necessarily do it, but consider it.

I've not seen any evidence to suggest I should consider circumcising someone else, instead of letting them make up their own mind.

Unless, I suppose, it was a Marky45 sort of thing with one's enemies; you know, all the foreskins of people you'd conquered in battle, but that sounds a bit Papuan to me, like keeping shrunken heads. Anyway, I've yet to hear any reason why my son should not make up his own mind. And, I suppose, my daughter, if that's the sort of thing she wants

SC

Older male CONVERTS to Juduasm and Islam also undergo later circumcision.

From a medical and psychological point of view, circumcision after infancy is more difficult and complicated so unless there is a compelling ACUTE medical reason, conversion, or the list above, it usually ain't gonna happen. Again, this is a nuanced social issue. Not black and white. If you're going to do it in your life, the sweet spot is INFANCY. Something like this with a long religious/tribal/ethnic tradition AND scientific evidence of proven medical benefits most definitely should NOT be banned anywhere.

Why do you keep on bringing legislation into it? The question is whether it is fair to carry out operations which we believe to be beneficial, but are irreversible, on our newborn children, when no significant benefit will accrue to them until they are old enough that they could have made the decision for themselves in any case.

By the way, what are the additional risks from adult circumcision, in case I need to persuade my son against it?

SC

Some posters here have advocated legal bans, that is why.

Not going to bother doing your research for you about adult circumcision issue because the chances that they will consider this for PSYCHOLOGICAL reasons are almost nonexistent.

Again, the argument ad nauseum that people are going to consider it later so you should never consider doing in infancy is ridiculous and empty. They won't except in the rare exceptions I listed. Infancy or almost never. Why is that so hard to understand?

So if the arguments for circumcision in adulthood are not sufficient to convince adults to be circumcised, I put it to you that to do it to children who have no choice is unfair. Legislation does not enter into it.

SC

I am suggesting that with new scientific evidence that they SHOULD consider it. Not necessarily do it, but consider it.

new scientific evidence that is contradicted, not fulluy agreed on & that misses out the negative medical complicatiosn that this procedure can cause.

the parents decision cut or not is almost always a LIFETIME decision either way.

yes, for a child that has no choice whether they want this or not.

Older male CONVERTS to Juduasm and Islam also undergo later circumcision.

From a medical and psychological point of view, circumcision after infancy is more difficult and complicated so unless there is a compelling ACUTE medical reason, conversion, or the list above, it usually ain't gonna happen. Again, this is a nuanced social issue. Not black and white. If you're going to do it in your life, the sweet spot is INFANCY. Something like this with a long religious/tribal/ethnic tradition AND scientific evidence of proven medical benefits most definitely should NOT be banned anywhere.

Why do you keep on bringing legislation into it? The question is whether it is fair to carry out operations which we believe to be beneficial, but are irreversible, on our newborn children, when no significant benefit will accrue to them until they are old enough that they could have made the decision for themselves in any case.

By the way, what are the additional risks from adult circumcision, in case I need to persuade my son against it?

SC

Some posters here have advocated legal bans, that is why.

Not going to bother doing your research for you about adult circumcision issue because the chances that they will consider this for PSYCHOLOGICAL reasons are almost nonexistent.

Again, the argument ad nauseum that people are going to consider it later so you should never consider doing in infancy is ridiculous and empty. They won't except in the rare exceptions I listed. Infancy or almost never. Why is that so hard to understand?

So if the arguments for circumcision in adulthood are not sufficient to convince adults to be circumcised, I put it to you that to do it to children who have no choice is unfair. Legislation does not enter into it.

SC

This has already been addressed. It is not strictly "fair" in the sense that if the person later feels that they are missing something. But in real life, that is so very rare that is basically a trivial issue. Granted, it can become a big issue for a small minority of men who become irrationally obsessed with their loss. Probably more so with these hysterical over the top anti-circumcision extremist websites popping up putting the idea in peoples heads that they SHOULD be upset about it. That minor risk is something to consider when weighing the pros and cons of infant circumcision.

new scientific evidence that is contradicted, not fulluy agreed on & that misses out the negative medical complicatiosn that this procedure can cause.

Your propaganda websites that you absurdly take as gospel WILDLY exaggerate the risks and wildly irrationally question the proven benefits. Again, there are indeed valid pros and cons to this procedure and doing it in infancy is the way to go.

I have no problem with fanatics having a field day with blowing up the problems of infant circumcision and denying the benefits, but again, don't you guys dare make it illegal. THAT is not fair.

so anyone not agreeing with your view on it are over the top hysterical extremists. nice!

...

So if the arguments for circumcision in adulthood are not sufficient to convince adults to be circumcised, I put it to you that to do it to children who have no choice is unfair. Legislation does not enter into it.

SC

This has already been addressed. It is not strictly "fair" in the sense that if the person later feels that they are missing something. But in real life, that is so very rare that is basically a trivial issue. Granted, it can become a big issue for a small minority of men who become irrationally obsessed with their loss. Probably more so with these hysterical over the top anti-circumcision extremist websites popping up putting the idea in peoples heads that they SHOULD be upset about it. That minor risk is something to consider when weighing the pros and cons of infant circumcision.

Along with, I suppose, the issue of choice and self-determination.

SC

new scientific evidence that is contradicted, not fulluy agreed on & that misses out the negative medical complicatiosn that this procedure can cause.

Your propaganda websites that you absurdly take as gospel WILDLY exaggerate the risks and wildly irrationally question the proven benefits. Again, there are indeed valid pros and cons to this procedure and doing it in infancy is the way to go.

what propaganda websites are they that I take as gospel? I never take anything as gospel. I research using numerous sources. But you claim to know so much about what is in my head that you know that already. So why the lie?

I have yet to see a valid argument from you or any of your sources on the hightlighted part of the text beyond your suggestion that this is the "sweet spot".

so anyone not agreeing with your view on it are over the top hysterical extremists. nice!

There you go again with your personal attack. I have been the reasonable one here. I am TOLERANT of your views. YOU want to shove your irrational anti-science morality down all of humanity with LEGAL bans. Yes, that opinion is very, very extreme. Objectively so. I am for freedom of information and parental choice for a MINOR medical procedure widely endorsed by many credible doctors and in fact AGGRESSIVELY pushed by the WHO in some nations. I am not for forcing everyone or anyone to do it. You are for FORCING everyone all over the world, even Jews and Muslims, not to do it. On that issue, it is hard to imagine a more extreme point of view than your total legal ban point of view.

new scientific evidence that is contradicted, not fulluy agreed on & that misses out the negative medical complicatiosn that this procedure can cause.

Your propaganda websites that you absurdly take as gospel WILDLY exaggerate the risks and wildly irrationally question the proven benefits. Again, there are indeed valid pros and cons to this procedure and doing it in infancy is the way to go.

I have no problem with fanatics having a field day with blowing up the problems of infant circumcision and denying the benefits, but again, don't you guys dare make it illegal. THAT is not fair.

I've no objection with infant circumcision, so long as the victim / patient chooses to be circumcised when an adult first. Once time travel is sorted out, I can't see any argument arising. In the meantime, I think my own personal opinions on freedom of choice and the right to one's own body mean that I still fall on the side of considering it unfair to subject one's offspring to irreversible ... I don't know a more succinct word for irreversible removal of body parts than mutilation though I accept it may not be precise enough for this discussion,,, anyway, such irreversible treatment.

Unlike the adverse effects of vaccination, which either occur in the short term or not at all (to the best of my knowledge), circumcision is something that stays with you for life.

Out of interest, why has circumcision fallen out of fashion in the US? Is it because the current generation is less well educated on the health benefits? Why was circumcision more popular in the US than in Europe, a generation or two ago? Were Europeans less cognisant of the health benefits?

Anyway, I still don't understand why we should not delay until adulthood, excpet for the obvious one, that most adults don't want to have bits nipped off their willies, without clear and pressing benefit.

SC

I think you need to stop drinking the koolaid jingthing if you think you have been reasonable or tolerant. You have ranted, bullied (daring anyone to ban it) called those who do not toe your line fanatics, hysterical, over the top extermists. You don't seem to want to accept that for many people this is an abuse on the rights of a child. Not an attack on your beleifs but a protection of a child who has no voice.

You keep referencing the WHO, who are pushing for it in Africa for ADULT males, not infants. There is a massive difference.

That you cannot see the differnce is not our fault.

I have stated several times that I have no objection to the practice providing the male it is being done to gives full consent, something a baby cannot do.

I'm still worried about the consequences of adult circumcision. Its something I might consider for myself, or recommend for my son, if I was fully aware of the downsides. Apart from the marketing arm of theamerican medical fraternity, I've not really seen any argument in favour, and I've never seen a clear and dispassionate assessment of the downsides, nor an explanation for why it has fallen out of fashion in the US.

SC

I think you need to stop drinking the koolaid jingthing if you think you have been reasonable or tolerant. You have ranted, bullied (daring anyone to ban it) called those who do not toe your line fanatics, hysterical, over the top extermists. You don't seem to want to accept that for many people this is an abuse on the rights of a child. Not an attack on your beleifs but a protection of a child who has no voice.

You keep referencing the WHO, who are pushing for it in Africa for ADULT males, not infants. There is a massive difference.

That you cannot see the differnce is not our fault.

I have stated several times that I have no objection to the practice providing the male it is being done to gives full consent, something a baby cannot do.

To be fair, though, a lot of us spend a lot of effort rationalising into common sense the religious prejudices that we were brought up with. I am fervently opposed to the diefication of man, or the suggestion that a person is chosen by God to be God's representative on Earh. I am staunchly opposed to popery. Our ministers are appointed by us to represent us to God, not vice versa. and the divine right of kings is a duty, not a privelige. Now an English or a Roman person would take a different view on that.

and, I am sure, a Jewish person would bring to bear some common sense reason for snipping their willie. Its something I've only recently considered for myself, and I've not seen any credible dispassionate convincing argument for putting myself under the knife and the concommittant risks (Ref. the "By special request" thread) but I am fortunate that in my condition, I can maintain an open mind.

SC

I was raised non denomination, we have what we call church of england, most schools are CoE & religion is not pushed on us. It has allowed me to make my own choices in relation to religion, we study the big 4, christianity, judaism, muslim & buddhism.

I made a choice not to follow any, although over the years I have become very well educated in all. One can know alot about something, even respect aspects of it without swallowing the doctrine whole & "gasp" disagree with parts of it.

JT has admitted that few circumcisions happen after a child reaches the age of discontent.

That says it all really....I've been present for quite a few of these operations, at ages from 9-12 usually, and the kids involved are all having the snip for reasons of necessity.

There is an apprehension with all of them and in one case, where a poor laddie had a previous botched operation needing fixing, much tears and I had to intervene to prevent his mother from what many here would describe as parental abuse using violence.

Its an emotive issue certainly but having seen this operation performed it is not something to be taken lightly.

People's religious beliefs are strong, as is the belief of others in a child's right to choose.

In my humble opinion no child would choose this of his own free will.