Should infant male circumcision be banned?

1. Laura

March 4, 2010 @ 5:07 pm

Yes infant circumcision should be banned.
The foreskin is there for a reason, why remove it ?
The natural penis has been designed to work with a foreskin Period.
Genital integrity is a basic human right. It’s illegal to cut a baby girl, it should be the same for boys.

2. Jake

March 4, 2010 @ 5:28 pm

It seems foolish to try to ban it, but of course that won’t stop the anti-circumcision lobby. Maybe one day they’ll be able to accept the fact that many people disagree with their viewpoint.

3. Laura

March 4, 2010 @ 5:53 pm

Jake,
The point isn’t about banning circumcision. If an adult thinks removing a valuable part of his package is worth it, he can go for it. But it should be his decision.

4. TN

March 4, 2010 @ 6:50 pm

I agree with Laura. I wish my parents had the fortitude to understand what was being done, rather than following the herd.

5. NYC

March 4, 2010 @ 7:41 pm

It’s much more of a difficult recovery time and more pain is involved when an adult male decides to get circumcized. There are benefits to circumcision and each parent must make an educated decision based on what’s in their son’s best interest in the long run. I don’t believe one decision is better than another, only different, valid reasons for doing it or not doing it. This is just another example of people trying to pick a superior side in which to judge other people. Do what you think is right and don’t listen to haters on the Internet.

6. Mark Lyndon

March 4, 2010 @ 9:30 pm

It’s illegal to cut the prepuce off a baby girl, or to make any incision on her gen1tals, even without removing any tissue. Why don’t boys get the same protection? Everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether they want parts of their gen1tals cut off or not.

No-one complained when it was made illegal to do it to girls, so why is it a big deal for boys to get the same rights over their own body?

His body - his decision.

7. Ron Low

March 6, 2010 @ 11:39 am

Infancy is the worst time to circumcise. The cutter can have no idea how the boy’s skin tube or phallus will grow, or even whether at the time of cutting it is puffed up from handling or shriveled from the cold room. The healing must happen in a fouled diaper under the care of lay people, and the victim can’t articulate if something doesn’t feel just right in the healing process. Infants can’t tolerate effective pain meds - indeed many of the deaths from infant circ are from anesthesia complications. The trauma interferes with breastfeeding success, and it is painful for the baby to even be snuggled close for nursing. And any tiny error in cutting is magnified as the victim grows.

EVEN IF, the cutter had a specific style of cosmetic result in mind, it’s impossible to execute on a tiny baby, and most importantly the boy does not have a say. Imagine someone performing surgery on a girl to enhance her bustline. It would be absurd to presume that in infancy the need for such a thing, or the degree of addition or subtraction that the girl would find most pleasing, could be understood. A boy has every bit the right to control what he sees in the mirror when he becomes an adult.

The only possible rationale for cutting in infancy is the supposed slight reduction in UTI incidence during the first year of life, but girls get more UTI than boys, and we treat those cases effectivelt with antibiotics. In places where they know the proper care of the normal prepuce (that is, leave it alone, clean only what is seen) the UTI “advantage” is not observed.

Adults elect genital surgery all the time. About 40% of men over 40 get vasectomies. It’s no big deal with modern pain meds.

I dare say if there was a 100% safe pill you could give a baby (and which would not work if given later) that would prevent him from ever having to shave his face, that we would find it a gross violation of his right to self-determination to make that smooth-faced decision for him. How can it be ethical to choose for him how much of his perfectly evolved pleasure receptor he gets to keep?

8. Robert Jones

March 6, 2010 @ 8:23 pm

Mark, it isn’t his body, fact is Kids are under the control of their parents until they are legal age. To take that logic would be to say kids have all the rights of adults and parents have no rights over their children, This would also include no liability which parents are liable for their children so it is a nice saying but not very logical.

Fact is that people have the right to choose, some do it for religious reasons and they have the right, some do it for hygene and they have the right. When a Kid goes into the hospital parent make choices as to the kids all the time until they are 18 so this is nothing different. If you don’t like it, don’t do it to your children but you shouldn’t take away my right anymore than the government should force you to do it.

The best thing to do is not to force your decision on others, but let each parent decide for themselves after getting educated.

9. Robert Jones

March 6, 2010 @ 8:30 pm

Ron, the problem with your whole argument is that an infant isn’t competent enough to make that decision and all decisions of care are given to the parents. The argument that the baby may not have wanted it is illogical. If this is the case, the whole parent child right and responsabilty laws would have to be undone as you let the government decide what the child would want, oh wait then the suits of men who the government didn’t circumcise would role in. The fact is that the parent decides for children of that age, your option is the government would make decisions and be just as liable for making the wrong one. Through history parents have cared for and made choices for their children until they are legal age. You have to undo all history to rewrite what you simply don’t agree with. That would be your choice for your children but they may have wanted it and you are in the same boat of doing something that your own child disagrees with.

10. TN

March 6, 2010 @ 10:44 pm

Robert, your argument that the parent has the right to make choices and that the government does not decide is not exactly correct. There have been more than one case recently where parents made the choice to tattoo their children and were arrested. Based on your argument, this cannot happen. Also a law was recently enacted that prevents parents from altering the genitals of their daughters for religious/cultural reasons (although I cannot relate, this also speaks directly to your argument).
I think that your real argument is that you cannot envision anyone making a logical case for allowing a body modification to the owner of the body. Most circumcisions in the US are not for religious reasons, and the hygene issue is for most a last ditch statement by some who have no idea what is really happening. Admit it, most just follow the herd. If enough people cut off the earlobes of their female children, many would follow suit without trying to understand what they are really doing or why.
What is so wrong with waiting until the child is old enough to make the decision for himself. STD’s and AIDs are not going to be an issue for more than a decade to the infant.

11. Aaron

March 26, 2010 @ 5:12 pm

Robert do I have the right to cut on my daughters genitals? That is a religious pratcie in many part of the world… does that make it right? no! It is also not right to do the same to boys. Research shows that it can cause psycological problems when they grow up and all evidence of a male being healthier has been debunked. I think performing any unnecessary surgery on an infant should be illegal. Circumcising an infant is the worst too since it can mental scar a child, and the foreskin is actually attached to the head of the penis and must be riped of with forceps then crushed, then cut off. The foreskin that is cut off containts over 250 feet of nerve endings that the male can never get back. Why should someone else have the right to choose if this should be done to me? Not too mention things can go wrong from pain during intercourse to having to have a penectomy. This should be outlawed internationally.

12. Prescott

March 26, 2010 @ 7:38 pm

Aaron — just a bit of advice, any good points you may have are overshadowed when you make nonsensical statements like “the foreskin that is cut off containts [sic] over 250 feet of nerve endings…”

Look at the tip of your index finger, which has a dense amount of nerve endings. Now picture “250 feet” (the length of 2.5 NBA basketball courts) of anything existing within the skin of it. Then do a brief web search for a layman’s explanation of the nervous system (start with the definition of a “nerve ending”) and you’ll see how silly that sounds.

13. Rebecca

March 31, 2010 @ 1:02 pm

I don’t think it should b outlawed. If they have it done wen there little it makes it easier on the little boys when they get older. And that whole “their 2 youmg 2 give concent.” Their 2 young 2 give concent 2 all these pedophiles who think they can.

14. Ian

April 9, 2010 @ 1:34 am

Rebecca, you being of the female do not understand the stipulation of this cause. Your ignorance is further exacerbated by the fact your argument really doesn’t have any common sense nor does it make any sense. “Their 2 you 2 give concent 2 all these pedophiles who think they can,” please explain to me just what that is supposed to mean? The equivalent of female circumcision has been outlawed, males deserve the same right. There is not a real benefit to having this occur in infancy. It doesn’t make it easier on little boys when they get older. It’s their choice, not the parents. The human body is your greatest asset. This is incomparable to vaccinations and other things performed at birth, since rarely are these things permanent, and they do not affect physical appearance. If in anything, the procedure is much more inhumane in infancy. The male infant is often strapped down while the procedure occurs, and is not given any medication. In contrast, if an adult is to have the same procedure, they are put under anesthetic. As a society, we need to question the moral permissibility of our actions and not just go with the herd.

15. Brandy

April 19, 2010 @ 8:31 am

What you all are getting into here is another pro-life/pro-choice type debate. As for circumcising young female….are you kidding me? Do a research paper…read a book….or at minimum read a scholarly article on the issue. I can tell you that in my research, and in the papers I have written, there are three main types of female circumcision and they ALL have proven to make the genetal area more prone to infections (unlike the circumcision of males). In fact, there is one specific form of female circumcision that actually makes intercourse unbelievably painful and this type of circumcision is conducted SPECIFICALLY for that purpose and to ensure marital fidelity of the female. Female bodies are not built in the same manner as male bodies… Can you please give me an example of a male who went under a normal, healthy circumcision, who not only received more infections because of it but also made intercourse more painful for him? In all of my research, I have yet to find one case. Therefore, please stop acting like circumcision is the same for both males and females, as it obviously has different outcomes for each sex.
As for being happy or possibly distorting their self-image or whatever….that is a ridiculous statement. I have met many men and not one has blamed any of their problems on the fact that they were circumcised as an infant.
Bottom line, I have a son. I got him circumcised because as HIS parent (who loves him and wants what is best for him) this is MY decision to make for him. If I felt it would harm him in anyway down the road, I would never have done it. If the world is so consumed with this, one day I’ll ask him if it has scarred his life. As of now he’s the happiest baby you would ever meet.

16. priya

June 28, 2010 @ 2:57 pm

Iam from indian origin,i have 3 years old daughter seconde one is boy born recently. as iam 30 years old i never heard about circumcission in india. my husband without know knowledge he said when before going to my c-section paper filling process.

he thought there may be small cut to pass urine freely he thought in mind,but we ended up with worse.

as a mother i didnt seen my son peenis not even once,because off my csection pains.when iam going to home one doctor came and he took my son he did circumcission .my son cried like hospital roaring ,i didnt seen that time ,nurse said i clean the diaper after one hour .after an hour she came back and we saw his pennis ,iam totally shocked ,nothing is there to see .half off them they cut .it was happended 3 months back but still also ,i unable to digest the truth.he is the first son in our family after 4 girls.we had soo much expectation on him.he is good ,but looking his pennis i feel like we did such a big mistake ,we never get back. i didnt have any satisfation off giving birth to him.

every day iam feeling soo bad about this.Sleepless nights and iam crying every day.some times iam thinking i only hurt my son .

please stop doing circumcission ,no one mother should not suffer like me ,please especially in america please stop doing this procedure .because nobody knows about this much. why doctors are doing like this.

babies are form with all kids off resources ,how to grow themselves healthy .why like this u guys doing hurting the small babies.

PLEASE STOP DOING THIS .

17. unnamed

July 12, 2010 @ 1:36 pm

i have a 3 and 1/2 year old boy, we are jewish and in our religion circumcision is a big thing for an infant child. there definitely should not be anesthetic, it hurts the child for a second, u can put a bottle in their mouth and they are completely fine a minute lately. the whole point of doing this at infancy is that it is pain free, when a grown man goes to get a circumcision it is now a surgery with needles and stitches and god forbid infections. it hurts to pee and god forbid your clothes touches the area. infancy circumcisions take a whole of 5 minutes and heal in a week where as an adult can take a month and thats without any complications.