Is circumcision bad

Answer 1

Yes, circumcision is a bad thing. The need for the removal of the prepuce (foreskin is very rare. and the foreskin plays an important part in the way the penis functions. Approximately 15% of the worlds men are circumcised and most of these are done is children when they have no choice in the matter. ti is also done to some males (as infants) in some of the English speaking cultures. Have a read of the information in the related link below. ( The case against circumcision) if you want to know more about it. Circumcision is a wasteful and harmful form of "Male Genital Mutilation" especially when inflicted on infants as is usually the case.

Yes, it is . when you take into account that the vast majority of men have intact genitalia because the intact penis works better. It is a bad thing to take an infant and amputate a part of its body from it for in the majority of cases religious and cultural reasons. a small group are done for falsely attested medical reasons Such as those in the USA . The foreskin is an important part of the male genitalia and the male sexual health no one has the right to deprive a non consenting child of it unless that child's life is threatened by its existence.

No, it's not a bad thing. To each his own, I say. A lot of men are circumcised, and a lot of men aren't. I would venture a guess that those who are circumcised had it forced upon them when they were babies, so they had no choice.

There are a number of arguments for and against circumcision, generally originating from a cultural or religious bias. The American Academy of Pediatrics, while they do not recommend routine circumcision, state that the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. Among the benefits they cite are easier hygiene, decreased risk of urinary tract infections, decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections, prevention of penile problems, and decreased risk of penile cancer. The question, as stated, is loaded with a judgemental "good versus bad" element, but this is not a "good or bad" question. Perhaps a better way to address the question is from the risk/benefit aspect, taking into account one's religious and cultural considerations.

Answer 2

While there is some evidence to suggest that uncircumcised men stand a slightly higher chance of getting AIDS, this shouldn't be a consideration. Anyone who has unprotected sex, without a condom, can get it. What you do and with who varies the risk, but any exchange of any body fluid carries some risk.

Answer 3

There is a risk with every surgical procedure. The risk is presented in percentages sometimes. I'm not sure how much you want to know - are you considering it for yourself, your son? If you Google circumcision and risk, you will find Horror stories of what has happened in some cases by incompetent doctors or rabbis. ( rabbi's are teachers not circumcise-rs unless they have been trained to be Mohels, who are Jewish circumcisers and not necessarily rabbi's). You would obviously want to choose your surgeon carefully. You might also want to consider if you really want it to be done. The majority of males on this planet intact genitals and manage to live normal lives. Both sexes should be taught how to clean their sex organs, if cleanliness is the problem. If it is for cultural reasons, you still might want to have a long think and maybe allow your son to make a choice about this when he is old enough to make a decision. The foreskin is an important part of the sexual organ and its loss is a serious issue both physically and psychologically.

If we are talking about females it's not called circumcision but mutilation. It is dangerous for a woman and causes many health problems for her and also for the baby when she's in labor. Many babies and women die each year because of this. Even the circumcision of male children is no more then male genital mutilation.

Just in the USA where facility's are of a relatively high standard more children die as a result of circumcision then of sudden infant death syndrome. Figures on the results of the damage done by circumcision in the US are notoriously poor as this is still a billion dollar industry fighting to survive.

HARM CAUSED BY CIRCUMCISION

The increasing doubts about Jewish circumcision are based on the understanding that it causes harm. Anatomical, neurochemical, physiological, and behavioural studies confirm what mothers already know: infants feel pain. Drs. Anand and Hickey, in a comprehensive review of recent medical literature on newborn pain, conclude that newborn responses to pain are "similar to but greater than those in adult subjects." This study is accepted by virtually all medical authorities and is often cited in the literature whenever there is a discussion of infant pain. As a surgical procedure, circumcision has been described as "among the most painful performed in neonatal medicine." Studies of infant responses show that the pain of circumcision is not like that of a mere pin prick. It is severe and overwhelming.

The relationship between infant pain and vocal response needs explanation. The cry may be reduced by the effect of anaesthetics given to the mother during labor. These anaesthetics enter the infant's body and, according to paediatrician T. Berry Brazelton, it can take over a week to leave. Other factors can also account for minimal vocal response. Justin Call, infant psychologist and professor-in-chief of child and adolescent psychology at the University of California, reports that "sometimes babies who are being circumcised . . . . Lapse into a semi-coma." Tonya Brooks, president of the International Association for Childbirth at Home and a midwife, observes, "In four of the nine circumcisions that I have seen, the baby didn't cry. He just seemed to be suddenly in a state of shock!" Studies demonstrate that even though an infant may not cry during circumcision, the stress hormone level in the blood still increases dramatically, and medical researchers consider this change to be the most reliable indicator of pain response. Therefore, lack of crying does not mean that the infant feels no pain. It could mean that he is withdrawing from unbearable pain.

Circumcision has other harmful effects. Anand and Hickey write that

the persistence of specific behavioural changes after circumcision in neonates implies the presence of memory. In the short term, these behavioural changes may disrupt the adaptation of newborn infants to their postnatal environment, the development of parent-infant bonding, and feeding schedules. Psychiatrist Rima Laibow agrees that circumcision significantly impairs mother-infant bonding. Other researchers conclude that circumcision has "behavioural and psychological consequences." The American Academy of Paediatrics Task Force on Circumcision notes increased irritability, varying sleep patterns, and changes in infant-maternal interaction after circumcision. Canadian investigators report that during vaccinations at age four to six months, circumcised boys had increased behavioural pain response and cried for significantly longer periods than did uncircumcised boys, a possible indication of post-traumatic stress disorder. Other long-term effects have not been studied.

(source The Jewish circumcision resource center.)

No. The screaming they do, elevated heart rate and blood pressure, sudden and extreme muscle tension and the other signs of stress that their bodies display are really signs of delight and comfort. They just look and sound like they are being tortured because their nervous systems are immature. Any mother knows that a screaming infant is under stress. You would think physicians are smart enough to figure it out.

I think the reasons that anesthesia is not routinely used for infant circumcision are:

• Doctors do know that there are risks anaesthetising newborns, and with a kind of backward logic they prefer not to use it for a procedure that is not even medically indicated in the first place.
• The evidence that there is unnecessary pain and stress would ordinarily be the complaints and/or lawsuits brought by patients. Newborn boys have no defense and no way to complain, do they?

Answer 4

No it is not, Around 15% of males world wide are circumcised and most of these have it done to them while they are infants or have been falsely informed by parents or guardians that it is a natural thing to do

Hygiene

Most Americans imagine that the foreskin of the adult male looks like the foreskin of the infant, pulled tightly over the glans, protruding out in front. They do not know, because they seldom see a normal intact male, that the foreskin becomes very loose, and may be easily retracted so that the intact male looks as if he were circumcised. It is as easy to clean this intact penis as a circumcised one. Hygiene is an absurd and tragic reason to circumcise.

Complications

Williams and Kapila report: "Although haemorrhage and sepsis are the main causes of morbidity, the variety of complications is enormous. The literature abounds with reports of morbidity and even death as a result of circumcision."11

Complications of every male circumcised

Loss of sexual sensitivity - 15+/- cell layer increase in thickness of surface of glans penis.

Loss of the foreskin

Loss of the frenulum

Progressive loss of glans sensitivity

a scar on the penis

changes in urethral orifice

Complications - common

Hemorrhage

Infections

Meatitis

Meatal stenosis - constriction of the urethral opening.

Bridging - adhering of the cut edge to the glans creates tunnels.

tight scar on shaft.

curving of penis, due to removal of too much skin. often not apparent until an erection.

pubic hair on penile shaft, pulled onto shaft after removal of too much foreskin.

bleeding during sexual intercourse

pain with erection

concealed, or hidden penis - cut surface of remaining skin adheres to itself, burying glans.

removal of too much skin

wound separation

urinary retention

Complications - serious

Hemorrhage

Infection

Cutting off all or part of the glans

Harming or destroying all or part of the penis

electrocautery has destroyed entire penises, necessitating surgery to change the infants' genitals to those of a female.

inadvertently putting hemostat in urethra and crushing glans.

Tetanus

Tuberculosis - via Mezizah, the practice of sucking the blood from the circumcision wound. the mohel gives the disease to infant.

lacerated scrotum

severe iron deficiency anemia (following hemorrhage)

blistering and peeling of glans with intromission (described by Masters and Johnson)

neonatal sepsis (twice as common in males as females) ie. scalded skin syndrome,

meningitis, necrotising entero-colitis, necrotizing fasciitis, gangrene.

Shock

Death

The following complications are derived from statements by circumcised men.

low self esteem over body image

sense of body violation

sense of denial of human rights

difficulties with intimate relations

sense of betrayal by parents, especially the mother

feelings of anger and violence toward women

addictions and dependencies (chemical and sexual)

extreme anger and hostility toward doctors

Broader Implications of Harm

A recent book, Circumcision, the Hidden Trauma by Ronald Goldman, Ph.D., discusses many subjects that may be associated with circumcision. These include:

• low male self esteem
• avoidance of intimacy in male-female relationships
• attitudes toward pain and stimulation
• passivity
• reduced empathy
• antisocial behaviors - adult male violence, domestic violence, rape, child sexual abuse, suicide, and theft.

"What's done to children, they will do to society."

—Karl Menninger MD, Menninger Clinic

The Bottom Line - Human Rights

The following rights were enumerated at the Second International Conference on Health and Human Rights, Harvard University, October 1996. Tim Hammond declared that each one of these is violated when a circumcision is performed:

• The human right to Security of Person
• The human right to Physical Integrity
• The human right to Physical and Mental Health
• The human right to Self-Determination

Circumcision is also a violation of:

The Convention on the Rights of the Child

Article 24.3 calls for abolition of "traditional practices prejudicial to the health of children."

Myths

Please check to see how these myths have been refuted by the above information.

"Just a piece of skin."

"It does not hurt."

"Circumcision is not an important issue."

"It is necessary for hygienic purposes."

"Necessary to prevent cancer of penis."

"Necessary to prevent urinary tract infection."

"It's important that he looks like his father."

(actually, his father wants to look like him)

"He may not be comfortable looking different."

(Half are intact today. He does need to be told that he is OK, that he is normal, and that he should treat his circumcised friends gently.)

Female Genital Mutilation

Most everyone in America is horrified at the idea of female genital mutilation (FGM). Everyone agrees it should stop. There are many parallels between FGM and MGM (euphemistically called male circumcision). We quote directly from the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Committee Opinion (Committee on Gynecologic Practice, and the Committee on International Affairs) Number 151 - January 1995. Try substituting "male" wherever the word "female" occurs.

"Female genital mutilation is a practice based on cultural and traditional patterns dating back at least 2000 years. According to the World Health Organization, approximately 80 million women [now living] have undergone these procedures. While the rationale for these procedures is lost in antiquity, the practice is still widespread in Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. The procedure is performed rarely in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe; however, women who have undergone the procedure often immigrate to these countries.

"There are many forms of female genital mutilation but the procedures performed most often are 1) removal of the clitoral prepuce, 2) excision of the clitoris, and 3) removal of the clitoris and labia minora and occasionally much of the labia majora, suturing the two sides together to occlude the vagina (infibulation). These procedures usually are performed prior to adolescence (between the ages of 1 week and 14 years old) by untrained individuals without benefit of sterile conditions or anesthesia.

"The immediate physical effects of female genital mutilation can include infection, tetanus, shock, hemorrhage, and even death. In addition, there are long-term physical and mental disabilities, such as chronic pelvic infection, keloids, vulvar abscesses, sterility, incontinence, depression, anxiety, sexual dysfunction, and obstetric complications.

"There is no scientific basis for the female genital mutilation procedure. Physicians are reminded, however, that patients who have undergone the procedure should be treated with sensitivity and compassion. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists joins many other major organizations (World Health Organization, United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, and the American Medical Association) in opposing all forms of medically unnecessary surgical modification of the female genitalia. Furthermore, it is recommended that the issue be addressed by promoting awareness among the public and health care workers and by developing methods for educating physicians regarding the gynecologic and obstetric care of women who have undergone this procedure."

This is the basic information you need to know so that you can make the decision not to participate in circumcisions.

References

1. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291-5.
2. Gairdner D. The fate of the foreskin: a study of circumcision. Br Med J 1949;2:1433-7.
3. Fleiss P, Hodges F, Van Howe RS. Immunological functions of the human prepuce. Sex Trans Inf 1998;74(5):364-7.
4. Cold CJ, Taylor JR. The prepuce. BJU Int 1999;83 Suppl. 1:34-44.
5. Denniston GC, Hill G. Circumcision in adults: effect on sexual function. Urology 2004;64(6);1267.
6. Hunter RH. Notes on the development of the prepuce. J Anat 1935;70(1):68-75.
7. Deibert GA. The separation of the prepuce in the human penis. Anat Rec 1933;57:387-399.
8. Øster J. Further fate of the foreskin: incidence of preputial adhesions, phimosis, and smegma among Danish schoolboys. Arch Dis Child 1968;43:200-3.
9. Beaugé M. The causes of adolescent phimosis. Br J Sex Med 1997; Sept/Oct: 26.
10. Maden C, Sherman KJ, Beckmann AM, et al. History of circumcision, medical conditions, and sexual activity and risk of penile cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85(1):19-24.
11. Williams N, Kapila L. Complications of circumcision. Brit J Surg 1993;80:1231-6.

Yes. If you are uncircumsized, you are more septable to bacterial infections.

See link on US rate of circumcision.

There are at least two sides to the circumcision debate, and whether or not it is 'healthy'. That really is the wrong question; what is actually healthy is the foreskin tissue cut from baby boys during the procedure. More important, it makes sense that the removal of healthy tissue should be the result of a medical need, and not some future benefit that is not particularly strong. To be a little flip in the service of making a point, if there is a clear history of testicular cancer in the family of a newborn boy, would anyone suggest that the prudent course of action would be to remove the boy's testicles in order to protect him against the threat of cancer in 50 years? Yet the over-all future 'threat' to keeping the foreskin is on average much less serious than testicular cancer. This is just an example to highlight that a slight future chance of issues does not constitute a medical indication at the time of birth. Information and proper hygiene can avert most difficulties for intact boys.
There are some medical studies that show that circumcision is medically harmful.

Answer 5

There are always risks involved in the amputation of any part of the body. However i suppose it it is possible to remove a finger or leg safely with only the result of being denied the advantages of having that finger or or leg then the same could be said for the foreskin. there are many disadvantages in having the foreskin removed. So I would suggest it is not a safe thing to do.

Answer 6

Circumcision, just like any other surgery, does have risks. While most circumcisions do not have serious complications, risks include severe pain, prolonged bleeding, and infection.

Answer 7

Getting circumcised wouldn't be a problem. Infection, discomfort and a shaky surgeon would be the only concerns.