Child Circumcision

[Biomega]

Here, there are some people are trying to ban Circumcision.

Some say it is a religious rite, and some say it has medical benefits. Some say it is against children rights and are forced to do it, and some says it has no medical benefits.

So, what to do you have to say about Circumcision. Should Children be forced to Circumcision? Has it a real cultural and religious value?

Post your propositions.

 

[Arachna]

I can't really see the point of calling it a religious right.
But lets talk about medical benefits.

And other stuff.

Most studies show that uncircumcised male infants have about a 10 fold increase in UTIs.
But the overall risk of an uncircumcised male infant getting a UTI is relatively low, only about 1%.
Cancer is also more common in uncircumcised men, but this type of cancer is very rare anyway.
And there is also a "small correlation between the uncircumcised male and risk for STDs".

While these medical conditions seem to support circumcision,almost all uncircumcised boys can be taught proper hygiene that can lower their chances of getting disease.

The reasons not to have a circumcision, including the risk of bleeding, pain from the procedure, infection, injury,sensation deficits.
Children who are circumcised are also at increased risk of meatitis, or inflammation.

(It is so hard to write about it if i am avoiding medical words for "it") lol

And the second part.

I don't support it at all. If a grown man wants to do it.He can.But the child doesn't really have a choice of picking. That is why i am against it.

In the end, one of the major reasons that many parents want to circumcise their child is because they want their son to look like their father, who is circumcised.
I find that just not exceptable enough as a reason to do it,to your own child.

 

[Crom]

Idk but, I sure do not mind my Love Sleeve (yeah, thats what I call it), and neither does anyone else.

Uncut: Shiney, clean looking, more sensitive

Cut: Mutilated, rock looking thing, weird difference in color, less enjoyable sex





I never understood the big deal, since they both look practically the same erect. I think this stuff only matters to 15 year old American girls, since from what I remember circumcision doesnt typically happen in most the world and I think thats the only type of person who would make a big deal of it.

Plus the claim in sanitary conditions is pretty laughable and should only apply to people who dont shower. Pretty pointless if you ask me.

 

[Buried Under Ice]

Banning the act goes against freedom of religion, as it is an especially well known custom and widespread within the two religions.

It is understandable if some do not want to have their children circumcised or would rather wait, but to have it removed as an option for those for whom it is sacred is cruel. It is an important part of their religion.
While one might want to do it as an adult if they are very religious and did not have it done before, it will be far more painful, mainly because one does not retain many memories of their infantry. I shudder at the idea of those who do it when they're older.

And since the children are just that, children, and it does have relatively little effect on the child later. I've never heard of a person who was traumatized because they were circumcised as a baby. Since raising a child as part of a religion is allowed, then this custom is too. It is not necessarily a bad thing unless the child is older and unwilling, in my eyes, as it is much like giving an infant pierced ears.

 

[Kaze Araki]

This is primarily a question of balancing the right to practice religion with basic human rights and how to make sure that they does not impedes each other.

 

[Arachna]

People do freakingly unbelievable things cos of "religious freedom".
I don't think i ll ever understand it.

Where is the limitation of that right,then?
When practicing religion isn't getting in the way of basic human rights?

 

[Kaze Araki]

Well, that's the tricky question.
We can't say much about the child's opinion, but we can look at the medical consequences resulted from the operation.

 

[Arachna]

I did say what are the medical consequences.
<.<
The only thing i didn't mention was that the children do get anesthesia. <.<

 

[Kaze Araki]

What I meant was effect on the children psychology, from medical point of view.
For comparison; even though a child would demand the right to read pornographic manga, the parent can deny this based upon the negative effect of such material towards children psychological development.

 

[Crom]

What I meant was effect on the children psychology, from medical point of view.
For comparison; even though a child would demand the right to read pornographic manga, the parent can deny this based upon the negative effect of such material towards children psychological development.

Lol, whats that have to do with circumcision? And last time I checked kids dont ask their parents if they can watch pornography, but thats beside the point.

 

[Biomega]

Lol, whats that have to do with circumcision? And last time I checked kids dont ask their parents if they can watch pornography, but thats beside the point.

The point is, children cannot ask for anything. While the proponents of children rights say that anything should be up to the children decisions, but in the end it's up the parent.

 

[Kaze Araki]

The point being, children does not has full rights as adults, they are still subject to their parent's custody.

Another comparison; a child doesn't want to get a doctor's shot (due to sickness), despite the trauma that may be resulted, the parent still has the right to force it onto the child. Obligation to God will be considered as of even higher priority.

In this instance, we once again need to seek medical justification in term of psychological effect from circumcision.


EDIT: Answered first by Biomega.

 

[Buried Under Ice]

Are there even any known psychological side effects? Again, most are subjected to it when they are young, and rarely retain memories from infantry. Also, I am not aware of anything being connected to the act when it occurs with older men.

-shrug- Again, I view it much like parents giving their children piercings as an infant. The child has no choice in the matter, but it's not particularly harmful.

 

[Kaze Araki]

It would be interesting if anyone can provide research papers regarding this matter.

 

[Crom]

It would be interesting if anyone can provide research papers regarding this matter.

Not much to discuss, if you ask me.Thread was solved with the first few replys.

The point being, children does not has full rights as adults, they are still subject to their parent's custody.

Another comparison; a child doesn't want to get a doctor's shot (due to sickness), despite the trauma that may be resulted, the parent still has the right to force it onto the child. Obligation to God will be considered as of even higher priority.

In this instance, we once again need to seek medical justification in term of psychological effect for circumcision.


EDIT: Answered first by Biomega.

Ah alright, mistook the content of the statement.

 

[Arachna]

Developmental Psychobiology by M. P. M. Richards, J. F. Bernal, Yvonne Brackbill

We present both circumstantial and direct evidence that circumcision of male infants leads to behavioral changes.
In some American studies using circumcised infants, reported gender differences may instead be the result of the altered behavior of circumcised males. We suggest that circumcision requires more study in its own right, and that it requires description if not control in all neonatal and infancy studies.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dev.420090112/pdf

Um..i found this.
But you need to register. <.<
XD

 

[Kaze Araki]

Here's the full version;
http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/brackbill/

We have reported here some direct and indirect evidence indicating that circumcision has an influence of unknown duration on the behavior and psychophysiology of male infants and we suggest that so-called neonatal "gender" differences may instead be circumcision differences. The term "stress" has already been used in the literature to describe the psychophysiological impact of circumcision (Emde et al., 1971). The animal literature warns us of the dangers of proposing any simple hypothesis linking adrenal physiology, neonatal behavior, and external events arbitrarily labelled "stressful". Nevertheless, indices of physical stress have been found in a proportion of human male newborns (Forsyth, 1974).

Can't seems to find any statements that directly implying negative impact, but the psychological effect is clearly stated.

 

[noex1337]

Here's the full version;
http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/brackbill/

Can't seems to find any statements that directly implying negative impact, but the psychological effect is clearly stated.

So what's the argument now? Do we ban circumcision because it's too stressful on the baby?

 

[Buried Under Ice]

Reading through the article, it is positive that there is impact, but unknown whether it is negative or not, as Kaze said above.

Considering there is no direct evidence (for I am a lazy sort, and do not particularly enjoy seeking out papers. It's a fault I cannot rid myself of) of negative psychological impact, and the physical effects are balanced on either scale, it definitely should be up to the parenting pair whether or not to subject their child to circumcision. After all, the main post is referring to the outright ban of it.

@noex: Stress isn't always negative, though too much of anything can have that effect. There wasn't mention of whether the chemicals generated from the result was harmful, nor if the psychological effects were bad in any sort. At this point, we cannot judge.

 

[Arachna]

I do think the article Kaze posted clearly says there is psychology effect.
So we can't rly say we are back at the beggining. <.<