What do you guys in the adoption section think of routine infant circumcision?
Many of you know my stance on the issue, I would just like to hear others view on it.
Did you have your son circumcised? (bio or adopted)
AP- Did the natural parents have a preference? Did you follow their wishes?
NP- Did you have a preference? Were your wishes followed?
2008-11-08T20:11:02Z
Harriet- WOW! I never even considered that!!!! Wow, welcome to America, the land of the FREE, congratulations on the loss of your family AND your forskin! People make me friggin sick!
Angela R2008-11-08T21:36:10Z
Favorite Answer
We adopted both of our boys internationally, and did not have them circumcised. They both came home at 6 months old, and in Korea they do not circumcise infants. I've never really liked the idea of circumcising babies in the first place, but there was NO WAY we were going to add to the trauma they were already dealing with for something not medically necessary, especially since it's a much bigger deal to circ. an older baby then a newborn (they would have had to go under general anesthesia in the hospital)
I also imagine the idea of doing this to a baby would have horrified their Korean first-moms since it is not something they do in their culture.
Obviously the circumcision fanatic claiming you would benefit from circumcision is promoting genital mutilation for no proven cause other than he thinks a mutilated penis looks better,...I guess I will leave that one there. I have four sons, and in each case, we took the whole baby home. It was a fight against some of he in-laws to 'save' them but my sons won. I must have changed a million diapers over the years and never once was there a problem (other than with the in-laws). Just a wipe with the baby wipe during diaper change, and never ever try to retract the foreskin. Now, my sons are teenagers (AAAAUUUGGGHHH!!!!) and still no problems. I think we surprised the in-laws because none of my sons died from some horrible, debilitating disease from not being mutilated as a baby. I agree and have used the same logic as you when discussing circumcision. If you want a cleaner, healthier baby, why not have his finger nails ripped off as well,...they collect more dirt,...and he will put his fingers in his mouth. In our twisted society, it would be criminal to take your child into the doctor to have his ears trimmed because you feel it would look better to have elf ears,....or take him as an infant to the tattoo parlor to have him covered in tattoos,...the childrens rights groups would be at your door in an instant,....but to take him to a doctor and have a useful part of his body removed is culturally acceptable. No, it is not,....there is a growing number of people who are better educated that our circumcision fanatic who question the need for this procedure, and realize it is male genital muilation, hiding behind a more culturally acceptable clinical name like circumcision. I have been restoring my foreskin for three years and I love the results. The foreskin I restore will not be a good as the one that was hacked off my protesting body all those years ago,...but it will be far better than living out my life circumcised. Mithras
My oldest son was a high risk pregnancy and was born at a very progressive hospital. they gave me information both for and against circumcision. After reading that there really was no medical reason to do it, I decided against it. this was over 19 years ago.
When my second son was born 16 years ago, it wasn't even an option in my opinion. The hospital (not the same) though thought I was crazy and told me horror stories about what could happen by not having him circumcised. Thankfully, I did not let them bully me into it.
My third son is adopted and he was circumcised. Since he was 8 when we adopted him, we obviously did not have a say in it.
And to Peter, I had never seen an uncircumcised penis until I changed my child's diaper, so your theory is incorrect.
My son's biological parents chose NOT to have him circumcised at birth. When we adopted him at six months, we asked the doctor about it - simply because we wanted to know from a medical standpoint if it would be healthier to have it done or not. Our son's health was our number one priority - not what the bio parents' wishes were. For us, medical concerns were even more priority since our son suffers from a life-threatening disorder. The doctors felt that it would be too traumatic at the age of 6 months to have it done and that it would not cause any problems for his medical disorder so there was no need to have it done. We concurred. We would have only agreed to go against the bio parents' wishes had it been a health issue for our child. HE was our #1 priority at that point.
"We have circumcised our boys here for over 100 years with no problems."
Dear me, take the rose coloured glasses off. No problems? You keep telling yourself that, while singing the Hallelujah chorus and carefully never Googling "circumcision problems". I guess you also believe that we've been laying our kids face down to sleep, feeding them honey, and giving them solids from a few weeks old without problems too?
"Because we've always done it" is about the most pathetic reason to mutilate a child I've ever heard. And no, I'm not American. So what? Doesn't mean I'm jealous, or uncivilised, or ignorant.