is infant Circumcision a form of Child Abuse?

Infant Circumcision is not a form of child abuse. It is a form of parental love. Parents chose that for their boys to protect them and their future partners from STDS,URIS,HIV,HPV,

Cancer of the penis, phimosis and balanits are almost non existent in circumcised men.

The truth is penile infection is more of a problem outside of the United States.

Circumcision has been around for 3000 years and it has never been called sexual abuse until it was adopted as one of the mantras by the foreskin freaks and the anti circ brigade in an attempt to discourage infant circumcision because the facts are not on their side.

it is you that is intolerant and disrespectful of peoples rights and religious beliefs

here are the facts:

http://www.aboutcirc.com/

http://www.medicirc.org/

http://www.circumcisioninfo.com/index_home_new.htm...

http://www.circinfo.net/

http://www.circinfo.com/

http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/2754/wiswell.h...

http://men.webmd.com/guide/circumcision-decision-w...

Jesus was circumcised if its good enough for him its good enough for me.

Since when are you an authority on what is child abuse and what is not? Certainly if circumcision were considered as child abuse this would be a matter for the courts to decide all the way up thru the Supreme Court if you live in the USA. It has not been classified as such by the legal system. Do you feel that the courts should interfere with the rights of the parent to make health decisions for their sons? I certainly would not want anyone to tell me what I should do or not do concerning my rights as a parent. We do not live in China were a family is told they can only have one child and where many times infant baby girls are put out to die because theparents would prefer to try again to have a son. Just think of the implications of what is said in the above post.

I do think it is child abuse. I don't, however, consider it sexual abuse. I don't believe that parents get it done for their own sexual gratification. I do believe that most parents believe what they are doing is for the best. That doesn't mean that they are right. I personally do not agree with circumcision. I have a hard time controlling myself when the debate comes up. I wonder how so many people can be so uneducated and/or ignorant. Especially us Americans. There is no need for such a practice. I'm thankful that I've learned (unfortunately after having my first son) and that I will not subject anymore of my children to this ridiculous horror.

What is circumcision?

Circumcision cuts off the foreskin, the sexually sensitive sleeve of tissue that normally covers and protects the head of the penis.

What is Mutilation?

Mutilation

Disfigurement or injury by removal or destruction of any conspicuous or essential part of the body.

There is no reason for mutilation. (IF) a person is restrained without there own consent and have no way of defending themselves against the attack of another person or persons it is forced upon them, then it is a purpose attack against that person, There is where Forced Mutilation comes into play.

Consider it what you will.

Circumcision deadens the penis sensitivity. WHY would you want to do that to a child.

Allow the child a chance to make up his mind when he gets older.

And for you that say its cleaner, you are brainwashed, the foreskin is attached the same way as a fingernail is to the finger, exact same way. How can it get dirty.

You women say that the child will be made fun of later in life, thats a lie, just who is the child going to be broadcasting his penis too.

And this nonsense of religion, the bible did not say anything about circumcising the penis, there was mention of circumcising the hearts of the people and that meant to cleanse their soul of evil and to follow the way of Jesus. The New Testament refers to circumcision and slavery in the same sentence, nowhere did circumcision and penis be mentioned together anywhere.

Circumcision was not part of biblical times, Not one, again NOT ONE single mummy has been exhumed from the grave that has been mutilated "so called circumcision"

There is also talk that circumcision looks better, the foreskin was put there by GOD himself. The Bible explains this as clear as a bell.

The bible says.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Reprive:

The Bible says that God pronounced creation 'very good' (Genesis 1:31) and that humans were made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). The Apostle Paul also said that God made every part of the body as he wanted it. (1 Corinthians 12:18).

I would also like to ad that if you mutilate a child, you are saying that God did not create the child perfect to begin with, and you are altering God's creation, you "are altering nature."

And, I for one do not have the authority to question God's intentions.

And furthermore, No so called doctor is going to deform any child of mine for the sake of the almighty dollar.

The women that are all for mutilation, why don’t you get circumcised first and see how well you like it, go ahead and give it a try. I am sure you will like it.

Yes! I believe it is cruel and unethical. As you rightly say, why is it illegal for girls yet still happens to so many poor boys?! It's interesting to note, by the way, that the standard arguments for girls genital mutilation are the same as male infant circumcision: it looks better, it's healthier, it's cultural...

I believe that circumcision of infants and children who cannot give an informed consent should be outlawed. I have no objection to a grown man deciding for himself, my issues if for someone else deciding for the child. It is a useless (and hurtful) procedure and this is why they should be able to consent in my opinion.

As a helpless infant I was strapped down, assaulted, sexually abused and mutilated by the process called circumcision.

Yes, it is infant abuse in the worst way.

It is illegal to perform female circumcision of minors in the US---where is equal protection under the law for males? This is sexism in the extreme, and is unconstitutional.

As a result of the mutilation I sustained, my sexual sensitivity was reduced more than normal, which made it impossible for me to achieve orgasm in normal sex.

I didn't know what was wrong with me for years, until I finally found out about foreskin restoration. While it won't replace the 70,000 nerve endings lost in the atrocity perpetrated on me, the restoration is enhancing the sensitivity that I have left, and a whole new dimension in feeling with the highly sensitive inner foreskin is wonderful.

My own father was intact, but I never discussed the matter with him before his death. Why he allowed me to be deprived of a part of my body which was necessary to function as a complete male I'll never know.

I wish that I could sue them for what they did to me, but it's far too late for that. More teenagers need to know that they can now bring suit for damages perpetrated on them by this cruel and unusual mutilation.

Female circumcision of minors is illegal, and well should be, but where is equal protection under the law for males? This is sexist in the extreme, and is obviously unconstitutional.

No woman should ever be allowed to have her own son circumcised unless she herself is, so that she can see how SHE likes it!! Scarred, mutilated and sexually handicapped for life.

Circumcision is the worst hoax ever perpetrated on the male sex.

The doctors make money from it, and are very frequently members of the religions that try to perpetrate this atrocity on all males---that's how it became so widespread.

Thankfully, the mutilation of helpless infant males is on the decline in the US. Most of the rest of the world has known all along that a whole, natural and normal penis feels and functions better than a partial, mutilated and scarred one.

In spite of this, there are still infants being mutilated every day.

A foreskin is not a birth defect; it is a birthright.

Definitely child abuse. Keep up the fight to get it banned, and to educate those stupid people who do it to their sons. Doctors are becoming more and more against it except in the rare case of medical necessity. A girl's clitoral hood performs a similar function to a foreskin: to protect a very sensitive part of the genitals. Neither one needs to be removed to be "clean". Let your son decide for himself when he is adult, if he wants to be mutilated: few men do.

And yes, the majority of men in the world are not circumcised, and they don't get all sorts of horrible diseases as a result.

It isn't considered to be, but it should be. Forcible removal of a body part without the consent of the person is torture, a form of abuse. Just because a baby "won't remember it" doesn't make it right. They probably wouldn't remember being molested either, nor would an elderly suffering from dementia remember being neglected and abused, but those examples are still abuse.

Yes I certainly feel abused by this mutilation.

I can't understand how American Christians sometimes say it's part of their religion either! That's part of the old Jewish covenant not of the new Christian one.

It's also NOT world-wide practice anymore either.

Circumcision is the amputation of the foreskin, not extra skin but an integral part of the penis; measuring 15 square inches in an adult and accounting for over half the penile skin, lots of specialised nerve endings and the most sensitive parts of the penis.

Not one major medical organisation in the world recommends routine infant circumcision anymore. The US is the last western nation still doing this to about 50% of its newborn males but even there rates are falling and many insurance companies no longer cover it, because it is deemed a waste of money. Sadly they often still don't use anaesthetic either and when they do it’s risky and ineffective. It's child abuse, pure and simple.

The penis forms as one organ and at birth the foreskin is usually fused to the glans like a fingernail to its finger. So there is no cavity for germs and dirt to collect in until it separates naturally later; sometimes not till puberty or later. Only the boy himself should retract it and then he can be taught to skin back and rinse with plain water regularly.

Misguided attempts to retract too early, often by doctors and nurses, are the main cause of damage to boys’ foreskins and the real main reason for childhood circumcisions.

To perform a neo-natal circumcision the circumciser has to rip the foreskin away from the glans with forceps. Then the foreskin is either cut away or clamped until it falls off. Both methods cause the baby extreme pain and his raw glans and wound sting every time he urinates. It's quite common for the raw edges of the cut foreskin to fuse to the raw glans during the healing process, forming skin bridges or tags. These complications and other more serious ones are often not found till puberty and do not show up in complication statistics.

More serious complications, though not common are immediate. Some babies lose their penis to infection, bleed profusely (often because they are haemophiliac) or even die each year.

The claimed benefits of circumcision are a beat up (based on flawed studies) and don't really exist but medical authorities have worked out that the overall complication rate is higher than all the benefits claimed by the pro-cutting advocates. One by one the claims are disproved but the pro-cutting zealots come up with more and keep quoting the old ones despite the evidence against them. For example you have more chance of dying from a circumcision or losing your penis from infection than from penile cancer. The rate of penile cancer is higher in the largely-circumcised USA than in European countries where less than 1% of the male population is circumcised. Plus circumcised men have been found to have penile cancer, mostly on the scar. (Remember this is a very rare disease in intact or circumcised men).

A very recent study in New Zealand followed a cohort of boys through life from birth to age 32. About 40% were circumcised. The intact males had a slightly lower rate of sexually transmitted infections than the circumcised but there was no significant difference.

Using surgery to mutilate the genitals instead of washing in a modern western society makes no sense. Normal intact male genitals are, if anything, easier to wash than female ones and the same substance, smegma collects in the genital folds of both sexes. A few intact males have problems with tight foreskin but this is only a tiny proportion of intact males. The condition can now be almost always treated with simple stretching exercises, sometimes in combination with a steroid cream that speeds up the process. However doctors who do not value the preservation of the foreskin often still trot out circumcision as a first-option treatment in the US and even some other countries.

I am circumcised and hate it. I wish I'd been given the chance to choose for myself. Intact men can choose to get cut at any time in their life, though most have no desire to do so. The internet has shown that many men resent being circumcised. It's just not something that most of us talk about a lot, even to our parents.

Your son will grow up with many intact friends and there is every chance he will resent this unnecessary cosmetic surgery.

Geoff

While I agree that circumcision is medically unnecessary, it's another step to call it abuse. The doctors and the parents need to KNOW that it is abuse and do the procedure with intent to cause abuse. I think you are stretching it here.

http://www.mentalforums.com/

there is a new community for those of us suffering from adhd, panic and anxiety, bipolar, depression, eating, personality, schizoprenia, self injury, physical, mental, sexual, and substance abuse disorders. feel free to come join us today :)

http://www.mentalforums.com/