Do you consider circumcision child abuse?

[dust1n]

I think what Alceste is trying to say is: She's pro-choice for male foreskin. Which makes sense, however, she also neglects several details. A google search shows all the studies and arguments.

Circumsicion was to be a reminder. It worked for millions of people over a span of generations. The reminder was for God's guidance. The reminder that sacrifice is vital to growth and understanding. The reminder sacrifices the foreskin of the penis, undoubtedly so whenever we did anything from getting clothed, to *******, to having sex - that we'd remember God's guidance. It serves as something very important to people all around the world, for that regard, and is bolstered in whatever degree by recent medical study.

What medical studies bolster in whatever degree that circumcision is to be a reminder to not use your little friend inappropriately, and that this in any way actually works?

 

[Father Heathen]

You certainly can, as long as the donors are consenting adults. It strikes me as a very noble thing to do - donate the tip of your pecker to a burn victim. It's not so noble to steal pieces of baby pecker when they don't even know what it's for.

Babies can neither understand nor consent to anything, so does that make any decision a parent makes "abusive"?

 

[dawny0826]

I wouldn't call it abuse either, but certainly it's something worth looking up. And that's a much better source for helping your argument. I couldn't follow your trail to penile cancer.

My sister is a Registered Nurse - soon to finsish schooling as a nurse practioner.

She laughed when FH and I told her we were debating circumcision and said that we're all going to be able to find artcles to back our stance on the subject. She directed me to the CDC and WHO. A local health department is also a good source of credible information.

An online medical journal is usually a credible choice, but, you often have to pay for the good stuff.

Articles written by doctors can be good...but they have opinions too.

 

[Brickjectivity]

There isn't a single answer, because the parent's effort is so necessary. A parent can and may make the wrong decision, and that is the challenge of being a parent. A parent may also teach harmful political attitudes and religious beliefs to their own child, but the state cannot do a better job or replace the parent. Its a trade-off. Either the child gets loving decisions or they get governmental decisions. States have tried, but they make terrible parental decisions. States cannot 'Care' about children or give children autonomy like parents can.

 

[Breathe]

Justifying circumcision for religious reasons isn't very convincing, Sleeppy....

Especially considering some religions oppose it...

 

[Alceste]

Justifying circumcision for religious reasons isn't very convincing, Sleeppy....

Exactly, he needs to get caught up with the times.The modern rationalization for this absurd custom is that it reduces the risk of penile cancer, which almost nobody ever gets.

 

[Alceste]

Babies can neither understand nor consent to anything, so does that make any decision a parent makes "abusive"?

Knives and genitals. They don't mix.

 

[idav]

Knives and genitals. They don't mix.

That is one of the better points. No pun intended.

 

[Curious George]

Tubes in a child's ears are not usually a necessity

Many vaccinations are not usually a necessity

Baptism is not a necessity

Ear piercings are not a necessity

Spankings are not a necessity

Putting your child in a car seat is not a necessity

Using diapers is not a necessity

While none of these are considered child abuse, they all at times can be considered to inflict "needless suffering" on the child.

While circumcision is not necessary, I am still confused why we would equate it as child abuse. Is the permanency the reasoning? Well, the life altering choices parents make are also arguably permanent. Is the suffering the issue? What parent has not done something that had a causal link to "needless suffering?" I think when dealing with abuse it is better to focus on maltreatment. The question then becomes: is circumcision maltreatment? I do not see how we can equate a parents decision, carried out in a gentle loving way as maltreatment. Were the parent to simply pull out a knife and cut of the foreskin- sure. But when a parent enlists medical professionals to carefully carry out a medical procedure? If you want to say that the parents made a bad decision- I get that. But abuse? really? The same thing for which we as a society invoke to deprive parental custody? The same thing we invoke as a society to send people to jail? REALLY?

And then the number of people who have said -- well it is abuse, but the parents aren't abusers. What the hell is an abuser then- someone who commits abuse. It is not as if people accidentally got their child circumcised. No, no. I think what we have here is a group of people who would love to see their beliefs trump others. I see nothing wrong with saying circumcision is meaningless, foolish or a poor parenting decision. Abuse is too far, though.

 

[Sleeppy]

What medical studies bolster in whatever degree that circumcision is to be a reminder to not use your little friend inappropriately, and that this in any way actually works?

I very seriously doubt anyone was smart enough to do a 'medical' study on the psychological outcomes of circumcision. However, being that Abraham fathered the three most major religions of any time in history, and most all the adherents are circumsized for the reason I outlined - I'd say it's a working reminder.

 

[Sleeppy]

Justifying circumcision for religious reasons isn't very convincing, Sleeppy....

So be it, depending on whatever I was expected to convince you of, specifically.

 

[Sleeppy]

Exactly, he needs to get caught up with the times.The modern rationalization for this absurd custom is that it reduces the risk of penile cancer, which almost nobody ever gets.

Get caught up with the times? I don't know what modern study you can provide to support you, other than..? But you're attempting to push several billions of people's religious freedom away. If you've been paying attention, little things like this, which really only concern the family unit, and not society as a whole, are becoming fuel for Jihad, and any other name for 'holy war.'

 

[Sleeppy]

Especially considering some religions oppose it...

What religions are opposed? I didn't know there was a decision to oppose circumsicion in any religion, but obviously you do. Also, how are they opposing it?

 

[mycorrhiza]

Tubes in a child's ears are not usually a necessity

Many vaccinations are not usually a necessity

Baptism is not a necessity

Ear piercings are not a necessity

Spankings are not a necessity

Putting your child in a car seat is not a necessity

Using diapers is not a necessity

While none of these are considered child abuse, they all at times can be considered to inflict "needless suffering" on the child.

Spanking is considered child abuse, and is thus illegal, in my country as well as in many other countries.

 

[Me Myself]

Spanking is considered child abuse, and is thus illegal, in my country as well as in many other countries.

Not in mine.

I ve been spanked, I can tell you that while it wasnt pleasant at the moment, I prefered that than the "no more TV" punishment.

Many aqcuantances were spanked too. One says he is very glad he was, as it was the only way he would have changed his stupid ways.

I wouldn`t spank my kid, but it ain`t the biggest deal really. Far more thraumatizing things are legal. (like simply being absent)

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I can respect your reasoning for not wanting such a procedure done for your son and for raising a brow at others who choose the procedure for their children.

What I don't respect, is the manner in which you accuse parents of inflicting "extreme" pain upon their children.

They do not always project discomfort during or after the procedure. Seriously, the babies that I've cared for, are more upset by gas or seem more bothered if they are removed from their swaddling.

When was the last time you had to strap a baby to a table because of its discomfort from gas?

Healing time usually takes about a week. As with any surgical procedure, there are risks. If you're a loving parent, you thoroughly consider any risks and are prepared to handle any consequences, further, taking ownership of them.

But not preventing the unnecessary ones where you can?

There were risks involved in giving birth to my children, particularly giving birth to my second baby via C-section. After an emergency C-section, you're given a choice, in the states for your second birth. I elected for surgery after thoroughly weighing the risks to both myself and the baby. I got hell for it from these "natural Mom's" who told me that my baby would be born with upper respiratory ailments and it would be my fault. They told me all sorts of ugly things - that I was being selfish and that the risk of uterine tear was very low.

But, you know what, I did what was best for me, my baby and my family. I already had a three year old. And my daughter was born healthy and without any upper respiratory problems. I however, had a scare on the operating table, which is par for the course with any surgical procedure.

Ah. Sounds like I may have inadvertently tapped into something. I'm not sure what to say except that a circumcision is not a C-section and I'm not a "natural Mom"... despite what ever transferred feelings you may have.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I was both circumcised and beaten around and neglected as a child. I have no complaints about being circumcised, don't have trauma from it, and in fact, am glad that the procedure was performed when I was an infant. On the other hand, I really would have not rather been smacked around, yelled at, and put through the emotional and psychological ringer as a child. So, no, circumcision isn't child abuse, and I feel glad for anyone who has the luxury of not knowing any better.

 

[Alceste]

Get caught up with the times? I don't know what modern study you can provide to support you, other than..? But you're attempting to push several billions of people's religious freedom away. If you've been paying attention, little things like this, which really only concern the family unit, and not society as a whole, are becoming fuel for Jihad, and any other name for 'holy war.'

I didn't say it should be banned. I said it's an absurd custom to slice up the genitals of our children, and if you were the first person to think of it, you'd obviously be prosecuted.

I understand the context. Many societies have equally absurd customs of bodily modification, many of which are even more absurd and horrific. (neck stretching, foot binding, female genital mutilation, etc.)

I don't think banning any of these customs would be effective at all. The only remedy is education and the development of critical thinking skills.

 

[Alceste]

I was both circumcised and beaten around and neglected as a child. I have no complaints about being circumcised, don't have trauma from it, and in fact, am glad that the procedure was performed when I was an infant. On the other hand, I really would have not rather been smacked around, yelled at, and put through the emotional and psychological ringer as a child. So, no, circumcision isn't child abuse, and I feel glad for anyone who has the luxury of not knowing any better.

* sympathy hug *

 

[Me Myself]

Get caught up with the times? I don't know what modern study you can provide to support you, other than..? But you're attempting to push several billions of people's religious freedom away. If you've been paying attention, little things like this, which really only concern the family unit, and not society as a whole, are becoming fuel for Jihad, and any other name for 'holy war.'

First of all, "Jihad" is meant to mean an internal war. The term was hijacked and corrupted by terrorists to mean something the Qran never said.

Second, "religious freedom" is a terrible justification for needless mutilation.

In US, killing animals for religious rituals is forbidden (oh the irony) which is limiting to the religious freedom of the people who do it, but it is still there because it is seemed as needles torture of a sentient being, which religion shouldnt be a good excuse for.