Posts
Out of 100 Circumcised boys:
75 will not readily breastfeed post-op
55 will have adverse reactions from the surgery
35 will have post-op hemorrhaging to one degree or another
31 will develop meatal ulcers
10 will need to have the circumcision surgery repeated to fix prior surgical problems/error
8 will suffer infection at the surgical site
3 will develop post-operative phimosis
2 will have a more serious complication (seizure, heart attack, stroke, loss of penis, death)
1 will require additional immediate surgery and sutures to stop hemorrhage
1 will develop fibrosis
1 will develop phimosis
1 will be treated with antibiotics for a UTI (urinary tract infection)
1 will be treated with antibiotics for surgical site infection
Of those who do receive pain medication for the surgery (about 4% of those boys undergoing circumcision in the U.S.) some will have adverse reactions to the pain medication injected
Out of 100 Intact boys:
2 will be treated with antibiotics for a UTI (fewer if the foreskin is never forcibly retracted)
1 will be told to get cut later in life for one reason or another (fewer if the foreskin is never forcibly retracted)
Note: One reader of these statistics (a man cut against his will at birth with 4 intact sons today) critiqued (quite accurately) that it is actually 100 of 100 circumcised boys who experience negative consequences as a result of circumcision. Each and every one has lost an organ responsible for a great deal of his life-long normal health and functioning.
The above statistics are averages from a literature review of studies cataloging the medical outcomes of circumcised vs. intact boys between 1989-2009. These studies are highlighted in more detail throughout the following references:
Books:
Circumcision: The Rest of the Story
What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Circumcision
Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma
Circumcision Exposed
Doctors Re-examine Circumcision
Questioning Circumcision: A Jewish Perspective
Circumcision: A History of the World's Most Controversial Surgery
Marked in Your Flesh
A Surgical Temptation
Children's Genitals Under the Knife
Linked Sources:
Cirp.Org/Library/Death
Dangers of Circumcision Report (pdf) at DoctorsOpposingCircumcision.org
Circumstitions.com/Complications
NoHarmm.org/complicationsUS
22 comments:
PHENOMENAL!!! Its about time that it got broken down this simply!
I wrote a post on circumcision yesterday -- looking at it from the perspective of female "circumcision" -- and if you wouldn't want that for yourself and wouldn't do it to your daughter, why would you do it to your son?
-Kathy
This is extremely near and dear to me, my husband and I are both HUGE intactivists. Now I have come across a woman who is trying to get her 18 month old son circumcised because there wasn't enough skin to do it at birth. This should not be something that insurance approves, it should be something the doctor REPORTS to CPS.
Love this!!
- proud mama of a whole boy!
Amen! I live in an area (the Midwest) where we have a 90% circumcision rate. You can imagine the "tsk tsks" from people when they discovered my son was intact. I honestly don't care what people think--I am not about to do a cosmetic procedure on a newborn baby who was born perfect just the way he was.
Thanks for bringing awareness to this issue.
I am amazed at how many people think this is an acceptable practice. Can you imagine getting ANY part of your body cut off without pain medication, never mind a piece of your genitals? I think if more people KNEW what really happened during a circumcision - like how infants have their arms and legs strapped down - they may choose differently. This is a practice that was adopted to prevent boys from masturbating (which obviously doesn't work:-). It has no medical reasoning and in my opinion is not much different than female genital mutilation.
There it is in black and white. Not only is it barbaric to cut off a piece of a baby's penis, but also has many negatives. I'd love to see these statistics plastered all over drs offices.
And this is where the reality of circumcision meets the medical profession. Especially in America, doctors benefit financially from this non-therapeutic surgery and therefore have a vested interest in minimizing the language of risk and/or suppress actual data outright.
As always, you are spot-on.
I highly recommend another childbirth educator's blog post on the topic:
http://womantowomancbe.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/circumcision-guidelines/
Extremely effective perspective shift.
Thanks for the post! I'd like to see more stuff on here about circumcision. People still think it's going to lower STDS and UTI rates to circumcise....sigh.
Sarah - the rate of MGM in the Midwest has dropped (thankfully) to 65% as of 2008 (according to national hospital surgery statistics and is likely lower as we enter 2010). It continues to fall as parents become educated prior to their son's birth. However 6-7 out of 10 babies being cut up at birth is still WAY too high. Thank you for protecting your own son. We need MUCH activism in the Midwest.
I did a lecture tour at Universities (human development and childhood education courses) in IA/WI/MI/IL this past fall and the response from students was overwhelmingly positive. Change CAN be made - we just have to be willing to talk about this difficult subject and spread accurate information - not lies, myths and misconceptions that the media loves to jump on.
Strwberryjoy - Thank you for the encouragement. Your comment made me smile because we have oodles here on the subject of circumcision - more, in fact, than any other general parenting site and this sometimes gets people 'upset'... Some don't like coming face to face with MGM in the U.S.
If you go up to the search feature on the left hand side of this blog, you can type in various words (such as 'circumcision' or 'circumcised' or 'intact' or 'foreskin' or 'pain') and come up with more articles that apply to this subject.
On the topic of sexually transmitted infections (and HIV) here are a few recent links (most of them also have additional links to more reading at the bottom of the article):
Dr. Dean Edell on HIV: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/10/dr-edell-discusses-africa-aids.html
HIV increases among men who were cut in Africa: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/hiv-increases-in-africa-where-most-men.html
HIV increases among female partners of men who were cut in Africa: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/07/african-hiv-circumcision-study-ends.html
Public policy cite HIV: http://www.circumcisionandhiv.com/
HIV: http://www.mothering.com/health/truth-about-circumcision-and-hiv
UTIs: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/12/how-foreskin-protects-against-uti.html
http://drmomma.org/2009/08/here-we-go-again-new-york-times.html
If you haven't already read "The Functions of the Foreskin" it is a basic 101 on the prepuce that everyone should read. :) http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/functions-of-foreskin-purposes-of.html
And this video, "CUT: Slicing through the myths of circumcision" (made by a Jewish filmmaker) answers a LOT of the "STD" myths out there: http://www.cutthefilm.com/Cut_Website/The_Film.html
FGM and MGM share a similar history of myths in the US: http://drmomma.org/2009/09/history-of-female-circumcision-in.html
Just an update on my previous comment -- that post now has the list of AAP doctors (with their emails) who are currently considering whether or not to recommend routine infant (male) circumcision. Please email them now -- after they make the decision, it will be too late! Feel free to copy & paste the names & addresses from my blog into this post or another post.
http://wp.me/p9IBz-Nq
-Kathy
DrMomma: I am glad to hear that the rate has dropped. I am trying to educate more people, but it's so hard to change minds. Most people's reason for doing it is so that their baby won't be "different" and that is just plain sad. Evolution would tell me that if there was something "wrong" about a part or if it wasn't needed, it wouldn't still be there.
http://pharmtips.com/2008/11/27/dispelling-myths-about-circumcision/
http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/
---
Blissfully intact and a PROUD intactivist!
Twitter: @light_peak
What a great post. Is that truly what a baby who is circumcised looks like right after? All of them or is that just a bad one? I didn't have the heart to look at pictures or video of procedures. We knew way ahead of time that we would not be getting this done. My Mom is the only one who pushed for it because "uncircumcised penises look gross". I told her I had yet to see a penis I found particularly "attractive". Anyways, great post and I hope you don't mind me quoting it or directing people to it next time the debate comes up!
Emmalie and Aidan's Mom -
Yes, this is what a typical cut and intact newborn's penis looks like. There is nothing unusual about the circumcised penis in this photo - except that it shows the genital mutilation of a human baby in close detail. And I'm not sure this could ever be considered anything but 'bad'. :(
Sarah - keep up the good work! Every single baby saved is a human life changed - and generations that are spared from such atrocities continuing. You touch more lives than you probably realize. If you are not already in the peaceful parenting group on FB, you can find many other parents in your shoes there. (Link on the side of this page). Or, if you'd like me to introduce you (in online fashion) to more intactivists in WI and the Midwest, I'd be happy to do so. They have lots of great ideas going around. Find me there on FB as well - http://www.facebook.com/drmom and just let me know *who* you are. ;)
Alyssa G: I know how you feel. An acquaintance of mine decided to get her adopted son circumcised recently - I think the surgery was just done yesterday. Even after I asked her to read the literature about this issue on 'peaceful parenting', she still went through with it. The poor little guy is 32 months - just a few days older than my little girl - I feel horrible for him!
This post omits things for which we have good anecdotal evidence but not data: a penis damaged for life by scar tissue or glans damage; difficulty with adult erection because of too little skin; difficulty enjoying intercourse, especially after age 40.
Circumcised men have a tendency to thrust harder, faster, and deeper during intercourse. This detracts from the women's pleasure, in ways that are impossible to measure but are real nonetheless.
The head of pediatric urology in a major American teaching hospital told a friend of mine that about 25% of her caseload consists of repairing damage from routine circumcision.
My son is not circumcised. The skin never "pulled back" as they said it would. When he was 12 yrs. old he began experiencing pain because the skin was too tight. I brought him to a pediatrician who recommended that he be circumcised immediately. I was appalled and refused to believe that there were no other options. I found a pediatric urologist in our area who prescribed a topical medication to be applied 2x daily...and in six weeks...VOILA!! Problem solved. The transformation was amazing! The skin now pulls back normally. No pain, no cutting. I want as many people to hear/read my story, because our sons deserve better!!!
This is a very straightforward way to put it - thank you!! I have been exploring the circ issue myself on my own blog a lot over the past few months... it is such a deep issue, and it is unfortunate that people tend to brush it off as "no big deal." I wonder if seeing this list of stats would change some minds... I hope it would!
To Alyssa G - not having enough skin to circ the baby at birth would, to me, mean that he doesn;t need to be circed *ever*. My mother was told the same thing about my youngest brother in 1988... that there wasn't enough skin for them to feel comfortable doing it, so she should go to a pediatric urologist. When she did, they told her that she should just leave him as he was, that circing was not necessary anyway, so she did. And... he grew up thinking he was circed! So, just think of how much more likely the damage would be on a boy who has less than average amount of skin there in the first place! Maybe you could convince this mom that since her baby has less skin to begin w/, he may end up looking more circed than intact anyway, so why ct off even *more* of his skin??
Hi! Thanks for posting this. I'm trying to convince a friend not to circ his son, and I'd love to send this to him, but he'll want to know the source/s. Can you add that to your post somewhere?
Post a Comment