German court outlaws circumcision for boys

[maycocksean]

^That's pretty much what I gathered too.

[deep]

for that reason it should not be prohibited
and a recommendation by them is reasonable.

[Salome]

According to that same logic they should also remove the appendix at a young age. Thing has no use and it would prevent possible appendicitis.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by Salome

According to that same logic they should also remove the appendix at a young age. Thing has no use and it would prevent possible appendicitis.

Except only the appendix has no use

[anitram]

Originally Posted by deep

for that reason it should not be prohibited
and a recommendation by them is reasonable.

Is this their consistent position? Say, with respect to something like appendectomies or tonsillectomies for children?

[maycocksean]

I must say I'm really surprised by many of the responses on this topic. People who are normally pretty sharp, seem to be. . .less so on this topic.

I really expected to hear stronger arguments than what's been put forth so far. Are we seriously comparing an appendectomy to circumcision? I mean, really?

[maycocksean]

And I admit I'm not entirely unbiased. I obviously have a vested interest in not feeling like I'm somehow "broken" or "scarred for life."

But even so. . .

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

I must say I'm really surprised by many of the responses on this topic. People who are normally pretty sharp, seem to be. . .less so on this topic.

I really expected to hear stronger arguments than what's been put forth so far. Are we seriously comparing an appendectomy to circumcision? I mean, really?

Have you ever seen a circumcision performed? It's not a neat little snip. I'd agree it's silly to compare an appendectomy to circumcision, but only because the appendix actually is a useless organ

[yolland]

In the US, pediatric tonsillectomy actually was a very routine procedure for preventing typical childhood throat infections 60 years ago. That came to an end when large-scale followup studies made it clear that the operation did not in fact have that effect for most children, and given that when these infections occur they are usually easily treatable with bed rest and/or (by that point in time) antibiotics, tonsillectomy as routine preventative was therefore no longer endorsed. Even so, it remains one of the most common childhood surgeries (in the US) and a source of continued infighting among doctors as to whether and when to recommend it for children. There's no history of pediatric appendectomy being employed in such a manner, so it's hard to compare, but as far as it goes the operation itself (as distinct from the disease) actually has quite a high morbidity i.e. significant complications rate in children (13.5%-35.6%, compared to the 0.19%-0.22% cited for infant circumcision--and incidentally, 1.9% for early childhood tonsillectomy--in the AAP statement). That would obviously have to be taken into account if considering appendectomy as a routine preventative.

If the AAP found that research to date supports a conclusion that infant circumcision impairs sexual satisfaction in adulthood, I'm sure they'd change their tune dramatically (their statement does include a literature review on this topic). They are a relatively conservative organization--in the sense in which that term applies to medical organizations, not in the political sense--so it isn't surprising that they'd effectively sidestep the more ideologically charged aspects of the medical question by neither actively recommending nor actively discouraging it (the statement does not constitute a "recommendation," and it is a misrepresentation of it to say so). As the pediatrics professor quoted in MrsS' article points out, most parents decide whether or not to circumcise based primarily on social, cultural, familial or religious notions anyway, so in practice it matters little what the AAP determines the upshot of the extant medical research to be, unless and until they perceive that said research demonstrates unacceptable risk of medical harm.

[Jive Turkey]

Yet we're still discussing whether or not a baby should have part of his penis cut off... Just think about that for a second. The only reason people aren't completely repulsed is because of ingrained, archaic culture

[anitram]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

I must say I'm really surprised by many of the responses on this topic. People who are normally pretty sharp, seem to be. . .less so on this topic.

I really expected to hear stronger arguments than what's been put forth so far. Are we seriously comparing an appendectomy to circumcision? I mean, really?

Sorry for coming across as stupid to you.

My problem with the AAP's recommendation is the logic that they are using. I am not sure why you are satisfied with the logic applied to circumcision as preventative medicine, because to me that's what's not sharp in this debate. I don't think that they've put together anything that's convincing, so why put it out at all? I am not familiar with the way the organization operates so I can't pass judgment on their motivations, etc.

[maycocksean]

Anitram, I do not think of you as stupid. Far from it.

I do think of you as a human being, like myself, and we aren't always strictly logical. For me it's not that I'm satisfied so much as I don't feel it's quite such a big deal one way or the other. I don't think people "should" get circumcised--obviously I don't think they shouldn't.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

Anitram, I do not think of you as stupid. Far from it.

I do think of you as a human being, like myself, and we aren't always strictly logical. For me it's not that I'm satisfied so much as I don't feel it's quite such a big deal one way or the other. I don't think people "should" get circumcised--obviously I don't think they shouldn't.

But do you not think a person should be able to decide this for themself? I think that's the main issue

[Irvine511]

It seems silly to me that a cultural practice that involves the unnecessary mutilation of a baby boy's penis isn't a big deal.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by Jive Turkey

But do you not think a person should be able to decide this for themself? I think that's the main issue

They do in some places.

I know in the Philippines it's a rite of passage that takes place. . .I think in your earliteens. I remember some of my former students going from Saipan back to the Philippines to have it done.

Personally, I'm glad it happened when I was young.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

It seems silly to me that a cultural practice that involves the unnecessary mutilation of a baby boy's penis isn't a big deal.

Many cultural practices could be described as silly, I suppose.

Also I do not accept the label of mutilated--thank you.

[Irvine511]

But it is mutilated.

[maycocksean]

My son was circumcised as a part of surgery to correct hypospadias when he was about two.

Circumcision was not a "given" for us, but they used the skin from the circumcision to reconstruct his penis so that the opening of his penis was on the tip rather than on the underside of the shaft. At least that's my understanding.

At any rate the whole process of having our child under major surgery was very hard for us. It wasn't made any easier by the anti-circumcision zealots I came across when researching my son's condition who maintained that even repairing of hypospadias amounted to mutilation. THAT made me angry.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

But it is mutilated.

I do not accept that.

Not anymore than someone who has had a tattoo is mutilated, or has had their ear, nose, or eyebrow pierced.

[Caleb8844]

It's probably too personal, but I'd be incredibly interested to see if this argument falls right along the lines of those who are circumcised arguing for it vs. those who aren't arguing against it.