Nobody knows if circumcision is a positive or negative. I realize many people are calling it "genital mutilation" but the studies they cite are certainly not definitive. I suppose it would be OK to let the kid decide for himself when he's 13 or whatever age is appropriate. Sounds like Mommy is not the custodial parent, which I find interesting. It's kind of suspect that the dad decided to do this when his son is four years old. He may be doing it just to freak out the mom.

simple google search will help.

When we talk about genital mutilation we talk about female mutilation in many African countries. The clitoris and the large labias so that, heavens forbids, a woman may enjoy sex.

Circumcision removes the outer skin from the edge of the penis. Many studies that the incidence of AIDS is a lot lower among circumcized tribes.

I find it interesting that, at least on DU. the women are the most vocal anti circumcision and one has to wonder: what do they know that the others do not?

On your genitalia where experience has nothing to do with it. These are just posts. I think they should wait till the child can decide. It's not a deadly disease that has to be dealt with ASAP.

The mother agreed with the father that the child would be circumcised.

The agreement was done in 2011.
People, stop "suspecting" things about people you've never met, or whose circumstances you ignore.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&q=Heather%20hironimus%20opinion%20filetype%3Apdf&ei=poAtVaS1GIWggwTX64DIBw&url=http://circumstitions.com/Docs/hironimus1.pdf&ved=0CCUQFjAC&usg=AFQjCNHVFNjqsWDxn3rvpdtu3tiLG8F37g&sig2=k5koYktSx6NVeAqkSQxlqw

It didn't seem that big a deal to him in all that time, but suddenly it's super important now that the mother has changed her mind about it? I agree that we can't know for sure what's in anyone's mind, but it's not a great leap to think that the poor relationship between the parents plays at least some part in the father's determination to have the procedure done now against the mother's wishes.

until he was four years old and out of diapers.

Her mother's objection or the father's decision to operate?

You are mind-reading a stranger.

protect against HIV and other STD's.

Although they promoted circumcision as a "cure" for masturbation, it's fortunate and convenient that the practice has now been found to have other benefits more relevant to the modern world, isn't it? It was once touted as protection against polio. Too bad that wasn't true.

I wonder why, if it's such a great practice, America is the ONLY country in the world where circumcision is commonly done for "medical" reasons instead of religious ones? I wonder why no national medical organization in the world recommends
routine infant circumcision?

Let him decide.

then I'm pretty sure you've got that right.

#2: it looks like the concern is yours, not the mother's.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&q=Heather%20hironimus%20opinion%20filetype%3Apdf&ei=poAtVaS1GIWggwTX64DIBw&url=http://circumstitions.com/Docs/hironimus1.pdf&ved=0CCUQFjAC&usg=AFQjCNHVFNjqsWDxn3rvpdtu3tiLG8F37g&sig2=k5koYktSx6NVeAqkSQxlqw

Fast forward to this past Wednesday, when a Florida appeals court granted Hironimus, who has changed her mind about circumcision, an emergency order to stop the removal of her son's foreskin. A lower court had ordered the circumcision could go ahead after hearing testimony from a pediatric urologist.

Judge Jeffrey Gillen last week ruled that enforcing the parenting agreement would be in the best interest of Chase, now 3, although the urologist testified he wouldn't recommend it at Chase's age.

http://gawker.com/judge-grants-mom-an-emergency-order-to-protect-3-year-o-1577491316

States differ in whether consent of one or both parents is required, but practically speaking, any doctor would be very reluctant to do it knowing that one parent opposes it. Often consent of both parents is required by doctors/hospitals even if law says only one parent's consent is required.

As to the question of custody, the parents share custody, I believe, though the mother is primary caretaker. Parents were never married but signed a parenting plan when the boy was about one. At that time mother had consented to allow father to make arrangements for procedure. Father took no action till boy was three and by that time mother had learned more about circumcision and changed her mind about having it done. Judge sided with father because it was in parenting plan.

She failed in two courts. Let's not underestimate the number of judges you consider "dimwits" in this case.

2011 agreement.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&q=Heather%20hironimus%20opinion%20filetype%3Apdf&ei=poAtVaS1GIWggwTX64DIBw&url=http://circumstitions.com/Docs/hironimus1.pdf&ved=0CCUQFjAC&usg=AFQjCNHVFNjqsWDxn3rvpdtu3tiLG8F37g&sig2=k5koYktSx6NVeAqkSQxlqw

Unless you can point to such concern.

Would you want to be forced to undergo a surgery today because you signed a consent form in 2012? Then why should a child be forced to?

"So, dad.. back in 2015 you and Mom went to court because you wanted to slice the tip of my penis off. What's the matter with you? One day, I'll be the one who will decide whether or not to put you on life support, mkay?"

Something must have gone wrong with my circumcision. They left the tip Intact.

"Dad what is wrong with ME?"

Fathers and sons don't need matching genitals.

Or just some? And frankly, is that a compelling argument, that 'genital cosmetology is destiny'?

Not true?

If we were not meant to have a foreskin, it would have evolved away by now ( over thousands of years) wouldn't it have? Ever since I realized how unnecessary circumcision was and is, I've resented mine. And I believe the foreskin has an important function that's being ignored by the Aids scarers. That function becomes more apparent with age.

I suggest you youtube for a video of an actual circumcision procedure. I saw one once on a baby in a documentary and I was horrified. My grandmother volunteered for years at the hospital taking care of newborns. I asked her about it and she said oh yeah.....those babies come back screaming inconsolably so much that they would give them bottles of sugar water just to calm them back down....my own father as an adult was circumcised right before he married my mother....I was told it was a horrible experience and my grandmother told me that was why he looked so bad in his wedding pictures! In light of that....I cannot imagine doing this to a 4 yr old....without some absolute medical reason to do so...

Better stop that one too. Hey, males are proud of the bigger, the better.

want breast reduction surgery. Both 4 year old boys and 14 year old girls are still minors. So if the parent of a young girl gives permission to "mutilate" their daughters with breast reduction surgery (far more major surgery than a circumcision), would you object to that too? Or is it just MALES because that is seen as some kind of male prowess issue with men?

are forced nose jobs allowed in this country now?

Parental consent for circumcision for boys. Parental consent for young girls for breast reduction. A 14 year old girl cannot give consent to surgery anymore than a 4 year old boy can. If you think cutting off the foreskin of a boy is mutilation, isn't cutting off the breasts of a girl mutilation too? If you say NO, then you are showing your SEXISM.

Let me hear your objections to female breast mutilation of young girls.

I had my kid circumcised and would do it again, but by age four it's too late. Leave it alone.

that his folks had him circumcised at birth...

And another question: Why do so many men have such obsession with penises and whether other male's penises are circumcised or not? Why is the state of other men's penises any business of anyone else?

I hadn't met him yet when he converted so I don't know the details. It was more a religious issue than a medical one...and since I am not Jewish I just don't know. My stepdaughter is a Reform Rabbi...I can ask her when we visit her later this year...

There are a number of Eastern European and Russian Jews who are not circumcised. The last time I read about it, the numbers were about 50/50. Those that lived in shtetls were almost always circumcised. So, I am guessing some of it may have to do with "pressure" to not be recognized as Jewish. Of course, if a man is already circumcised, there is a ceremony to 'dedicate one's self' via symbolism. I don't remember the name of the ceremony, but it involves a modified brit milah where the shaft of the penis is nicked with a needle to draw a small amount (usually a few drops) of blood. Then there is the ritual bath after...all done. That is how the Conservatives handle it. It is likely different among Reforms.

We actually live in a section of New Haven that has an Orthodox shull nearby so our neighborhood has many Orthodox families. They walk to services on Friday night and Saturday on our street and there is a mikvah also nearby. There is a group of Hasidim in another area of the city who dress in the distinctive garb of the group...I see them often.

The former owners of my house had put a mezuzah on the doorpost and it's still there. I like it...

Let's really think about that for a while...

He'll be pissed off at mom then.

Most intact men are happy to have never been circumcised and do not want it done as adults. Besides, there are arguments in favor of having it done as an adult rather than a newborn or child. Aside from consent of the person whose body is being surgically altered, that is.

Pitbulls optional