Great article. My son was born in California where intact boys were more the norm -- even 7 years ago.

Good for you for keeping your boys intact. I chose to do the same for my son and I know that many of my friends have as well. Thank God this generation of moms have woken up to the fact that circumcision really is genital mutilation.

I chose to not have my son circumcised just for the general idea that it's his, not mine. I grew up southern baptist and everyone @ home wonders why I didn't (even though it shouldn't be a christian practice). My grandma, however, didn't get my uncles cut and was in full support of our decision, and was surprisingly the only person in my circle in SC that didn't think us nuts. If something comes up that changes, we'll cross that bridge when we get there. :)

circumcision is an awful thing to do to an innocent baby. cosmetic surgery that can cause pretty severe complications. there's no medical reason whatsoever to cut your baby. if you're on the fence about it, i encourage you to watch a few videos about it on youtube, including "the elephant in the room," a scholarly and well researched video, link is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSM-SkwGEf0&feature=player_embedded
we certainly won't be doing this to our son, either.

I circumcised both of my boys and did it because of the health benefits. It protects against UTI's, STD's, and cancer. That was enough to convince me that they could go through a quick procedure (that they would not remember later in life anyway) to have that protection. Plus, it could easily be a hygiene issue for boys. I don't regret our decision and my boys seem well adjusted despite the fact that they were cut as infants.

My daughter and son-in-law chose not to circumcise their son, my precious grandson. I, of course, never considered it an option when I was a young mother. Everybody just did it. But I respected their decision, and am interested to hear that more and more parents are choosing not to do the procedure.

Good topic, Leigh! I think it's fantastic that you and your husband made a decision based on such care and thoughtful consideration.

This was a tricky one for us and it was a hard decision for us to make. Having had 3 girls before our son was born, I wasn't sure what to expect or what to do so we researched and decided to make the decision at the hospital. In the end we decided to circumcise our son and the procedure was performed by my OBGYN.

I think that our locker rooms are going to be filled with boys who have both been circumcised and those who have not and I have a feeling this generation will follow our lead with the same respect and tolerance that we teach them to display towards others with differing views.

I did have to fight the hospital to not circumcise my son. They were 30 minutes away from a big lawsuit! Fun times.

I felt pressure to have my son circumcised, and I was very ill right after the birth and did not fight them. Hearing him scream is not something I will forget, nor the verbal abuse from visiting family at my negative reaction (they were busy serving champagne cocktails to celebrate the new baby while the baby was being mutilated and my hysteria was unacceptable). So you see, medical and societal pressure is considerable. I hope that changes someday.

This type of forum and the wealth of information through reliable resources on the web gives parents the option to make an informed choice. That's a wonderful use of new media! Wish I had of been more informed back in the dark ages when "it" was just done routinely!

We kept our sons intact mainly b/c we could no more ascertain medical reasons for circumcising them than we could for girls. There was never a question in our minds that we would not circumcise a girl. Rather, we would do our best to teach a girl good hygiene and sexual health practices to minimize the risk of bad outcomes. For us, the same argument applied to boys. I'm glad it's becoming less common. I respect that circumcising parents are trying just as hard to make the best decisions for their boys, but it does seem to be way more of a cultural practice than a medically necessary one.

Thomas,
I respect your passion! Thanks for all the links.

One has to understand that doctors and hospital get paid on a fee-for-service basis. Circumcision is an additional service and a profit center. They will tell parents anything to get the parents to consent to circumcision.

The AAP statement is highly biased in favor of circumcision and should not be relied upon. It overstates the benefits and understates the risks, complications, certain injury, and other disadvantages.

The popularity of circumcision is decreasing all over the United States. I saw some state-by-state statistics recently. Intact boys are now in the majority in 20 percent of the states.

Medicaid in South Carolina, just forty miles to the east, stopped paying for circumcision in February because it is an unnecessary non-therapeutic operation. They preferred to use their medical dollars elsewhere.

If one is on South Carolina Medicaid, one should not expect SC Medicaid to pay for a circumcision.

My son is circumcised. I remember hearing the ob comment that doctors are leaving more skin than they used to. I wonder if this has any effect on the risk factors.

Good article and good comments! One thing that seems missing, though, is a discussion of the purpose and function of the foreskin itself. The foreskin is erogenous tissue, containing thousands of fine-touch nerve endings, similar to those in the fingertips and lips. These nerve endings in the foreskin contribute to a man's pleasure in a big way. Second, the foreskin acts as a linear bearing, making intercourse more comfortable and pleasurable for women. For diagrams of how this works, see: http://www.cirp.org/pages/anat/

i let my husband decide and since he was uncut we chose that. its basically cosmetic for a baby and in theory, that seems wrong to me. and there is a risk. why bother?

"he did end up having to have the procedure done when he was 10"

Stories like this are based on BAD medical advice to pull back the foreskin and clean with soap. That is EXACTLY what causes the problems. The problems do not occur in places where they just clean the outside. The US medical professionals have been causing problems for US boys for years (my ped tried to do that to my son). Also, almost no men get these parts of their penis cut off as adults. The parts are so awesome (thousands of fine touch ans stretch nerve endings). The fact that men want to keep all of their parts, even with sex in the city type social pressure, shows just how AWESOME these parts are for sex and masturbation. On the other side (even though most men say their penis is great) with the internet so many men are saying they wish they had all of their penis, so many are restoring (although that does not get the nerves back).

Few parents consider the future sexual enjoyment of their son. The long term harm is huge with nerve damage and harm to the sensory system. A whole range of sensation and sexual and protective function are lost. The lips and fingertips have similar touch sense. To take this away from another person without their consent????

Frankly, I have hesitated to comment on this thread, but that last post is worth an honorable mention. Here it is again: "he did end up having the procedure when he was 10"

I think Mr. Perry's advice is sound (even though, like a lot readers, I never wanted to think about my parents OR our baby sons having sex!). But, you know, that text that was quoted MIGHT be read (by some other readers) as: ...he did end up having the procedure done when he was 10 inches.... Poor guy! I certainly understand his situation.

I guess I clicked on the OTF link to Jack Perry's post, that sent me to the bottom of the comments, I arrived in medias res -- and I misread that quote at first. My bad......

No medical association endorses routine infant circumcision.

HIS body, HIS decision.

Funny how comments promoting circumcisions are deleted... WHY? Is there not 2 sides to every story? Do people not need to know some experiences from adults that have been in situations with both circumcized and uncirc'd males? Really? I am appalled that this article is so biased and caters only to people who agree and do not express concerns or give details of bad (but very truthful) experiences.

Shelly,
The comment in question was removed by Athens Patch because it was too sexually explicit not because of your stance on circumcision. I can appreciate that you felt it was a truthful experience but some details were too graphic for this forum. As for your feeling about the article being biased, it is an opinion piece and I was sharing MY experience. I clearly ask for opinions at the end of the article and the entire point was to start a discussion. I welcome all opinions.

The real issue here is about parents being able to make an informed choice.
There seem to be pros and cons to the situation (as you mention, Leigh, in the article) but how people respond is definitely also a matter of choice and expression!

Right?

An interesting commentary...
http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/thebrownandwhiteblog/index.ssf/2011/09/lecture_on_genital_alteration.html

Honestly, some of the comments left on here by "anti-circumcision" people do seem fanatical. It is to be decided by the parents and it is a VERY personal choice. I've already made my decision and I don't regret choosing circumcision. We had zero complications and I've heard no complaints from my boys. I can't believe how accusatory some of these comments have gotten.

"it is a VERY personal choice" That is exactly what we say, Laruren - so personal that there is only one person who should be making it.

You may never hear complaints from your boys, but when they are men they may still have them and never tell you. Some circumcision complications - and inevitable losses - are never sheeted home to their real cause - the men imagine that everybody has to put up with what they do, since lots of men don't talk about the details of their sex lives.

Exactly what is so fanatical, so radical, about not doing anything?
Nothing. Just letting nature take its course?
The fanatical thing, is removing half the genital skin from a healthy baby, because somebody else thought it was a good idea.
I'm not judging anybody. I had one circumcised son, and one uncircumcised son.
I know how hard it is to buck tradition, or to buck faulty medical advice. But that's exactly what it is, faulty medical advice. The Europeans live longer and healthier, and they don't do it. What do they have to show for it? Less disease.

Europeans don't live less long, because they keep their foreskins. This tells you circumcision is not a benefit to a longer life. They get less STDs than Americans, which tells you there is no STD benefit.
Are there any other normal body parts you object to so strenuously, that you would have your kid surgically altered, to get rid of them? Is there any other body part you feel looks better as a scar, than the real part? Most men want more genitalia, not less, but I guess there is an exception to everything. Are there any other instances where you know better than 4.7 million years of human evolution, and God, how something should look? Hey, Moses was cut, and left his son uncut.
The only one that lost, was your son. 20,000 exquisitvely sensitive nerves, the frenulum (the most sensitive part), the inner foreskin (the second most sensitive part), and the ridged bands. A mucous membrane, like the inside of your mouth, was turned into skin more like your arm. Would a woman's genitalia be better that way?Something which makes entry gentle is gone, What would a man do with all that "extra" skin, that comes standard?
You've got a prejudice against the human body, as nature made it.

To each his own on this, I say. We had ours circumcised because that was the common practice back then. Not sure what I would do today, although my husband still likes the idea, having been circumcised himself.

If it ain't broke...

Laururen, I agree with you. Since a baby cannot make the decision, then it is up to the parents. My boys have never complanined about it. Neither has my husband. I would choose it again.

Would you choose it for your daughter?
Wouldn't the fact that he can't choose it for himself, cause you to act cautiously, and leave his choice options open? If he has a foreskin, he can always be circumcised, if that's what he wants. If he is circumcised, and wants to have a foreskin, he's out of luck.
It's pretty easy to choose for someone else.
How would you feel if someone else chose to remove a considerable amount of skin from your genitals?

I tuned in to Athens Patch after this article was written. Thank you so much for writing it! I left my son intact. My ex's entire family tried to convince me that my son's penis was deformed and necessitated circumcision. When he was 2 weeks, we took him to the doctor, and I acknowledged that his penis was in fact deformed, and I was ready to have him circumcised. How many uncircumcised baby boy penises had I ever seen? Apparently, none. The doctor looked me straight in the eye and told me that my son's penis looked exactly the way it was supposed to look. My son is 8 and has never had any problems with his body. I have taught him to pull his skin back each time he bathes so that clean water washes away any body fluid or bacteria. I have also heard of boys having problems if they wash with soap in that area, so I was careful to teach to only rinse with clean water. Kudos to you Leigh for writing this article to raise awareness, and kudos to all parents who break tradition and do not unnecessarily involve their baby boys with knives and blood to their private parts.

You brightened up my day.
That doctor did exactly what he or she was supposed to do...and that is rare.
Thanks, Ryan.