1 in 100 boys experience complications due to Circumcision. Doctor seems to think that is an acceptable risk. Why expose your son to any risk whatsoever for medically unnecessary procedure?

Broccoli_Tesla · 2012-09-13T03:32:10+00:00

It feels like they are trying to come up with ways to stop kids getting polio. If we have better methods to control things like urinary tract infection (like clean water - Australia has this) then perhaps we shouldn't jump to "lets cut up the children's genitals".

The following types of comments also infuriate me. "I'm the mother so I know whats best for him" and "I find uncut en icky". Imagine if we all suggested the that cutting the clitoral hood should be done for aesthetics or cleanliness.

wufoo2 · 2012-09-13T05:13:10+00:00

I work in cardiovascular office and hospital operating theatres. Most operations - and these are major, chest and beating heart open to the world operations - carry risks of 1% to 5% mortality/morbidity. Most pacemaker insertions are less than 1%. Why is it acceptable for an elective, redundant procedure with higher complication risks than many major surgeries to be performed on infants for aesthetic reasons?

wufoo2 · 2012-09-13T14:18:54+00:00

Graphic pictures of infant circumcision complications here. NSFL; don't say I didn't warn you.

2012-09-13T15:20:07+00:00

Why don't MRA lobby to make it so that circumcision requires the consent of both parents, at least? Surely that would be uncontroversial, and it might cut down on the number of babies who are victimized.

Also, what's the latest age a boy can be legally forced to be circumcised at? Is it the day before his 18th birthday? If so, the situation is even more twisted than I realized.

2012-09-13T15:39:49+00:00

deleted ^{^{^What}} ^{^{^is}} ^{^{^this?}}

Falkner09 · 2012-09-13T16:04:06+00:00

the 1% claim is false, it's based on studies that ONLY looked at immediate complications. it ignores long term complications, like meatal stenosis, which 10% develop and has to be corrected by removing a portion of the end of the urethra.

kurfu · 2012-09-13T17:07:08+00:00

To answer your question: Because of lazy mothers that can't be bothered to properly clean their child's unmutilated penis.

2012-09-13T22:53:06+00:00

I think a lot of people have the attitude that any amount of suffering is worth a marginal improvement of health. Never mind the fact that if you properly wash your genitals and practice safe sex, you will experience every "benefit" that circumcision supposedly has without the ED later in life.

r_rships_account · 2012-09-16T06:10:09+00:00

Brian Morris, the scientist quoted in favor, is obsessed with circumcision and tries, via the internet, to persuade adult men to be circumcised. He is not an impartial medical scientist.

Majimanidoo · 2012-09-13T17:54:10+00:00

The stats on both sides make the other side look bad.

Any pro circumcision reports the complication rate to be between .2 and .6% with ZERO Deaths reported in over 100 thousand subjects.

Those same reports also state that in the non circumcised group its 2-10% complications resulting in 2 deaths and several life threatening diseases.

In the case of the complications for those with Circumcisions being performed none resulted in loss of glands or any major long lasting issues with the penis.

I don't know how we can go about asking for a completely unbiased study to be done on this so we know honestly for sure that there is benefits or not to this procedure.

Title	1 in 100 boys experience complications due to Circumcision. Doctor seems to think that is an acceptable risk. Why expose your son to any risk whatsoever for medically unnecessary procedure?
Author	OsirisFox
Upvotes	71
Comments	17
Date	September 13, 2012 2:23 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/zsuxr/1_in_100_boys_experience_complications_due_to/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/1-in-100-boys-experience-complications-due-to.1013621 https://theredarchive.com/post/1013621

Comments