Discussion: Battle Over Florida Boy's Circumcision Heads To Federal Court

TPM Article Topics
21

I think if you haven’t got it done by age 4 then you really ought to leave it alone, given there’s no medical reason to do it. If, as an adult, the kid wants it done, he can get it then. From the point of view of medical personnel, if one parent is strongly opposed to this elective procedure, they shouldn’t do it, contract or no.

I agree with those upthread who think this is a proxy conflict between warring parents. If they can’t deal with these sorts of issues peaceably, then I think the joint custody arrangement ought to be rethought.

8 Likes
22

No kidding, this is just the tip of the story. Feels like it just…cuts off.

Joking aside, reading commentary on the first circumcision story in the Bible, it says, “when Abraham circumcised the members of his household, he piled their foreskins into a heap. The odor of the foreskins rose to heaven and was as appreciated by God as the odor of incense in the temple.” And that’s the invisible skyguy the nutjobs want us to obey.

Probably too late for anyone to read this, so consider it a confession into the ether. I truly regret having my oldest son circumcised. It was done to me, the research I found at the time before he was born suggested benefits to his future partner’s (s’?) health and that it had no psychological aftereffects. Maybe it’s my guilt manifesting itself, but he’s always seemed more tentative in embracing new things, won’t play games where he might get hurt, and panics at the sight of blood. I don’t know - it could be nature, but it sure feels like nurture or lack of could be responsible.

3 Likes
23

Four? He’ll never forget this. This might even become the poor child’s first lasting memory.

Circumcision is child abuse, plain and simple. I simply don’t understand how such a disfiguring and unnecessary operation can be done upon an individual under the age of consent.

6 Likes
24

Where in the article does it say how old the boy is? I missed that in this version: UPDATE: May 18, 2015, 5:55 PM EDT

25

CDC is wrong. Circumcision is barbaric.

3 Likes
26

Yeah, really, one rule of parenting is if both can’t agree to do something, “Do nothing” is the best option. Why is the dad going this far for what is after all an entirely optional procedure?

27

I’m glad that you weighed in. Now the science is finally settled.

You know, the anti-vaxxers would probably be on your side. You have a very similar argument.

1 Like
28

Since it’s not medically necessary, and there doesn’t seem to be a religious angle, how about this as a compromise: if the kid wants to be circumcised when he turns 18, he can have it done.

Because if they do it to him now and he doesn’t like it later, will they reverse the procedure?? Yeah, I didn’t think so.

And let’s not even get into the what-if the child was a girl…

4 Likes
29

It is an elective surgery. If the courts somehow force this “agreement” to an elective (totally non-medically necessary) surgery, does that mean the mother can, at some point, decide to have the boy’s earlobes extended? Facial implants? Nose job?

I am totally in the mother’s camp here. I know she “signed a parenting agreement” at some earlier point – but the surgery is totally elective just like the procedures I mentioned above. As a species, we have the ability to think and learn. The foreskin is there for a good reason – all that is needed is an understanding of proper care, cleansing, etc., just like for any other body part.

BTW, if anyone wants to interject the few studies done in Africa that indicate there is less chance of contracting/spreading HIV when the kid becomes sexually active, let the boy review those studies and make that decision for himself when that time comes. Until then, don’t mutilate him. I think the father is being a total dick – the bad kind of dick. More power to the mother here!! Thank you.

1 Like
30

One of my favorite cartoons shows Abraham looking up to the heavens and asking: “Let me get this straight. You want us to cut off the ends of our dicks?”

1 Like
31

OK.
A) This is Florida.
B) There has GOT to be some “Religious” reason for the insistence of the Father on circumcision, but it is not anywhere in the story.
How in the hell can ELECTIVE SURGERY be forced upon a child? Can a stage-mother force a 10 year old to have Breast Implants?, can a “traditional” Chinese mother force her girl to have her little toes cut off? can an Ethiopian father force his daughter to have a clitorectomy? Where does it end?

32

You sign an agreement, then balk at it, for some unknown reason. The question is how do you hold the mother responsible for backing out without traumatizing the child? What she did was get her way by stalling and is now making the legal argument that it’s too late to do with traumatizing the child. Whatever she believes, this is a crappy way to parent. That it has taken four years and multiple court hearings is REALLY crappy. These two adults should have been able to resolve this.

33

Right. Because you say so.

(rolls eyes)

1 Like
34

No it isn’t. That you make such histrionic pronouncements despite the actual medical benefits outweighing the risks, is rather odd to say the least.

35

Lets look at those CDC positions:

Clinical trials, many done in sub-Saharan Africa, have demonstrated that circumcision reduces HIV infection risk by 50 percent to 60 percent, the CDC guidelines note.

Condoms are extremely effective regarding aids and fluid borne transmissions. Better sex education and condoms beats circumcision in this regard any day:

Epidemiologic studies that compare rates of HIV infection between condom users and nonusers who have HIV-infected sex partners demonstrate that consistent condom use is highly effective in preventing transmission of HIV. http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/brief.html

Back to the CDC on circumcision:

The procedure also reduces by 30 percent the risk of contracting herpes and human papilloma virus (HPV), two pathogens believed to cause cancer of the penis.

30% effective? That’s <a href=Genital Herpes: Infection and Transmission">on par with condoms

“Although the magnitude of the protective effect was not as large as has been observed with other STIs, a 30 percent reduction in HSV-2 incidence (with condom use) can have a substantial benefit for individuals as well as a public health impact at the population level,” writes researcher Emily T. Martin, MPH, PhD, of Children’s Hospital Research Institute and the University of Washington, Seattle in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

In addition to condoms we have modern medicines which are far superior in preventing herpes than condoms or the archaic practice of circumcision:

Treatment with valacyclovir 500 mg daily decreases the rate of HSV-2 transmission in discordant, heterosexual couples in which the source partner has a history of genital HSV-2 infection (170). Such couples should be encouraged to consider suppressive antiviral therapy as part of a strategy to prevent transmission, in addition to consistent condom use and avoidance of sexual activity during recurrences. CDC

And another from herpes.org

The research team found that infections developed in the uninfected partner in only 4 of the 743 couples in which the infected partner took Valtrex

Lestaltdelc advocates archaic procedures which are between 30 to-60 percent effective versus safe non-surgical methods with extremely high effectiveness. When viewed with all options available, condoms -and modern medicine - coupled with education are looking to be a better bet than the disfigurement of children before they have an opportunity to make the decision themselves at the age of consent.

No need to nip it in the bud, wrap that rascal…

36

CDC Endorses Circumcision for Health Reasons

37

Great, I edited the wrong post.

Back in a minute or two

38

No need for an argument. Your hyperbolic bullshit that “circumcision is child abuse, plain and simple.” doesn’t even pass the laugh test nor does it warrant a response other than linking again the fact that the CDC Endorses Circumcision for Health Reasons.

But please try and argue that decreasing the sensitivity of the end of the penis, thus enabling men to “last longer” before achieving orgasm is a potentially bad thing. I sure legions of wives, husbands, girlfriends, boyfriends and significant others will rally behind the slogan “men take too long to cum!”.

39

Here we go,

As psychologists, we are deeply concerned by the recently announced CDC guidelines promoting circumcision for all males, and in particular children. The CDC guidelines are based on a sharply criticized 2012 policy statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics. The 2012 statement was condemned by a large group of physicians, medical organizations, and ethicists from European, Scandinavian, and Commonwealth countries as “culturally biased” and “different from [the conclusions] reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada and Australia” (Frisch et al., 2013).

The new CDC guidelines highlight methodologically flawed studies from Africa that have no relevance to the United States. They chose to ignore studies that were conducted in the United States and show no link between circumcision and the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV (Thomas et al., 2004).

So what would be problems with studies on HIV rates based on circumcision in men from Africa.

Are circumcisions more likely in wealthier and educated people? Circumcisions aren’t free. It seems much more likely to find a socio-economic link to rates of circumcision. Much of Africa is under 50% literacy. Literacy brings more income and access to medical advice, condoms and sanitation, all of which contribute to a decrease in STDs in the West.

Its a long enough post. We can talk about psychological harm later.

40

Seriously, there are cheap cures and therapy for that problem. No need to mutilate children under the age of consent.