Is Circumcision A Form Of Child Abuse ?

I don't want to offend anyone, but as my title says, I consider circumcision to be a form of child abuse. The whole idea of cutting of a piece of someone's genitals, without their permission, is so unreal and sick to me everytime I try to imagine it. If I went up to some woman and sliced off a part of her genitals, I am sure it would be called sexual assault and would be illegal. So why is it legal to do it to a defenseless child ?? To me, it's just a form of child abuse.

While I am against circumcision (unless done for medical reasons later on in life) since it serves no purpose whatsoever.. I don't think i'd go as far as calling it "child abuse". Most people don't even realize that there is no medical reasoning behind it whatsoever but because it was the "normal" thing to do for so long you can't really blame the people who are un-educated and do it based on the fact that it's what everyone else does.

I get criticized everyday because my son isn't circumcised, and each time it comes from someone who believes that there is some medical benefits behind it. it's BULL!

While I wouldn't call it child abuse.. I think it is completely wrong to make such a decision for your child, it's their body it should be their choice.

Wow. That is actually something I hadn't really thought about...I think at the moment I have to agree. It's actually pretty heinous if you think about it..

None of my boys are cimcumsized. They are 15, 17 and 20 and so far none of them have ever had any problems because of it.

If circumcision is then certain vaccinations should be as well since some people don't believe there are medical benefits and thereforeeee you are sticking a needle in a child's body which hurts the child. Same with drawing blood for those people who believe there are no medical benefits to it.

I think it's a matter of opinion as to whether there are medical benefits to circumcision.

And if you believe that is up to the child then shouldn't it be up to the child whether he gets vaccinated or has blood drawn? How about piercing a baby's ears - is that child abuse too?

I don't know, but I'll never understand the parents that have it done. I hear it's worse to have it done than not...more problems down the line.

I don't know, but I'll never understand the parents that have it done. I hear it's worse to have it done than not...more problems down the line.

Honestly though No-one really can say unless they have experienced not being circ'd and then being circumcised later on in life.

If circumcision is then certain vaccinations should be as well since some people don't believe there are medical benefits and thereforeeee you are sticking a needle in a child's body which hurts the child. Same with drawing blood for those people who believe there are no medical benefits to it.

 

I think it's a matter of opinion as to whether there are medical benefits to circumcision.

 

And if you believe that is up to the child then shouldn't it be up to the child whether he gets vaccinated or has blood drawn? How about piercing a baby's ears - is that child abuse too?

Drives me crazy to see babies with pierced ears. But circumcision is removing a body part...maybe not child abuse but certainly under the rules of society - which we haven't got much choice but to function by - I'd say it's pretty ridiculous and perhaps cruel.

I dunno. I think always having to hold your skin back to use the bathroom is kind of worse. This should be a question for the men...

CIRCUMCISION or NOT??

read about the benefits of circumscion.

link removed

And NO..I don't think it's abuse. In some cases it's necessary...

While I am against circumcision (unless done for medical reasons later on in life) since it serves no purpose whatsoever.. I don't think i'd go as far as calling it "child abuse". Most people don't even realize that there is no medical reasoning behind it whatsoever but because it was the "normal" thing to do for so long you can't really blame the people who are un-educated and do it based on the fact that it's what everyone else does.

 

I get criticized everyday because my son isn't circumcised, and each time it comes from someone who believes that there is some medical benefits behind it. it's BULL!

 

While I wouldn't call it child abuse.. I think it is completely wrong to make such a decision for your child, it's their body it should be their choice.

I agree. I too will not be circumcising my son, because if nature intended there to be a foreskin there, then i will be leaving it there. I don't think of it as a form of abuse, that's going too far, but for people who do it (other than religious reasons) I think they are not very bright about it unless there really is a good reason for it, because think of the infections you may be dealing with if your baby's fecal matter were to come in contact with the wounds from circumcision? Waste of money, health, causes parents to fear infection, and above all ridiculous. Plus, when my baby grows up and becomes a man, i want him to have a good, comfortable sex life with on issues from improper circumcisions, which is what my cousin is facing right now (they cut too much skin off his penis).

So then you are drawing a distinction between removing a piece of skin and making a hole in skin with a needle? How about injecting a foreign substance into the hole which is what a vaccination is? There are those who find that medically unnecessary. Who are you to say why one is abuse and one is not?

In my opinion, it is an acceptable religious tradition and for those who believe it has medical benefits, an acceptable medical procedure. And if you are going to call it abuse then you also need to call vaccinations and piercings abuse - because vaccinations are not left up to the child, either.

Comparing it to genital mutilation in women is silly - whole different type of organ and impact.

I dunno. I think always having to hold your skin back to use the bathroom is kind of worse. This should be a question for the men...

 

CIRCUMCISION or NOT??

What? I'm not circumsised and I never have to do that.

In my opinion, it is very barbaric. It's quite appalling that there is SO much ignorance on this matter, yet it is sanctioned as an unquestioned ritual.

Recently, the American Pediatric Association declared it to be unecessary, medically -- and only useful for "cosmetic" or "religious" purposes. So, doctors now leave this decision discretely to parents to make, based on these parameters. Well I have to ask, since when did religious tolerance require us to concede that part of the body should be mutilated, just because so many have apparently sustained no "lifelong" medical complications as a result? Many arguments have been made for the procedure and a few doctors still believe it decreases the chances of contracting certain STDs, but more and more, these arguments have been shot down. So what we are left with is doctors condoning the "private decision" of parents.

I don't know if you are a man, but I suspect from your post that you are male. I think it's interesting to note that it is MEN who seem most averse to seeing this custom overturned. My sister has a new baby boy, and the subject of his circumcision was the worst difference of opinion that they'd had in a 10 year marriage. She wanted not to circumcise, he wanted to. Many men fear in subconscious ways their sons looking different, and not following the "way we do things" with that part of the body. I have found (as you might, in this thread) that more men find it an abhorrent idea to have their foreskins than not. So not many men want to see their son born without having this done, based on their own sexual frame of reference (which is usually that it hasn't affected them emotionally and physically negatively at all), whereas women are more likely to feel protective of their child when they see the literature.

There is a legal organization though that is now pushing for this becoming a civil rights issue -- namely, the rights of the child. I have become a fervent believer in this cause.

And I am very glad that in the end, my brother-in-law gave in: they waited until the last moment, leaving the hospital nearly, to make their decision and he relented, saying, "Whatever you want to do, I will be at peace with it." So my nephew is happily uncut. Which is a HUGE break with our family religious lineage. His mom absolutely freaked out, but by that time he was reconciled to the decision. Thank GOD!!!!

I think circumcision is going to be around for a LONG time, but people like me with a big mouth will do what they can. Unfortunately, it's not considered good decorum to "tell people how to be good parents" as though this were like different opinions on spanking or schooling. Circumcision is a one-shot deal, no going back. It's an abomination.

im circumsized and glad i am... im glad i don't have to fold back foreskin to take a clean piss or to clean it properly in the shower.

If it developed as a part of the human body, an especially important one in fact, it must serve a purpose. I could see where there would be cases where it would need to be removed, like with a spleen or anything, but it's a part of the human body that's kind of supposed to be there. I think if it's not broken, don't fix it, basically.

What? I'm not circumsised and I never have to do that.

Well then you're lucky, because some HAVE too!

I dunno. I think always having to hold your skin back to use the bathroom is kind of worse. This should be a question for the men...

 

CIRCUMCISION or NOT??

Coming from a friend who was circ'd later in life.. He said he preferred not being circ'd.. and to be honest, from what I have read up on and been told by many pediatricians, Circumcisions really serve no health purpose. It doesn't reduce or increase the chances of anything. If a guy keeps himself properly clean, he will not have any problems.

I'd like to add that I think "child abuse" really isn't ONLY about intentional harm, so even if someone means well, if they are violating their child, to ME, that constitutes child abuse.

If it developed as a part of the human body, an especially important one in fact, it must serve a purpose. I could see where there would be cases where it would need to be removed, like with a spleen or anything, but it's a part of the human body that's kind of supposed to be there. I think if it's not broken, don't fix it, basically.

I'm being funny

It serves it's purpose as a form of birth control

Also, how many of you ladies would like to get your vaginas mutilated when you are born? I bet nobody wants that, just as a man doesn't want his privates mutilated either. Unless there is a significant problem with the foreskin (or religion, which i totally understand), there is no need to mutilate what god has given us.

Also, my fiance is circumcised and he does not have a problem at all. He doesn't need to hold his foreskin back while peeing either. I'd like to add that i'm a nursing major and i'm kin and friends with many people in the medical field and circumcision is not necessary. Only for insecure people who think little joey needs to look like daddy.

Well then you're lucky, because some HAVE too!

Just like alot of circ'd guys have other issues related to being circumcised..

Not really trying to debate here but things can be said for both and I guess its all a personal choice for the parent. I'm not going to say someone who chooses to circumcise their son is a bad parent or is abusing their child but it just wasn't my choice to do so.

My son has equal male parties involved with him that once he gets old enough if he has questions about either / or he can ask his daddy the benefits to being circumcised and he can ask other family members the benefits of NOT being circ'd and then he can choose whether to have the procedure done or not.

obviously if you refer to it as mutilation that puts a bias on the question. I don't consider it to be mutilation and female and male genitals are completely different in that respect - there is no extra flap of skin that can be removed without harming the genitalia or providing medical benefits to the circumcised individual.

Only for insecure people who think little joey needs to look like daddy.

That was the biggest problem I had with my son's father and his family. They were under the impression that it HAD to be done thereforeee all the guys in that family were circumcised and I was majorly criticized because of my choice not to have the procedure done. My ex didn't have a clue and when I brought it up that it was something I was dead set against my ex didn't have a clue that we had a choice in whether the kid was circ'd or not.

Just like alot of circ'd guys have other issues related to being circumcised..

 

Not really trying to debate here but things can be said for both and I guess its all a personal choice for the parent. I'm not going to say someone who chooses to circumcise their son is a bad parent or is abusing their child but it just wasn't my choice to do so.

 

My son has equal male parties involved with him that once he gets old enough if he has questions about either / or he can ask his daddy the benefits to being circumcised and he can ask other family members the benefits of NOT being circ'd and then he can choose whether to have the procedure done or not.

Oh..I forgot to mention...IT LOOKS BETTER