Another reason newborn infant circumcision is wrong

(Excuse typos- spell checking now. I was using Siri voice to text earlier)

I feel for this family. I really do. What a horrible way to find out your son has a heart condition. However, it didn’t need to be discovered in such a stressful way for the child.
It just goes to show that just because a baby seems healthy and perfect doesn’t mean he is or should be subjected to cosmetic elective surgery.
Poor baby. Poor family.
I hope he continues to do better.


Another heart defect discovered during an infant boy’s circumcision

And another

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Newborn Baby Survives Heart Failure Following Circumcision

“About 15 minutes after they circumcised him, he crashed,” Bond said. “Luckily, we had someone here that knew what was going on and saved his life.”

now before you think “thank goodness they circumcised him so they found out about the heart condition
I want you to think about baby girls.
Girls can have heart conditions too but we don’t try to discover them by electively cutting their genitals.

Circumcision exacerbates these heart conditions. If these babies were not circumcised the body wouldn’t have been under the stress that caused the episode. Yes, they still would have had a heart condition but at least they would not have stressed the heart and baby.

I don’t blame the parents. They are duped by the medical community here in United States. They are feed that circumcision is the right thing to do. They are told its healthier, cleaner and more visually appealing. They aren’t told that having foreskin is normal, natural and appropriate. They aren’t told that the foreskin is part or the penis. They are told it is a flap of skin with no function or purpose.
The foreskin or prepuce protects the glans or penile head keeping it warm, moist and covered.

A review of the scientific literature, however, reveals that the actual eVect of circumcision is the destruction of the clinically demonstrated hygienic and immunological properties of the prepuce and intact penis. (this is a medical site)

In addition to its long term immunological handicap, neonatal circumcision immediately compromises the immune system, making the circumcised male neonate vulnerable to infec- tion, often with tragic consequences.94 95 Even if the circumcisionists’ studies were valid, the real and unavoidable risks of circumcision out- weigh, both quantitatively and ethically, the alleged risks of intact genitalia. Amputation of the prepuce neither inhibits risky sexual behav- iour nor confers immunity after exposure to pathogens. This is demonstrated by the fact that the United States has both the highest number of sexually active circumcised males and the highest rates of genital cancers, STDs, and AIDS of any first world nation.96 97
Mass involuntary circumcision has failed to achieve any of the public health benefits its advocates have claimed for it; but even if it had achieved them all, there can be no scientific or ethical justification for depriving anyone of sovereignty over his own sex organs. Neonatal circumcision violates bodily integrity and imposes on an unconsenting individual a diminished penis for life. In the wake of the Nuremberg trials, it is inappropriate and unethical for doctors to persist in performing or advocating involuntary penile reduction sur- gery on healthy, normal individuals. The totali- tarian concept of involuntary prophylactic sur- gery espoused by circumcision advocates has no place in modern medicine or the civilised world. The key to decreasing the transmission of STDs is education, not amputation.


The prepuce traditionally has been described as a simple fold of skin,1 for which the purpose and function are unknown. This is inaccurate. In reality, the prepuce is a complex structure with multiple anatomical and physiological functions.2

The prepuce is a portion of the entire covering of the penis. It is specialized tissue, composed of skin, mucosa, nerves, blood vessels, and muscle fibers.2 It is anchored by the abdominal wall at the proximal end of the penis and at the proximal end of the glans penis. It is not attached to the shaft of the penis, so, after puberty, it is free to slide back and forth, everting and inverting as it does.3 The sliding/rolling back and forth is called the gliding action.3,4

A frenulum is found on the ventral side of the penis. The frenulum serves to tether a movable structure to a non-movable structure. The penile frenulum returns the foreskin to its normal protective forward position.2 Most men report that the frenulum is highly erogenous tissue.

Peripenic Muscle

In the skin of the penis, there is a sheath of dartos fascia muscle fibers — the peripenic muscle.2,3,5 The muscle fibers keep the prepuce snug against the glans penis.3 The fibers of the peripenic muscle sheath form a whorl at the tip of the prepuce, which act as a sphincter,3 especially in infants and children. The sphincter also serves to prevent inadvertent retraction of the prepuce. The peripenic muscle gives the prepuce great elasticity, allows it to stretch, and helps to return the prepuce to its forward, protective position after retraction.2 The elasticity of the prepuce plays an important role in the erogenous and sexual functions of the prepuce.


The prepuce covers and protects the glans penis and urinary meatus. In most males, the prepuce protects the sterile urinary tract environment in infancy and maintains the moistness — beneficial to good health — of the mucosal surface of the glans penis throughout life.6 Fleiss et al. (1998) have identified immunological functions that help to protect the body from pathogens:7

sphincter action of the preputial orifice functions like a one-way valve, allowing urine to flow out but preventing the entry of infectious contaminants;
apocrine glands of the inner prepuce, which secrete lysozyme, an enzyme that breaks down cell walls of pathogens (and also acts against HIV8);
sub-preputial moisture that lubricates and protects the mucosa of the glans penis; and
high vascularity to bring phagocytes to fight infection.
The epidermis of the prepuce contains Langerhans cells that secrete cytokines,2 hormone-like low-molecular-weight proteins, which regulate the intensity and duration of immune responses.9 de Witte and colleagues (2007) report that the Langerhans cells produce langerin, a substance that provides a barrier to HIV infection.10


The prepuce of the newborn male has extensive innervation. Winkelmann (1956) reported, “[t]he principal form of innervation of human newborn prepuce consists of a deep and superficial network of nerve fibres in the dermis.”11 Moldwin & Valderrama (1989) reported an extensive neuronal network in the prepuce.12









***Graphic****Genital cutting. Bad for both sexes

Warning warning warning! Contain vivid graphic-

Warning* horrible graphic below


Taken from a friend’s intactivtist postings on Facebook.



Care for baby boy and child

Caring for your uncircumcised boy is easy: Do NOT pull back the foreskin. Simply wash the outside ONLY

We do not douche girls! You do not need to clean underneath the foreskin on boys. Too much cleaning of genitals for either sex messes with the body’s natural balance causing issues that never need be.

A teen or adult man should pull back the foreskin, rinse and replace.
Just as a woman should wash her labial folds but NOT stick soap up her vaginal canal. (Ouch)

How do I teach my son to wash his penis?
There is no need to clean inside the foreskin in young boys. Just wash the penis the same as any other part of your son’s body and be careful to wash off any soap. When a boy is old enough to bathe himself, he can wash his own penis.
Once your son can retract (pull back) his foreskin, you can talk to him about retracting his foreskin and washing. A simple explanation of “how to” may be helpful:
gently slip your foreskin back
rinse the head of your penis and the inside fold of your foreskin with warm water
slip your foreskin back in place over the head of the penis
Tell him to make sure he rinses off any soap before pulling the foreskin back over the head of the penis.
Back to top ↑
What happens if someone retracts (pulls back) my son’s foreskin too early?
Forcing the foreskin back before the natural separation of the foreskin from the glans has occurred causes tearing of the connective tissue. This is painful and can lead to problems:
tearing the foreskin from the head of the penis leaves an open wound which can lead to infection
the raw surfaces touching each other can heal together and form adhesions (areas that stick together) between the foreskin and the head of the penis leading to permanent problems with retraction (pulling back)
small tears in the opening of the foreskin can heal to form non-elastic (non-stretchable) scar tissue, possibly causing acquired narrowing (phimosis)
the foreskin can get “stuck” behind the head of the penis (paraphimosis)
– See more at:

Colorado no circ pamphlet

This pamphlet tells of the harms of circumcision and proper care of the intact infant/child penis.


What is circumcision?
Circumcision is the surgical removal of the foreskin, the natural covering of the glans (head) of the penis. In one common method, the doctor inserts a metal instrument under the foreskin to tear it from the glans, slits the foreskin, and inserts a circumcision device. The foreskin is then crushed with the device and cut away with a scalpel or scissors. You can view pictures or videos of a circumcision online to understand what the surgery entails.

What does the foreskin do?
First, the foreskin is erogenous tissue, with dense concentrations of sexually sensitive nerve endings. Second, the foreskin protects the glans from abrasion, irritation, and foreign material, keeping it soft, moist, and comfortable throughout life. It also protects the delicate urinary opening. Third, the foreskin provides sufficient skin length to accommodate penis growth and to allow for comfortable erections. Fourth, the foreskin allows for a gliding action with the motions of intercourse and helps retain natural sexual lubrication. By reducing friction in these ways, the foreskin makes sex more comfortable for both partners.
Circumcision alters all of these functions. Your baby boy will one day grow up to be a man, with his own preferences about how his body works, so it is important to consider the purposes of the foreskin when deciding about circumcision. Diagrams of the foreskin and how it works can be found at

Are there medical benefits?
Most physicians feel there is no compelling medical reason to circumcise newborns. Some studies indicate that circumcision may provide a benefit on occasion, such as reducing the already low chance of an infant developing a urinary tract infection, or possibly reducing the risk of certain sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. However, other studies show no health difference between circumcised and intact males. In any case, only a small minority of boys might ever experience a benefit from circumcision, and these conditions can be prevented or treated without surgery. Practicing safe sex is always necessary whether one is circumcised or not.
For these reasons, no medical organization in the world recommends circumcision for all males – and some advise against it. Medical organizations consider newborn circumcision to be an elective and non- essential procedure.
Is circumcision painful?
Yes. Because of the sensitivity of the foreskin and the steps required to remove it, newborn circumcision is very painful. Pain in the newborn period has been shown to have long-term neurological effects. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, if circumcision is chosen, it is vital that pain relief be provided. However, circumcisions are still sometimes performed without adequate pain relief. Even when anesthesia is used, studies show that it may only reduce the pain of circumcision, but is not guaranteed to eliminate it.
Can there be complications?
Yes. While circumcision is generally considered safe if performed by an experienced medical professional, as with any surgical procedure, complications can and do occur. While most complications are minor, some can be serious. The true rate of complications is not known because there is no national system for collecting this data. However, the following problems have been documented: pain, infection, excessive bleeding, removing too much skin, need for repeat surgery (1%), problems with the start of breastfeeding, buried penis, adhesions between the glans and remaining foreskin (15-30%), meatal stenosis (scarring of the urinary opening, 7-10%), damage to other parts of the penis, and in rare cases, loss of part or all of the penis, and death.
However, the risks of the procedure should not be confused with the guaranteed consequences. Every circumcision results in the loss of a normal and functional body part.
Is circumcision ethical?
Newborn circumcision is performed without the child’s consent. Because it is not possible to accurately predict what a boy would want for himself if given the choice, this raises ethical concerns. Since circumcision results in the permanent loss of healthy, functional tissue and is medically unnecessary, a number of medical organizations now suggest that parents consider letting the boy make his own decisions about circumcision once he is an adult.


How do I care for my son’s intact penis?
A boy’s intact penis needs very little care. The best advice is to simply leave it alone.
At birth, the inner foreskin is normally fused to the glans. As the child develops, the foreskin naturally separates from the glans and its opening becomes looser, allowing it to be retractable. It is normal for these changes to continue into adolescence and the process does not need to be rushed.
A child’s foreskin should never be forcibly retracted.
Trying to retract the foreskin before it has naturally separated can cause pain, bleeding, infection, adhesions, and scarring. The first person to retract a boy’s foreskin should be the boy himself.
Before the foreskin is retractable, cleaning under it is not needed. Simply wash the outside of the penis. Once the foreskin is retractable, you can easily teach your son to clean his penis using the ‘Three Rs’ as a guide: In the tub or shower, have him occasionally Retract the foreskin, Rinse with warm water, and Replace the foreskin back over the glans.
If you have medical concerns, seek out a pediatrician who has a good understanding of foreskin development and care.
How can I learn more?
See the following web sites for more information about circumcision and the foreskin.
This brochure has been prepared by
The Colorado Circumcision Information Resource Center
The information in this pamphlet is not meant to replace the care and advice of your pediatrician.

for the full pamphet click link above. To see other pamphlets from Colorado no circ click
this link:

Just a snip? Really? **graphic pictures***

WARNING: graphic surgical photos below

I feel sick anytime some fan page on Facebook posts things like this but then I repost to help get the message out that this is NOT okay! That this practice is harmful and if no one wants to listen to that then we are inhumane ….. These are our children whom we should be protecting……

Check out this video on YouTube:

These are screen shots from the video above. The baby is screaming throughout the entire thing except for the very end where the baby becomes ominously and freakishly quiet…. In Shock? Shock sleep?
Poor baby.
Supposedly, this child is actually the dr’s son. I’ve heard that before but don’t quote me on it.
The baby was given a pain relief injection at the base of his penis.

Remember when looking at these pictures that this is a helpless baby who is strapped down and awake during this painful surgery
graphic pictures below


















Bleeding out/ hemorrhaging

Is circumcision just a routine harmless procedure?









Before and after images:



So freaking sad that this happens and that the statistics on infant injury or death due to circumcision are not accurately reported.


Oh crap!

Please prayer for this little boy!!!!!!

I really should have stayed off of fb today. My heart aches for this family.





Oh God, the baby died. Please pray for this family in their time of grief and heartache.

“God, bring comfort and peace. Peace is your essence. Peace is your name. Bring peace to this family who has lost their precious child in death.
We come to you, God because we know that you sorrow, and are acquainted with grief. You too have endured the loss of a child. You empathize.
We can’t help but ask, “Why?” Forgive our insistence, our confusion, even our anger. We believe that you are just, and we ache to understand how this tragic death is an expression of that justice, how it expresses your love. We also know – in our minds at least – that you seldom answer the “why?” question. We press you, but on these matters you are mostly silent.
What we ask instead is “how?” How can we move forward? How can this bring us together and not tear us apart? How can we now live under the shadow of this untimely death? Answer this prayer with your comfort and guidance.
There is no way to remove the pain. The grief is real. The only sanity is to know, to believe, in a life beyond with you, when all the scales are righted and the sufferings are made good. We trust you and your promise that while this child’s life on earth is done, his life beyond has just begun. With that release we lose him and let him go into your arms, then by faith receive in return the boundless comfort of your presence. That is all, that is enough. In Jesus.”

Read more:


Learn about circumcision

click link to read





click this link to read


My Journey to Understanding the Truth About Circumcision

The birth of my first son, with my mom.

I was seventeen when I found out I was pregnant for the first time. I didn’t have much support locally but thought I understood enough of the basics of how to birth and care for a child. I knew it would be challenging and confusing at times but I also knew I loved the small human growing inside of m…………………………….


below is a link to pictures of a circumcision…. Look at it and realize this torture is happening to a child

What moms from other countries think about infant circumcision

Retrieved from babycenter






From intact Hawaii on Facebook






from soggy mamas Facebook fan page status update:

‎”Let’s just say we have 10 men in a room. In walks someone who says, “Look, we’re gonna hack off a piece of your D*cks. It’s all the rage and women seem to love it”.

7 men say, “Cool, I want women to like me”, and the other 3 men say, “No Fuckin’ way!!! Your All F*ckin’ Nuts!!! I don’t want my D*ck Mutilated. And, it’s my d*ck. It belongs to me. What give you the right to make that choice? It’s my sexuality”

“Well, we asked your Parents and since you spent 9 mo in your Moms womb she says we can. She says your hers, you belong to her.”

“Well, I’m a Grown ass man, what does my Mother sexual Preference have to do with me? I’m never gonna have sexual relations with her, why should she dictate what happens to my Penis? She hasn’t even seen my penis since I was 10 years old”

“Well, we have seven other men here that say it’s a good idea. So we all think your just being a baby about it” “So, That’s them. Just because they like a mutilated d*ck doesn’t mean I want one. What gives any one the right to do that?”

“Well, Your Dads says He has every right to do what he wants with your penis because he’s your dad, and he wants you to look just like him.”

“I look Plenty like my parents, It’s my d*ck not my dads d*ck.” Parents, “Well, we listen to all the reasons you said not to do it, we weighed it all, and we decided that even though it’s your body, your Penis, your sexuality, and your choice, we’re still gonna forcefully hack off part of your Penis because we want to prove we have a Parental Right to do so.” ~Travis R Tippetts

Sound legit? (reposted by maria)







Circumcision: issues

Another man’s story on his coming to terms with his circumcision as an infant and doing stretching exercises of the shaft skin to try to grow “substitute” coverage of the glans of the penis. (Foreskin restoration techniques)

please read his entire story by clicking the link

So my initial suspicion that something was wrong with my penis actually came before I even started researching circumcision, during puberty. I remember looking at the scar line and wondering why it was uneven, darker, and why the skin above it was a different color. I also noticed how the frenulum ended awkwardly into the scar line. I didn’t really put much thought into it then, but it is interesting to think I knew something was wrong at that age. I also remember when I would masturbate and end up causing sores, I thought I was just being too rough. I started using the technique many intact guys seem to use, thumb on top, fingers on bottom… not a fist, just the ends of the fingers. Perhaps guys are hardwired for this technique 🙂 Anyways, this didn’t work because the skin wasn’t mobile and I was just rubbing it raw, after which I couldn’t masturbate for several days or the sores would reopen. The glans was uncomfortable to stimulate and the main stimulation was from the frenulum when pulled down. When I finally did the fisted approach it helped, but was still rough on the skin.



below is a link to pictures of a circumcision…. Look at it and realize this torture is happening to a child

Joseph4gi: blame game

(Side note: I never realized we are the same age. It’s cool)

click the link for the entire article and diagrams

For what other medical treatment or procedure are parents in a position of entitlement to “decide” at whim, without any kind of clinical indication or medical diagnosis? For what other surgery are surgeons slaves to demanding parents? Do parents actually wield so much power?

Aren’t parents usually given the power to choose a method of treatment for their children AFTER a doctor has determined that there is some kind of clinical or medical necessity?

For these reasons and more, I believe Jonathon’s image is a false paradigm. This delusion of “parental choice” is a false paradigm invented by doctors, the trade unions they belong to, and it is perpetuated by the media.

In the special case of circumcision, however, physicians get away with profiting from this non-medical procedure on healthy, non-consenting individuals, by pawning off their responsibility on parents. Doctors push the paradigm of “the great parental decision” forward, and the media helps perpetuate it.

In their latest statement, the American Academy of Pediatrics came very close to, but stopped short of recommending infant circumcision for all infants (contrary to popular belief). Despite touting over and over again that “the benefits out weigh the risks,” they must still admit that the “benefits are not enough to recommend the procedure,” concluding that “the final decision should be made by parents.” (This was their exact position in their last statement in 1999.)

The result is a spineless, non-committal statement that sounds like an endorsement, if not outright recommendation, but is actually nothing more than self-absolution of professional responsibility, and the undue placement of an onus on parents.

Ethics and pediatric medicine practices

First, a study recently published in Pediatrics, the academy’s journal, suggests that using “cry it out” sleep training with infants does not harm them. The authors actually say “Behavioral sleep techniques have no marked long-lasting effects (positive or negative).” They actual draw this very strong non-scientific conclusion even though they did not look at all possible effects AND they did not examine what the control group families were doing AND even though there are decades of studies on mammals showing the long term harm that distressing young offspring can have on mammalian brains. The great ignorance and disdain for babies shown here is alarming.By allowing this irresponsible and unethical conclusion the editors are encouraging parents to do great harm to their children and our fellow citizens..

The second piece of evidence calling into question the ethics of leaders in pediatric medicine is a statement that was published in August, again in the academy’s journal, Pediatrics. This was the American Academy of Pediatrics’ statement on circumcision that ‘leaves it to parents to decide’ whether to circumcise their infant, instead of condemning it like medical bodies around the world. The statement says:


20130202-111002.jpg Routine circumcision: the opposing view

The link below is from a site i usually post as non-biased but leaning towards pro-circ. I only put the conclusions but the circumcision complication rates were interesting to note. Click the link below to read the full article.

Routine circumcision: the opposing view

Andrew E MacNeily, MD, FRCSC, FAAP


Newborn circumcision remains an area of controversy. Social, cultural, aesthetic and religious pressures form the most common reasons for non-therapeutic circumcision. Although penile cancer and UTIs are reduced compared with uncircumcised males, the incidence of such illness is so low that circumcision cannot be justified as prophylaxis. The role of the foreskin in HIV transmission in developed countries is unclear, and safe sexual practice remains the cornerstone of prevention. There remains a lack of knowledge regarding what constitutes the normal foreskin both among parents and among primary care providers. This lack of knowledge results in a burden of costs to our health care system in the form of unnecessary urological referrals, expansion of wait times and circumcisions. Routine circumcision of all infants is not justified from a health or cost-benefit perspective.
Go to:





below is a link to pictures of a circumcision…. Look at it and realize this torture is happening to a child

Mogen clamp

Adding 4/14/2013

Another baby hemorrhaging… Lucky to be alive and yet supposedly the risks are worth it? How is almost dying worth it? How is almost dying because of a medically unnecessary surgery being performed on a healthy infant worth it?



Pubmed circumcision complications, severe complications and more

as you may have noticed I do a lot of cut and paste from other sources. Maybe I’m not original or maybe I’m lazy, but I figure if someone can get the point across better and more articulately than me, I might as well let them say it. I do a lot of copy/paste so that I can tag and label it so that maybe just maybe it will pop up easier in the Internet search engines…. And in case you were wondering I am totally against circumcising babies and children without immediate medical need. I have no problem with an adult choosing genital modification surgeries

CONCLUSIONS: Genitourinary trauma in the newborn is rare but often necessitates significant surgical intervention. Circumcision often is the causative event. There has been only 1 prior report of a perineal injury similar to case 7, with a fatal outcome.

Infant pain measured during circumcision

Some statistics of complications for on study group…

Our circumcision rate was 87%. Neonatal circumcision had been performed in 270 (83.9%) of the children. Two hundred and fifty nine (80.7%) were performed in hospitals. The operation was done by nurses in 180 (55.9%), doctors in 113 (35.1%) and by the traditional circumcisionist in 29 (9%) of the children. Complications of circumcision occurred in 65 [20.2%] of the children. Of those who sustained these complications, 35 (53.8%) had redundant foreskin, 16 (24.6%) sustained excessive loss of foreskin, 11 (16.9%) had skin bridges, 2 (3.1%) sustained amputation of the glans penis and 1 (1.5%) had a buried penis. One of the two children who had amputation of the glans also had severe hemorrhage and was transfused. Even though the complications tended to be more likely with nurses than with doctors or traditional circumcisionists, this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.051).

We have a very high rate of complications of circumcision of 20.2%. We suggest that training workshops should be organized to adequately retrain all practitioners of circumcision on the safe methods available.


The scientific world journal


In the United States, circumcision is a commonly performed procedure. It is a relatively safe procedure with a low overall complication rate. Most complications are minor and can be managed easily. Though uncommon, complications of circumcision do represent a significant percentage of cases seen by pediatric urologists. Often they require surgical correction that results in a significant cost to the health care system. Severe complications are quite rare, but death has been reported as a result in some cases. A thorough and complete preoperative evaluation, focusing on bleeding history and birth history, is imperative. Proper selection of patients based on age and anatomic considerations as well as proper sterile surgical technique are critical to prevent future circumcision-related adverse events.


The rate of adverse events varies widely across reports, depending on the definition chosen for a postoperative complication. In a large meta-analysis of prospective and retrospective series, Weiss et al. reported a frequency of adverse events of and for serious adverse events [14]. This can represent a significant cost in terms of utilization resources and healthcare dollars. During a five-year period at the Massachusetts General Hospital, 7.4% of all visits to a pediatric urologist were for circumcision complications. This translated to an average total cost per patient for redo procedures of $1,617 and an estimated annual cost of $137,122 to the institution [15].

For ease of discussion, adverse events following circumcision can be categorized as either early or late complications. Early complications such as: bleeding, pain, inadequate skin removal, and surgical site infection tend to be minor and quite treatable. However, postcircumcision bleeding in patients with coagulation disorders can be significant and sometimes even fatal. Other serious early complications include chordee, iatrogenic hypospadias, glanular necrosis, and glanular amputation. The latter, of course, requires prompt surgical intervention. Late complications include epidermal inclusion cysts, suture sinus tracts, chordee, inadequate skin removal resulting in redundant foreskin, penile adhesions, phimosis, buried penis, urethrocutaneous fistulae, meatitis, and meatal stenosis. These are commonly treated in an outpatient setting. Most of the aforementioned conditions are avoidable giving attention to detail and proper technique. Mayer et al. found that some subtle anatomic variations are significantly associated with late circumcision complications, including penoscrotal webbing, suprapubic fat pads, and prematurity [16].

4.1. Death

Fortunately, death from neonatal circumcision is fortunately an extremely rare occurrence. King reported a period when 500,000 consecutive circumcisions were performed in New York city without a single fatality [17]. However, a case of a misplaced Plastibell ring which caused complete meatal obstruction resulted in acute venous stasis and subsequent death from sepsis reported by the Ontario Pediatric Death Review Committee in 2007. In this situation, prompt recognition of the obstruction is critical and primary management should be immediate removal of the Plastibell ring and catheter placement [18]. There are other reports in the international literature that describe mortalities from tetanus as a result of circumcisions performed under nonsterile conditions. Bennett et al. reported that topical antibiotics could decrease this risk of neonatal tetanus 4-fold [19].


Necrosis of the glans can occur as a result of cautery injury during a Gomco circumcision or from distal migration of an incorrectly sized Plastibell ring [9, 20]. Management of glans necrosis depends on its severity


I know the examiner is a dubious source…..


Some research in North America has shown that boys, who were circumcised as small babies, have less chance of developing urinary tract infections in the first year of life than those who are uncircumcised (there is no difference in older boys). However, the numbers of uncircumcised boys who will get urinary infections is small. If 1000 well boys are circumcised, 8 infections will be prevented, but 20 will have a complication related to the circumcision. So the risks of circumcision surgery outweigh the benefits. In those boys with an underlying urinary tract problem, circumcision has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrent urinary tract infections, particularly if still in nappies.


Even with the most skilled and careful hands there are small incidence of risks from both the operation and the general anaesthesia. There is a risk of bleeding and infection following the operation. The risk of death or serious disability due to general anaesthesia is 1:80 000. Very rarely the penis may be permanently damaged. After circumcision, irritation of the exposed penis tip can cause narrowing of the urine opening (meatal stenosis) that may require further surgery. About 5% of children who have been circumcised require further surgery to correct problems it causes.


The most commonly observed complication was preputio-glandular fusion, seen in 25 cases (52%). The other complications were: meatal stenosis in 11 (23%), urethral fistula in five (10.4%), partial glandular amputation in four (8%) and opening distal urethra in three (6%). Adhesion freeing and revision were performed in all cases of preputio-glandular fusion, patients with meatal stenosis underwent meatotomy, urethral fistulae were repaired by simple closure, partial glans amputations were patched with buccal mucosa, and patients with complete open distal urethra were repaired by Mathieu (one patient) and tubularized incised plate urethroplasty techniques.

Circumcision may be associated with many serious complications. To prevent these complications, the operation should be performed by educated and experienced personnel.


Obtaining informed consent for medical procedures is an important practice. In emergent cases when a parent or legal guardian is not available to give consent, a procedure will often be performed if it is judged to be life-sustaining and in the best interest of the patient. When a person having a procedure is unable to give consent and a guardian is present, the guardian’s consent is acceptable. This occurs for routine medical procedures of clear benefit to children such as immunizations. A physician performing a procedure for other than medical reasons on a nonconsenting patient raises ethical concerns.

While routine circumcision is widely practiced, the small medical benefits of circumcision lead many to consider routine circumcision to be a cosmetic procedure. This leads to questions regarding medical ethics and whether and how to present to a parent a balanced discussion of the relative benefits and harms of the procedure. Key to the ethical discussion is respect of the parent’s religious, ethnic, or other cultural beliefs for which circumcision is practiced.

One cost-effectiveness analysis estimated that the lifetime cost difference for men who were circumcised was $25, with a benefit of 10 additional days of life. (30) Another analysis estimated that routine circumcision cost $102 per person, resulting in 14 hours of extended life. (31) These findings suggest that cost factors should be removed from the decision of circumcision. (4)


A total of 8,967 children were operated during the study period, of which 424 (4.7%) were for complications resulting from previous neonatal circumcision. Penile adhesions, skin bridges, meatal stenosis, redundant foreskin (incomplete circumcision with uncircumcised appearance), recurrent phimosis, buried penis and penile rotation were the most frequent complications. At the outpatient clinic of the Section of Pediatric Urology, 127 boys with concerns following newborn circumcision were evaluated, representing 7.4% of the total volume of cases seen in this clinic.
Our results indicate the need to undertake a collaborative study to define the incidence of complications following newborn circumcisions, which should be performed by practitioners with adequate training in the technique of their choice and its post-operative care.


Medical malpractice attorney:

Why Was I Not Warned About the Risks?
It is an unfortunate fact that doctors often do not fully discuss the risks and disadvantages of circumcision with parents or their patients before obtaining consent for the operation. Too often circumcision is viewed as a minor surgery. [Of course, the definition of minor surgery is that which is done on another, while major surgery is that which is done on oneself!] The fact is that in most states the parents of a baby boy or the man about to undergo a circumcision are entitled to be fully informed about the risks and disadvantages. If such is not done, circumcision is performed, and a reasonable person would not have consented if told about the risks and disadvantages, then a suit may be brought for “lack of informed consent.”




below is a link to pictures of a circumcision…. Look at it and realize this torture is happening to a child

Writing on the sunny side of street: The c word


I have to say that I was livid that my precious boy was given medicine for something he didn’t have. And he’s never had an UTI, he’s never had problems with being an intact baby, since we have educated ourselves.

My toddler, Jack, who was born in France, has been to the doctors on numerous occasions since we arrived in Tampa, for check ups. Please note none of these visits have been because of problems with his intact penis. However, the verdict from doctors, especially male doctors, is always the same. “His hole is too small, we have to cut him.” “You need to cut him, because it’s not hygienic.” “You should do it now, or it’ll be painful when he has to be cut when he’s old enough.”

I just nod and ignore, because I know that for my family, preserving our boys as God made them is important. I do sound preachy sometimes, I do think it’s unnecessary, it does pain me to know that some boys have been cut. Do I lecture the parents? No. Do I lecture my friends? No, I offer information.

Many people are putting their faith on Doctors, and on the findings of the AAP. Let’s recap those findings, Studies in Adult males in Africa, had showed that it reduces risk of contracting Aids. (Call me ignorant but I thought that was condoms.) It lowers the risk of UTI’s, and other venereal diseases.

Am I missing something? Where does it say babies? It says Adult Males. So now, does that mean that every adult male who is not circumcised in Europe has UTI’s, Aids or venereal diseases? Erm no. Does that mean that our Canadian neighbors suffer from all these diseases since they don’t support Circumcision either? Erm, no.

TWN: dangers of plastibell circumcision

***WARNING: this article contains very graphic material that is not intended to be viewed by children. Some adults may be offended by it, as well. Viewer discretion is advised.***

please go to the link. Pictures of plastibell complications are in the link provided above

All circumcisions involve cutting, tearing and blood (even Plastibell methods). From birth, the foreskin is fused to the head of the penis (like a fingernail is fused to a finger). Before any circumcision begins, the foreskin must be ripped away from the glans. With a Plastibell circumcision, typically the foreskin is slit down the top to allow the insertion of the Plastibell. When in place, a string is tightly tied to necrotize the foreskin. After everything is secured, the excess skin is removed with scalpel or scissors.
………look at the pictures here
As you can see, the Plastibell procedure is not painless. It’s not safer than other circumcision methods. It’s not without its own unique set of risks and complications. All methods of circumcision have risks. All methods of circumcision remove a normal, healthy part of the male genitalia. ,

this video is of a plastibell circumcision. it is surprisingly bloodless, abnormally so, (wondering if this is a live baby or a corpse for medical study)-

For a video of a live child click the link below:




Circ- the untold story Austrialia bubhub

If you understand numbers? Here is someone’s extrapolation of the statistics for Austrialia

A common argument in favour of routine infant circumcision is that it eliminates the possibility a boy will have a foreskin pathology later in life requiring an adult circumcision. Unfortunately, there are no Australian studies examining how many therapeutic circumcisions are performed on adult men, so the debate is inevitably couched in terms of anecdote and hunches.

Using data extracted from the National Morbidity Database, the Australian Studies of Health and Relationships research database and the Australian Bureau of Statistics, I below analyse the rate of therapeutic circumcision among men aged 15-69 years for the sample financial year 2008* and among 20-year-olds for 1994 to 2010. I also analyse therapeutic circumcision in children (0-14 years), and attempt a cost-benefit analysis of the suggested strategy of Brian Morris’s Circumcision Foundation of Australia to reintroduce universal infant circumcision.

Adult therapeutic circumcision

In 2008 there were 7,703,817 males aged 15-69 years of whom 3,529,059 were estimated to be intact. There were 2,316 therapeutic circumcisions in that group: for phimosis, paraphimosis, “redundant foreskin”, and balanitis (including conditions such as BXO, Zoon’s, etc). This is an annual rate of 66 per 100,000 intact men, and indicates a cumulative risk of therapeutic circumcision of 3.6% to age 70. In different age groups the annual rates were little different: 0.07% for 15-19, 20-29, and 50-69 years; 0.05% for 30-39 years; and 0.06% for 40-49 years.

In other words, 3.6 per cent of intact 15-year-olds today could expect to be circumcised for medical reasons by the time they turn 70, based on practices and patterns prevailing in 2008.

The barometer cohort: twentysomethings

Males aged 20-29 have seen large changes in circumcision status over the past couple of decades, from 539,085 intact (38%) in 1994 to 1,217,465 in 2010 (72%). All the required data exists to calculate the rate of therapeutic circumcison for each year from 1994 to 2010, allowing us to detect any trends. And indeed in 1994-1999 the mean rate was 83 per 100,000, while in 2000-10 it was 66 per 100,000, a statistically significant fall of more than three standard deviations (the SD for both means was 5 per 100,000) or 21 per cent.

The implication is that as the intact penis becomes the norm, both doctors and patients are less likely to opt for circumcision as a therapeutic choice.

Child therapeutic circumcision

The rate of therapeutic circumcision for children since the 1990s has fallen even more, in line with trends observed in England and Scotland. In 1994 the cumulative risk for boys aged 0-14 years was 5%, while in 2008 it was 3.2% (3,619 cases from 1,695,410 intact boys). In terms of age breakdown, 1-4 and 5-9 years each accounted for about 36% of procedures in 2008, with 10-14 years accounting for 20%, and 7% occuring in the first year of life.

The total picture

What this means is that in Australia today a newborn boy who is not routinely circumcised has at most a 6.8 per cent cumulative risk of developing a foreskin pathology that would require a circumcion sometime by the age of 70. (It should be noted that terms such as “foreskin pathology” and “require circumcision” are matters of clinical judgement and their meanings have changed as medical practice guidelines evolved, and continue to evolve, towards less invasive approaches.)

Put another way, at least 93 per cent of boys will never require a circumcision, so inflicting RIC on them to avoid such a possibility is at best pointless and at worst a criminal infringement of their human rights and bodily integrity.

Cost-Benefit of universal infant circumcision

The core argument of Morris and his collaborators is that prophylactic RIC, as a public health measure, is a cost-effective means of preventing illness, and the associated costs, later in life.

The immediate aim would presumably be to prevent the 2,316 adult therapeutic circumcisions identified in this study. Cost-mix data indicate that these circumcisions cost the health system about $3.4 million.

The alternative, says Morris, is (through increasing the Medicare rebate, reintroducing RIC in all public hospitals, and reversing the medical establishment’s long-standing opposition to RIC) to circumcise the entire male birth cohort in the first year of life, every year. What would this cost? Well, using a very conservative average of $500 per procedure (bearing in mind there would be a mix of hospitals, day surgeries and doctors’ rooms, as now), the cost of such a policy, even if it could be implemented, would be at least $75 million annually.

Now if we use the same metric to calculate the cost of child therapeutic circumcision in 2008, we get $1.8 million. So we have a total cost of $5.2 million for all current therapeutic circumcisions versus a proposed cost of more than $75 million for universal RIC.

And what about complications? Following the RACP and using the 2010 systematic review by pro-circ researchers (Weiss, Larke, Halperin, et al) to estimate an immediate complication rate in infants of 1.5%, there would be 2,265 complications annually, ie about the same number as the adult circumcisions one is trying to prevent in the first place.

‘Health Benefits’

Of course proponents claim there are a range of other “health benefits” accruing from circumcision. But there is a fatal flaw in this argument. Even if circumcision did provide a measure of risk reduction for some conditions (a contention which is at the very least debatable), that is irrelevant. What needs to be shown for the public health argument to be valid is that, in Australia, circumcision provides differential outcomes at a population level.

But this is precisely what is missing. The biggest population study ever undertaken in a developed-world country to consider the effects of circumcision — the Australian Studies of Health and Relationships — shows precisely no significant health effect. And of course, non-circumcising countries in the developed world all show lower levels than the US of the very conditions for which circumcision is supposed to provide a risk reduction.


As at least 93 per cent of boys will never require a circumcision for medical reasons, it is neither rational nor ethical to impose prophylactic circumcision on them “just in case”.

Universal infant circumcision as a public health strategy to deal with adult foreskin pathologies would be both immensely costly and ultimately counter-productive, even on conservative estimates of likely complications. The existence of other “health benefits” that might modify the equation has not been established in Australia or other non-circumcising developed-world populations, probably because such benefits do not exist in these societies.

* Method note: The years 2001, 2006 and 2010 were also fully sampled, and confirmed the stability of the adult therapeutic rate (65-71 per 100,000) over the decade. The year 2008 was chosen because it was the last year in a run of dozen where the cumulative circumcision rate for boys aged 0-14 years was essentially unchanged, which allowed the most reliable estimation of the number of intact boys.


AAP are idiots…

….Poor babies

So supposedly the AAP will release a statement saying that while they don’t recommend routine circumcision for all infant makes, they state that the medical benefits outweigh the medical risks….

(um, I’m sorry, death or deformity is not a risk I’m willing my son to take for the sake of unnecessary cosmetic surgery. Moreover, both intact and circumcised males can get UTIs, and both need to practice daily hygiene and safe sex. Wrap it up! No need to cut babies.
Anyone who has an intact husband and/or son knows that 1/2 of these benefits are bogus. They say circumcision prevents, prevents, prevents… Prevents means 100%… Circumcision only has the possibility of reducing not preventing penile problems. Most intact men will never have a problem. There is no need to cut babies on the possibility of a problem. Circumcised men have problems as well(skin bridges, scars, painful erections, meatal stenosis, dry glans, hairy shaft- these are circ complications)
Point being- babies don’t have sex. Babies are not retractable so there is no penile hygiene to worry about. Babies are human beings. Babies grow into adults. Let the adult make the decision to modify their body or not based on current medical thinking)

The AAP’s treatment of the issue is in sharp contrast to that of other countries, such as the Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG), which roundly condems the practice. In May, a court in Cologne, Germany, ruled that circumcision of a healthy boy was bodily harm under the Basic Law.

One member of the task force on male circumcision, Dr Douglas Diekema, has hinted that the policy would lean further towards recommending genital cutting of healthy babies in the USA, in the light of studies of male volunteers for the adult operation in high-HIV-prevalance areas of Africa that seemed to show a reduction in their – but not women’s – acquistion of HIV by heterosexual intercourse. (To the contrary, one study suggested male circumcision might increasethe risk to women. USAID surveys of HIV rates show higher rates among circumcised than non-circumcised men, in a majority of the countries for which it has figures.)

Dr Diekema was the chair of the AAP’s Bioethics Committee in 2010 when it issued a policy that would allow a token, ritual nick to girls’ genitals “much less extensive than neonatal male genital cutting”. An outcry by anti-FGC organisations, led by Intact America, caused the policy to be “retired” within a month.

Speaking in more general terms, Dr Diekema has said under oath “I fully agree with the Bioethics Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics when they state:

“…[P]roviders have legal and ethical duties to their child patients to render competent medical care based on what the patient needs, not what someone else expresses. … The pediatrician’s responsibilities to his or her patient exist independent of parental desires or proxy consent.”

– but he has never applied this to male infant circumcision.







“Ethical and human rights concerns have been raised regarding elective infant male circumcision because it is recognized that the foreskin has a functional role, the operation is non-therapeutic and the infant is unable to consent.

The Dutch:

. Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors conflicts with the child’s right to autonomy and physical integrity


�The BMA does not believe that parental preference alone constitutes sufficient grounds for performing a surgical procedure on a child unable to express his own view


�Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely performed.�

Copy/paste: Attorneys for the Rights of the Child Condemns American Academy of Pediatrics for Hiding the Truth, Putting Doctors Ahead of Patients in its Circumcision Statement

Complete copy/paste of yahoo article.


The human rights group Attorneys for the Rights of the Child has condemned the American Academy of Pediatrics for its upcoming circumcision policy statement, which ignores and minimizes the truth about male circumcision and places doctors’ interests ahead of patients’ needs.

Berkeley, CA (PRWEB) August 22, 2012
The human rights group Attorneys for the Rights of the Child (ARC) ( has condemned the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) for its upcoming “Circumcision Policy Statement,” due out on August 27, 2012, which ignores and minimizes the truth about male circumcision and places doctors’ interests ahead of patients’ needs. J. Steven Svoboda, ARC’s Executive Director, commented today, “Based on comments that have appeared in the media attributed to members of the task force preparing the statement, the AAP appears to endorse a disproven procedure that violates the infant patient’s rights and removes functional tissue without providing any proven benefit.”

The AAP position statement ignores the wealth of medical evidence that shows that painfully amputating functional tissue from newborns is a dangerous and outmoded practice.

Not a single study has ever proven that circumcision has actually decreased any disease in the United States. Svoboda observed, “Rather than objectively evaluating all available evidence, the AAP selectively quotes and references highly contested and controversial studies to attempt to justify an entrenched yet outmoded cultural—not medical—practice. Over a hundred boys die each year from this needless procedure, yet the AAP quotes an absurdly low overall complication rate overall and fails to mention the deaths stemming from the practice.”

The AAP released a policy statement in Pediatrics in 2010 defending certain forms of female circumcision if performed for “cultural” reasons. Physicians who had followed the AAP’s suggestion at that time would have thereby violated federal law protecting females from such procedures. After ARC and other organizations opposing genital cutting pointed out the errors, the AAP quickly retracted its statement and replaced it with a new statement calling for the elimination of all forms of female genital cutting. Svoboda commented, “Boys deserve no less protection from the AAP than girls received. If circumcision is so great, why have no European countries adopted it, and why do their males enjoy better average health than Americans?”

The AAP statement demonstrates its ignorance of the fact that European men don’t circumcise and yet enjoy better health outcomes including the areas the statement cites as improved after circumcision. Moreover, medical organizations and politicians in Finland, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and other countries are calling for the practice to stop. Even in the US, the American Medical Association (AMA) agrees that there is insufficient justification for performing the procedure on newborns absent specific medical indications.

Svoboda noted that studies of adult males in Africa have numerous methodological flaws and that even if valid, given vast differences in health conditions and modes of transmission between the US and Africa, the results can hardly be applied to justify infant male circumcision in the United States. “Babies don’t get HIV and AIDS from sexual contact,” Svoboda added.

“Male circumcision,” Svoboda said, “is a disfigurement that carries risks without providing benefits. It violates a child’s right to bodily integrity, not to mention numerous civil and criminal laws.” Malpractice awards are mounting up including a recent $700,000 settlement in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. Svoboda noted, “Although the AAP’s statement regarding male circumcision is presumably influenced by its desire to protect its members who perform the outmoded procedure, the AAP has no business promoting a harmful and discredited cultural relic masquerading as a medical procedure. In these days of rising medical costs and scarce resources, we simply cannot afford to continue to carry out such a harmful and outmoded practice.”

Americans are getting the message, as according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), rates have dropped substantially in recent years.

Attorneys for the Rights of the Child is a non-profit organization founded in 1997 to protect children from unnecessary medical procedures to which they do not consent.

J. Steven Svoboda
Attorneys for the Rights of the Child
Email Information


The below pics are not “with” the article. I believe I either took them from peaceful parenting and/or saving babies fb page.