CDC rec to counsel all males about benefits of circumcision

[sistrmoon]

Wasn't sure the best place to put this, but here's the article:

CDC Considers Counseling Males Of All Ages On Circumcision : Shots - Health News : NPR

What do you think of this? Have you read the African studies and do you think they translate to our population? Do you think it's a good idea from a public health standpoint?

[klone, MSN, RN]

To each their own, but I cant figure out a single reason why a person would prefer it.

Because it's an unnecessary cosmetic procedure on a 1-day-old baby, under inadequate anesthesia (boys and men get general), with a high risk of postoperative infection (imagine that raw member sitting in a diaper, being exposed to feces and urine 24/7) and hemorrhage (newborns do not produce endogenous clotting factors until they're about a week old).

If you *choose* to do it, yourself, as a consenting adult, knock yourself out.

[klone, MSN, RN]

Wow...so 70-80% of the world's men are bizarre and horrendous and at risk for their genitals strangling themselves? You're a NURSE?!

There's that, too. I don't think there's a high percentage of men in Europe whose memberes are falling off secondary to paraphimosis.

And females, with all their labial folds, don't seem to have a huge issue with hygiene.

[Emergent, RN]

One thing I know, whenever I've seen a discussion of this topic online, it usually becomes polarized and devolves into less than amiable mudslinging.

Something about memberes arouses the passions in folk!

[ThePrincessBride, MSN, RN, NP]

I think parents should be allowed to make medical decisions for their kids without feeling vilified or shamed.

[klone, MSN, RN]

I think parents should be allowed to make medical decisions for their kids without feeling vilified or shamed.

And would you feel the same if the parents wanted to do an infibulation on their infant daughter?

[Red Kryptonite]

I think parents should be allowed to make medical decisions for their kids without feeling vilified or shamed.

They should be able to consent to medically necessary treatments. They should not be able to have healthy, functional tissues amputated from their children to serve their own preferences.

This coming year, the federal law that protects girls from genital alterations imposed on them by adults will turn 18. That means that 18 year old men can start suing for civil rights violations because while girls were protected from genital cutting, they weren't, SOLELY because they are boys. I think those lawsuits can't come soon enough, because I think civil rights legal action will be the quickest, most effective way to finally put an end to the human rights violation perpetrated millions of times every year in this country.

[ThePrincessBride, MSN, RN, NP]

I'm not going to get into an ugly argument because I know how anti-circumcision folks can be. I will say that female circumcision has been used to oppress female sexuality. While a circumcised member may have less nerves, it can still feel pleasure and have a relatively health sex life. Can't say the say for female circumcision.

[klone, MSN, RN]

I've talked to many women who have had infibulation. They claim to still feel sexual sensation. 100 years ago, RIC was recommended to prevent masturbation (i.e. oppression of sexuality and sexual expression).

But again, I ask...are you okay with routine removal of female infants' genital tissue? Because it really isn't any different, other than the fact that one is routinely done in the US, and the other is not.

[Red Kryptonite]

I'm not going to get into an ugly argument because I know how anti-circumcision folks can be. I will say that female circumcision has been used to oppress female sexuality. While a circumcised member may have less nerves, it can still feel pleasure and have a relatively health sex life. Can't say the say for female circumcision.

Do you know what the functions of the foreskin are? Do you know how many nerve endings are lost when it's cut off?

Anyway, reducing HIV risk by circumcising is like weeding your yard with a flamethrower. Just teach about responsible sexuality, avoiding risky behaviors, and condom use.

[MunoRN, RN]

Even if you exclude all studies with African subjects, there is still a substantial amount of evidence that male circumcision provides a health benefit and that it is not merely "cosmetic" or based on a parent's non-health based preferences. I don't think that trying to turn it into some sort of political statement is medically ethical regardless of which "side" is making arguments that are intentionally oblivious to the related evidence.

[ThePrincessBride, MSN, RN, NP]

And to answer the question if it was a ritual nick, I'd prefer that in the hospital setting to at home. I personally wouldn't do it but there are a lot of things people choose to do to their kids that I don't necessarily agree with but I don't feel it is appropriate to tell others what they should or shouldn't do for the kids (as long as it doesn't break the law obviously).

[suga_junkie, BSN, RN]

As a guy, I think not being circ'd is absolutely bizarre and horrendous.

I remember the first time I saw an uncircumcised person when I went into nursing and was like *** is going on

Of course theres also the scary risk of being uncircumcised and having your junk strangulate itself, and then becoming gangrenous down there plus major hygeine issues.

To each their own, but I cant figure out a single reason why a person would prefer it.

You think the human body as nature intended is bizarre and horrendous? I think the logic of circumcising just "in case" the foreskin becomes too tight later is akin to deciding to remove a child's tonsils, appendix etc at birth just in case they cause problems later in life. Just ridiculous.