This is an issue near and dear to my heart...when I was pregnant with my second child, I knew without a sonogram that this child would be a boy. My family is Jewish, I was raised Jewish, but had zero intention of circumcising any child of mine. Some of my family had a HUGE problem with this decision, and called me often during my pregnancy to attempt to convince me to have a bris. Traditionally, a boy is circumcised when he is eight days old, so my step-mother, who took on the role of spokesperson in this matter, called me to yell at me every day from the day my son was born until day eight. She pretty much told me that I was dishonoring my entire lineage by not cutting part of his body off without his consent, and that she would all but disown me if I didn't. To be frank, I find the practice barbaric, and I know many men who wish this procedure had not been done to them. Studies show that sex is more pleasurable for women with intact partners, and modern cleanliness(i.e. running water) is plenty to care for an intact penis. The vast majority of my son's friends are intact, and while my husband is not intact, he wouldn't have wanted his son to be anything but...the whole idea of circumcision just to keep father and son looking the same is ridiculous...if girls have their breasts ironed at puberty should they do that torturous thing to their daughters ad infinitum so that they LOOK the same??? What about female circumcision? Should we keep that up through the generations so that daughters don't feel embarassed to NOT be missing a piece of their bodies????

Here's a link to one of my favorite articles about this issue:

http://mothering.com/health/the-case-against-circumcision

I apologize for an emotional rant, this is a very charged issue for me, and one I obviously feel passionately about...

As a woman who has experienced the difference...in an intimate manner...

I would NEVER circumcise any male children I might have.

Believe me, there is a BIG difference...um, functionally. It takes very little "work" for the uncircumcised male as the bodies are working as nature intended. No need for lube because there is a natural seal and this suction helps keep the G-Spot in tight contact with the head of the penis.

I have also found that uncircumcised men take a little more time... :)

For me, it is not so much about the son, but about the women in your son's life.

They'll thank you later.

I think it's deeply immoral to sexually mutilate helpless infants. I would never do it to a son of mine.

Most men in the world are not circ'ed; the extremely high rate here in the USA is bizarre and troubling to me. There are also no proven health benefits or evidence that it is 'necessary' in the first world, and I think it's pretty telling how vanishingly few intact older boys/men ever choose to get circumcised.

Typical for men though, most are happy with what they have and don't waste time thinking about what life would be like if they had the foreskin they were born with, or vice versa. Beyond the initial pain for an infant boy, circ'ing isn't harmful either.

Ok - so here goes my neck out on the chopping block.

We had our son circumsized. I don't regret it. It was my husbands choice. I don't have the equipment, so I feel that I did not have as strong of a vote to cast. He did a lot of research, spoke to our maternity doctor, our family doctor and scads of friends, family and colleagues. He got reaction from both sides of the fence. We heard many stories and read many articles. We waffled from side to side for my pregnancy and then it was a conversation he had with 4 of his best friends that had him convinced. These four guys are all uncircumsized and they talked him into it. I do not know what happened during this conversation, and it is of a highly private nature, but my husband was convinced.

It was not a decision taken lightly. And Jack - ultimately it is your decision to make, and you should take your time. I may recommend taking some of your trusted buddies out for a frank conversation over some drinks to see what their thoughts are.

Everyone is definitely entitled to their own opinion, but please don't make rude comments on how I have mutilated my child and how he will hate me for his whole life.

EDIT: I am really quite disappointed with the amount of downvotes that I have received for my answer. I thought that Jack was wanting to hear both sides of this issue. I have not downvoted any answer here, and in fact I have upvoted a few that I thought were good answers. Just because I don't agree with what you are saying doesn't mean I don't think it is valid. As a parent I feel that other parents should be supportive and not judgemental. I too am disappointed with this forum, as I thought that it was about community - and to me a community is a collection of people and beliefs and a group who can celebrate not only similarities, but also differences.

I can tell you this, every man that is circumcised has held his thing in his hand..... and wondered.... what it would be like if he still had the skin he was born with? As nature intended? AND/OR, As god intended?

I'd reckon that a person is also less likely to get an ingrown toe nail without a toe. So, if we chopped off the little toes on babies feet when they were young and did this for many generations would people really be arguing about how it keeps them from getting ingrown toenails as adults? Or would we see chopping off pinky toes the same way everyone should see cutting off penis skin? As exactly what it is. Mutilation.

Cutting off a body part because of the possibility that it might get or cause infection in the future is sort of a ridiculous argument. My children have already spread germs via their hands, mouths, noses and lungs. So- if we follow the circumcision logic- I should definitely chop off their hands, remove their lungs (so many germs exhaled and coughed out! And to anyone within a certain radius! Not just a potential sexual partner), plug up their noses etc... Not meaning to put anyone down who responded to the 'FEAR OF DISEASE' threat (it's a scary one for certain) but cutting off a part of the body because of future germ potential is , as i said, ridiculous. Really think about it. You're cutting off a part of the baby's body.

If circumcision really does prevent STDs then I figure my sons can chose to have the procedure done when they are older and they have examined the literature themselves (or they could just avoid a lot of pain and use condoms). Since it's a permanent procedure, I don't feel comfortable making that decision for them, particularly considering the evidence that the foreskin serves a purpose.

I will say that if you chose not to cut, you need to find a pediatrician that is not ignorant and doesn't try to retract the foreskin (which I've heard about happening!). As for cleanliness or whatever, I lived in European countries where circumcision is rare and I can report that the people there are doing fine.

As far as whether or not this is an appropriate forum for this conversation, I would remind everyone to please discuss the costs/benefits of circumcision and not be too emotional about it. Clearly, if religion is a role in your decision, that that's a private matter between you and a higher power, so you have other considerations that may trump a scientific cost-benefit analysis.

Interestingly, a lot of hunter-gatherer tribes do circumcise, but they don't cut the entire foreskin. There is some debate whether the original Jewish form of circumcision was similar.

Also, the idea that the pain doesn't matter at that age has been increasingly called into question. In fact infant circumcision might have worse life-long effects compared to adult circumcision http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/10/magazine/10Fetal-t.html?pagewanted=all : "Anna Taddio, a pain specialist at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, noticed more than a decade ago that the male infants she treated seemed more sensitive to pain than their female counterparts. This discrepancy, she reasoned, could be due to sex hormones, to anatomical differences — or to a painful event experienced by many boys: circumcision. In a study of 87 baby boys, Taddio found that those who had been circumcised soon after birth reacted more strongly and cried for longer than uncircumcised boys when they received a vaccination shot four to six months later. Among the circumcised boys, those who had received an analgesic cream at the time of the surgery cried less while getting the immunization than those circumcised without pain relief.

Taddio concluded that a single painful event could produce effects lasting for months, and perhaps much longer. “When we do something to a baby that is not an expected part of its normal development, especially at a very early stage, we may actually change the way the nervous system is wired,” she says. Early encounters with pain may alter the threshold at which pain is felt later on, making a child hypersensitive to pain — or, alternatively, dangerously indifferent to it. Lasting effects might also include emotional and behavioral problems like anxiety and depression, even learning disabilities (though these findings are far more tentative)."

So if you DO do circumcision, please insist on the analgesic cream.

26 years ago, my husband and I made the choice not to circumcise any male children we had, after reviewing the evidence at hand, and after discussions with a number of professionals, from pediatricians to public health specialists to anthropologists. We've not had cause, with either of our boys, to regret that decision, nor have they -- and they, too, have decided that, when the time comes, they will not circumcise their sons.

"Back in the day", my husband and I had to fight to not inflict unnecessary harm on our sons. In fact, when our oldest boy was born, the hospital we were in actually proceeded to take him for circumcision WITHOUT our permission, and we had to go rescue him from surgery. Fortunately, one of the nurses on our floor was supportive of our decision and let us know that they'd taken him from the pediatric evaluation center DIRECTLY to surgery, rather than bringing him back to our room, in order to avoid having to discuss the attending physician's decision to circumcise despite our preferences. When asked about such a blatantly inappropriate action, the physician in question responded "Well, I'm more comfortable with circumcision, and I figured that once it was done, considering that you can't sue a military practitioner (at that time you couldn't), you'd come 'round to a sensible position." Can you IMAGINE the hubris?

Anyway, both our boys are happily intact, and their mates don't seem to have any problems with it, and they actually support the trend to non-circumcision.

My husband is English & intact.

Intercourse is much more pleasurable with him than the circumcised men I have known.

Nature designed us perfectly--why mess with it?

I applaud all the parents who respect their sons enough to let them choose when they are old enough.

My baby boy arrives in 5 weeks and I am not circumcising. I have not been persuaded that there are any health benefits, and the procedure seems barbaric to me. Why would I put him through that when he can't give his consent?

I have two daughter but my husband and I discussed when I got pregnant if we had a boy we would not circumcise. We both felt if you were born with a certain body part why cut it off just for the heck of it? With cleanliness and proper care there is no reason to mutilate baby boy. Just mho though:-)

we seem to be doing fine in Norway - it is not really common.. from what I understand you have to seek it out and have a specialized doc come in to preform the circumcision. Ever male I have talked to here thinks that it is so mean to take that choice from the (someday) man - if he wants it for religious or 'safety' reasons then he should make the choice when he can.

I was born in the 1970's in New Zealand, when the majority of boys were still cut. Thankfully now very very few New Zealand males get circumcised, it has been proven, a pointless, painful exercise to remove a highly specialized part of the most intimate part of the male body, one that serves a very useful purpose - protecting the glans of the penis. During WWII many soldiers from NZ were involved in the desert war of Northern Africa and the unhygienic conditions and all that sand, meant some men ran into trouble and for the longest time that was the evidence trotted out for circumcision - sand might get and irritate it like in the War...sigh.

Both my sons were born in Japan and there was no way I was going to do that to them and luckily it very rarely done here too. Thankfully, I personally can't remember the pain of it as I was newborn. I think anyone considering circumcision should be forced to watch a video of a baby boy screaming in agony as he gets cut. I saw one horrific one once and I felt absolutely sick to my stomach, I can handle a lot - blood and gore do not bother me at all, but that video made me angry. I Googled another one, not quite as traumatic as the one I originally recall, but still leaves me feeling very uncomfortable. Watch it. To circumcise or not circumcise

I believe and please correct me if I am wrong - that in the USA, hospitals make money from selling the foreskins: they are valuable and useful for skin grafts etc. The same system that pumps people full of radiation in the form of unnecessary revenue generating CT scans and the same system that makes billions from cholesterol drugs... the same damn system. Makes me angry.

I often wonder about - what if, as I am sure many cut men do. Sometimes seams in underpants irritate me for example. There are so many reasons to leave it alone, from vascular (rich in blood vessels that bring heat to the tissues), it protects the less vascular glans against frostbite, as Sir Ranulph Fiennes found on his epic transpolar walk to aiding in intercourse.

It's your sons choice, when his older if he wants it done, NOT the parents choice. It's HIS choice and don't even get me started on religion, must bite my tongue really hard there.

To be perfectly honest I am very disappointed that this place, of all places wouldn't be almost unanimously behind the natural way. I am glad the majority get it.

If you search pubmed you can find one study that showed circumcision effected the pain response in infants for months after the trauma. Children who were circumscised cried more and reacted more strongly to minor discomforts.

We did not circumcise our children.

My mother explained what circumcision was when I was 11 or 12. I was appalled and said I would never do that to any kid of mine. We are not religious in the least, but my mother still believes many old wives' tales and started spewing some misinformation at me that even in 6th grade I could tell was unsound, but finally settled on, "You can't just decide not to do it; you have to respect the father's wishes as well."
I responded that I would not let anyone, regardless of their reasons or connection - biological, legal, or otherwise - mutilate my son's genitals anymore than I'd let them cut off his nose.
It was only later that I even did any research or asked men (both cut and uncut) how they felt about it, and new information and perspective only encouraged my opposition to the practice.

Edit: Forgot to mention that in light of the paleolithic lifestyle, it makes perfect sense to not circumcise, but I also feel that it makes perfect sense in any lifestyle - regardless of what you believe, where you think we come from, how you think we should live, et cetera, et cetera.

In germany circumcision is of no relevance. I think it's mainly in the case of phimosis that a circumcision is conducted. My younger brother was such a rare case I know of. Normally men are intact here.

I am cut, I was against circumcision for my son, but my wife, her family, and my own family railed against the decision. Sad to say I was the "lone whisper in the shouting room", couldn't convince my wife who was already stressing over just about everything that mothers stress out about during the last few weeks of pregnancy and she decided it was better to go with "the safe bet" and get him circ'ed "like everyone else".

There is some regret now, in fact I'm fairly upset about my own, 33 years after the fact.

That being said, it hasn't had a substantial effect on my love life or my life in general (probably because "I don't know any better"). If the decision were to be posed to me today, maybe I would have pushed harder - but honestly I don't think it would have mattered.

One day this practice will be considered useless (and even damaging), and the people (like my parents and my in-laws) who throwback to this practice won't have a say. That day is getting closer and closer. Without their influence I'm sure my son would have remained intact.

One of the best things in the world is having a family to give you advice and help you with your new child. But one of the worst things in the world is having a family tie your hands on matters such as this... and it is something you must consider.

Long before I had ever thought about how evolution might help me approach diet, I did think that it made no intuitive sense to circumcise. I also figured that if my son really wanted to, he could chose to circumcize later. So, two reasons not to circumcise. (1) Some dicisions are easier to take back than others. (2) It's his choice.

But, let's face it, 99% of the time it makes approximately no difference, and even the other 1% has pros and cons. So it's not anything to stress too much about.

Thank God I have 2 girls and never had to debate this with my religious friends. Point 1 "My husband wants him to look the same." What father sits around and compares penises with his son? Takes father/son bonding too far and not on a scouting trip. The real answer is that if the son is not circ. he will have more than his father. Oedipus is the only reason to be the same. Point 2 If based solely on religious grounds then really be religious. Abraham started all this in his covenant with God. He was 99 years old and did it himself! Wanna be true? Wait till your 99 and keep a sharp knife handy. Eat a high fat diet to feed your brain and keep your hand steady. Perhaps God was joking just like the testing of Abraham in the faux sacrifice of Isaac. That God, what a tease.

I have two intact sons and no regrets. Why take away something you can't give back to them. My older son, 18, seems to be having a wonderful relationship with his girlfriend. It doesn't seem to be an issue. The younger, 9, just needs to be reminded to wash right. No biggie. If they want to be circ'd later, they will always have that perogative. But I doubt they will.

if it is required for some of his medical conditions or is incapable to maintain a good hygiene daily, [ie to retract the foreskin and wash it] then go for it; otherwise, leave the choice to him :]

from the reactions here, it seems to be a great deal in America :intrigued:

Just wondering, for those against circumcision because they alter what nature intended, are you equally against vasectomies because they alter what nature intended?