A Canadian boy, after a routine infant circumcision, developed an infection and died from septic shock.Increasingly research is showing less benefit to male circumcision and more downside, and a story like this only gives me nightmares. To finally have a baby and lose him/her to infection from a cosmetic surgery? I shudder to think.
I know this case was exceptionally rare but the more I learn about this topic, the more I'm convinced its time this practice is abandoned.
(Hap tip Pharyngula)
3 comments:
Personally, I'm against circucision. I see no reason why it's necessary. Sure there have been studies favouring circumcision to lower HIV risk. But there have also been studies in favour of 'au natural' to lower HIV risk. People are so against female circumcision ... aka female genitalia mutilation. Why are people in favour of male circumcision?? Why are both not considered mutilation? I for one have no clue.
that article made me a bit skeptical, but I'm still on the circumcision bandwagon.
...not only do studies show it lowers the risk of HIV and UTI's but it's beneficial to future sexual partners. Women who are with a circumcised man have fewer vaginal/UTI themselves.
I think circumcision is a choice that benefits health and cleanliness, especially in young boys.
I personally know of a couple grown men who've had to undergo adult circumcision because of infection...I guess I'm not convinced that it's a big deal to have baby boys circumcised. As for that article, infection is something that can happen after any type of surgery and that one case is not the norm.
...and as for what Tammy said...female genital mutilation is NOT the same thing as male circumcision. The countries that practice that do it so the girls cannot experience sexual gratification...circumcised males do not have that problem.
I think if a male wants to be circumcised, that should be his choice. As in, when he's old enough to decide for himself.
It shouldn't be decided for him.
Post a Comment