Circumcision ban getting people snippy.

[steverhcp02]

theprof00 said:

steverhcp02 said:

theprof00 said:

 

EDIT: I just feel like it's shoehorned onto this idea of cleanliness when really, either way, there is no strong difference.

And it most certainly has. To my knowledge theres no scientific proof of it "for sure" lowering the risk of cancer. But as i said in my previous post, we know for a fact certain things about why the procedure is beneficial. If parents are hesitant we do NOT do it. We will absolutley not do any medical procedure without the parents (or patient in other situations) verbalizing an understanding and why they want it done. Its not like we go in their with a debate team to convince them or anything.

We explain theres no need to be alarmed or scared if they choose to not have it done, just they must meticulously educate their child on the importance of cleanliness after intercourse, drying after bathing, washing daily, checking to make sure its been cleaned thoroughly....in the end these are the facts and in the end its usually done because while theres no factual concrete evidence of preventing or limiting cancer, we know having the foreskin removed limits the possibility of infection and essentially is easier to maintain that part of the body.

The idea behind it is like anything though. I could go 2 years without washing my hands after going to the bathroom and never get sick. But wash meticulously and end up gettign sick. We just make our decisions and information based on the facts: bacteria liek these places and gather there, its not easily visible an dmust be maintained because of this and removing or keeping is a moot point as theres no harm to the function of the body keeping or cutting. we stress it doesnt mean they will get an infection but we offer them the choice to prophylacticly limit the risk potential. thats all. And again, its a choice, not sure why people feel the need to force religious or social beliefs on people for no reason other than their egos.

Yeah I understand the medical ideas behind it. The problem though, on the medical side, isn't the washing. THe problem is parents not giving a single fuck, not informing their kids, not taking responsibility because Americans are pussies when it comes to talking to their kids about sex. Additionally, given an environment where intact was more common, kids could inform each other through common experience and let each other know what to do. This is what it's like in foreign countries (well at least in France it is) where the procedure is uncommon. On the medical side, it's really just another case of treating the symptoms. And it's treating the symptoms of parental negligence by treating a cause.

On the religious side of things, it's an affront. There is a lot of propoganda out there fueled by religious groups that are pro-circumcision because they feel like circumcision is some kind of religious rite. There is a long sordid history with circumcision in religion. Many were cut at puberty to coincide with female menstruation. When circumcised peoples would conquer others, they would circumcise the defeated nation's peoples as a means of marking ownership. On the religious side, this is a hostile takeover, IMO.

I cant argue with that, but its also not entirely true. Its treating prophylactically based on our best known evidence. The other guy, Fordy, i cant respond to anymore, hes just not able to have a conversation about this. As i have said, many many many times in this thread, i personally feel its a good practice. As i have also said, it is a choice and we explain all the pros and cons. Thsi thread and the legislation is about denying people the CHOICE, this is the issue. Im giving perspective from how we handle this situation in our hospital.

As i have said, and Fordy continues to ignore, is that it is NOT necessary, and we explain this to parents. We explain that to our knowledge it causes no distress, it may or may not decrease risks of aids and cancer but we explain how bacteria congregate, we explain there is no scientific of vital purpose to having the forskin. We give them facts if they want to do it they can, if not we continue to care for the baby until they are ready to go home.

The fact is this is not barbaric, it causes no mental anguish and its a CHOICE. Im not argueing for people to get this done, im only saying what we know as nurses and what we know from medicine this is WHY it is an option not that it should be what you all choose to do. Some people may try to force ideas, even nurses, i do not and i am not. I simply wanted to respond that the issue at hand isnt "mutilation, dismemberment or pain inducing" as the bulk of the arguments for this law to FORCE people one way or another.

I just was attempting to articulate that we currently dont force this procedure on people in hospitalzs, doing this procedure is not traumatizing and the reasoning behind why medically we do it...all the while ackowledging its not 100% certain to do any of the benefits but based out best knowledge it only helps. I cant put it any more simpler than that and its a shame people would try to force others out of this option, and its scary for our cvil rights if science isnt enough to sway this legislation.