I think it only makes sense that this should be an mature, adult decision for his own body. The only decision should be an informed decision and only the "owner" of the penis should be making such a permanent decision for his own body. The age of eighteen should be the age limit for making such a decision.

It is written; so therefore it shall be? We are the chosen people? Such a wicked fantasy. To see the religious lunatics manipulate government and our lives is shameful. www.BogusHocusPocus.com

It's about time.

The question people have to ask themselves is this; without medical or clinical indication, can a doctor even be PERFORMING surgery on healthy, non-consenting individuals? Let alone be eliciting any kind of a "decision" to make from parents?

The poster of this question/poll needs to also consider the CONTEXT in which the German court issued this ruling; a little boy nearly died from hemorrhaging complications, which is why the case ended up in court in the first place. This also wouldn't be the first time that a boy was in court because of some complication. So is the German court to just "look the other way" for tradition? Or is it in their duty to protect the well-being of children?

Advocates will recite a long litany of "medical benefits" and the "studies" that supposedly "prove" them, but are the risks worth it? What ARE the risks? Are people aware that they include partial or full ablation of the penis? Infection with MRSA? Herpes? Possibly death?

If the same hemorrhage complication involved a GIRL we wouldn't be having this conversation. Please talk about the risks, and complications of circumcision, as well as the functions of the foreskin, and the fact that 80% of the world's male population does fine without circumcision when talking about this, thanks.

We make it illegal to circumcise girls regardless of religion so boys should be afforded the same human right to an intact body. Why is it illegal to tattoo a minor yet it's ok to amputate a physiologically essential part of the anatomy? His body, his choice.

Is putting your son at risk for hemorrhage, infection, death, etc. worth it to you for conformity in the locker room? Pleasing a hypothetical mate who may or may not balk at natural organs? "Medical benefits" that your child may never need, nor want?

(IE, even if the "research" were correct, the "benefits" of circumcision are already easily achieved by cheaper, more effective, non-invasive means. Have you considered what those are? Or is your heart set on putting your child at risk for hemorrhage etc.?)

I can't bring myself to pierce my daughter's ears pierced without her consent. I couldn't IMAGINE removing one of the most sensitive parts of my son's body without his consent.

No-one complained when female circumcision was made illegal, even though some people regard it as their religious right or duty to cut their daughters.

It's illegal to cut off a girl's prepuce, or to make any incision on a girl's genitals, even if no tissue is removed. Even a pinprick is banned. Why don't boys get the same protection? Everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want parts of their genitals cut off. It's *their* body.

I don't mean to criticize the OP but it sounds like they chose to circumcise (I could be completely wrong). Based on saying that it was 1) "the hardest decision" - not circumcising is such an easy decision, after learning that the majority of the world doesn't circ and they are doing just fine. 2) "the locker room" comment - that one is easily debunked too. Current CDC rates for circumcision are said to be in the 30% range, so it's highly probable that the circumcised boys will be the minority depending on where you live. 3) "the bedroom" - his wife will thank you for NOT circing him. Studies have shown that women prefer having intercourse with uncircumcised men. The foreskin was designed to be a gliding mechanism during sex. Think about it, it protects the glans and allows increased sensitivity for the male making him better able to respond to her needs. Basic biology. Which leads me to 4) husband is "an academic" - so hopefully he read that the UTI, STD, cancer are used as scare tactics and when you break them down and look at the numbers it doesn't make sense to cut off a normal, healthy functioning part of a baby's body. I hope that's the conclusion he made but I fear (based on the tone) otherwise.

Whose "junk" is it really!? (Hint: Not yours!)

I chose not to circumcise and am always glad I did. EXCEPT when the data on HIV rates for uncircumcised men were published about six months later. I have to admit, even as a staunch anti-circumcision advocate, I worry that if my son grows into a man who loves men I may have increased his chances of contracting HIV. Ugh. To placate myself, I remember he can always choose to get circumcised when he's older and able to give his own consent. I've had people balk at that position, saying it's far worse the older you are. My response is always, "What could possibly be worse than being brand new in the world, unable to comprehend why you are being assaulted, and having no pain medication during or after a surgery? Really.".
So basically, he's stuck with regular condom use or a penis surgery for which he can get proper pain control and which he has chosen.

Haven't you guys heard of washing yourselves ... this theory of catching this and that is absurd! Take a shower and bathe!

Furthermore; a guy loses about 28% of his sexual drive ...!

This must have been some deranged idea by a religious fanatic!

Ha! Grant, I agree, but in practice, I don't know if bathing and showering immediately after intercourse is, in practice, either realistic or effective when discussing HIV in particular. Apparently, the environment the foreskin provides is quite hospitable to the HIV and merely pulling back the skin and soaping up wouldn't eliminate all the risk, assuming you could get men to do it reliably. We're talking about people's actual sexual behaviors here, not easily controlled, even when life and death hang in the balance. I'm also thinking of all the women I know who ended up pregnant after a condom broke, even after frantic douching and such.
Yes, "cleaning up" might help, but I'm a mom, I worry my son who hates taking a shower at 5 might be at risk as a man. I don't regret my decision to circumcise, but I'm also a medical professional and can appreciate the epidemiological facts as well.

Mary ... don't believe all the HIV hype ... one day they say salt is bad for you and the next people are falling to the floor from low sodium! I am not circumcised and whenever I had sex with my girlfriends ... I would shower soon afterwards.
This thought of the foreskin having to be cut is so outrageous -- gee ... perhaps some people's lips should be sown together to prevent idiots; from speaking with a forked tongue!

This must have been a woman's idea to slow down the guys sexual drive! (28%)

Rather humorous too ... when the Jews think they are the chosen people -- gee did God make an error! www.HolyFaux.com

And Joseph, much as we all know it's stupid not to wear condoms, the reality is, plenty of men don't, despite knowing the risks, especially single men. Of course we are all going to teach our kids to wear them, unfortunately, the sexual behaviors of others, even safety-related ones, are notoriously hard to control. I still defend the anti position, but I admit the HIV data gives me pause. I'm a mom, I worry.

Who on earth thinks douching can prevent a pgcy? Only a total idiot...douching pushes everything up into the uterus, not right out of the vagina. Nobody should ever douch....it leads to bacterial vaginosis and can cause pelvic inflammatory disease (which can cause infertility by scarring the tubes).

Your son is 5....no 5 year old likes bathing that much...but you teach them how to anyways. They eventually learn. What do hygiene habits at that age have to do with his sexual activity in the future? Nothing.

Don't worry Mary ... if your son is as cautious as his Mother ... he will be fine!

How about any and all medical procedures will then be done after the baby has reached the age of consent? That means babies born with or developing health problems won't get medical procedures or surgery until they are 18. Lots of them will die or become permanent invalids, but at least they will get to make their own choices.

Cutting the foreskin -- is rather different ... from a life and death medical requirement ... Diane!
Tell the guys to wash.

Perhaps if women's privates were sewn together and clean guys just had sex with other clean guys ... it may be better.
It would cut down on -- over-population ...!

Circumcision is definitely NOT the parents' choice, it's the boys. It should be no different than getting other body modifications/plastic surgery. And using religion as a scapegoat to mutilate someone else's body (especially your own childs') is beyond morally wrong. Open your eyes people. When you consent to circumcision you lose the best part of the male anatomy. You submit your son to Erectile Dysfunction. You risk the chance of the doctor making horrific mistakes. You risk the chance of your infant DYING.

My husband has recently chose to restore his foreskin. My son is left intact!

Stevie ... you are absolutely right!

There was no decision to make. We have four boys, and I never even considered having part of their penises amputated at birth. It is an insane thing to do to a newborn. Their dad is circumcised, and he was a little concerned about our oldest feeling "different" from him, but along the way, he has become very upset that he was not allowed to live life with his whole penis. We will never have normal, natural sex, either.

Here is an article on functions of the foreskin: http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/functions-of-foreskin-purposes-of.html I didn't know any of this until after our third son was born, but common sense told me you don't get part of your baby's penis cut off. It seems so obvious to me, and it's bizarre that it is such an accepted thing to do in parts of America. Yes, I am a life long American, who lives in a state with an above average rate for circumcision. Most of the world does not practice male circumcision. About 85% of the world's males are intact. Jews, Muslims, and Americans account for most of the circumcised ones.

Here is an article (with links to more articles) on the HIV studies for Mary. http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/hiv-increases-in-africa-where-most-men.html We all hope and pray our children will not grow up and engage in risky behaviors, but amputating body parts is not the answer, and it doesn't work anyway! If you had a daughter, how would you better protect her from HIV? You would teach her to protect herself, and if she chooses not to, then it's out of your hands. Depriving sons of part of their penis in the hopes it might help them not get HIV is not the answer.

Christy ... you are a smart lady!

To the author: " we thought about my son and what the decision would mean for him, in the locker room at school, in the bedroom with his wife."

-what the decision would mean for him: if you chose to cut him, then it'll mean a lifetime of side-effects and lost sensitivity, a higher likelihood of ED later in life, and the knowledge that he was strapped down when he was days old and had part of his most private, sensitive body part chopped off and his rights violated

-the locker room at school: this is a bogus argument. nobody actually looks at anybody else in the locker room, and if your son gets teased, he can turn the tides quickly by saying 'why are you looking?'. Plus, the current circ rate is only 33%, and with any luck, it'll be obliterated soon. So your son will be the odd one out. I'm going to instill enough self-esteem in my son that he'll feel sorry for anyone that's ignorant enough to poke fun at him because they're missing something.

-"in bedroom with his wife": Most likely, she'll experience less pleasure during intercourse because her husband's missing parts are all gone. So...a lifetime of less-than-what nature-intended sex.

Please research more before having another son. And by research, I don't mean spending 5 minutes on google just looking at the easily-disproven myths coming out of Africa right now...those are money-makers, not legitimate research.

My husband is circumcised....but me an him chose to leave our son intact. He is almost 2 yrs old and has no problems being as he was born. Its so much easier to care for. When intact do not retract. Wipe like a finger, clean only what is seen. dont believe all the myths about circumcision. The lie that it keeps from spreading HIV and is cleaner are incorrect and ignorant assumptions. My cut husband gave me HPV when we first me along time ago..and he has since then given me several bacterial infections by simply not taking a shower everyday. It does not keep infections or disease at bay by cutting off the foreskin..if anything this ignorance contributes to the spread of even more infection and disease. Just wash yourself and use condoms. A foreskin is not any more dirty then a vagina. After watching a horrific circumcision video on youtube i put all my effort into educating my husband the topic. Hospital statistic say 117 babies die anually as a direct result of their circumcisions in america. Only 11 children die anually from car seat deaths according to the CDC. 117 babies die from it every year? OMG they arent doing that painful unessasary surgery on my new born baby boy..no way! At the 18th internation aids convention they revealed that the circ rate went from 56% in 2006 to 32.5% in 2009. So if you leave your child as beautiful as the day he is born..he will not be alone.

Studies show that circumcision causes significant pain and trauma, behavioral and neurological changes in infants, potential parental stress from persistent crying (colic) of infants, disrupted bonding between parent and child, and risk of surgical complications. Other consequences of circumcision include loss of a natural, healthy, functioning body part, reduced sexual pleasure, potential psychological problems, and unknown negative effects that have not been studied.

Some circumcised men resent that they are circumcised. Sexual anxieties, reduced emotional expression, low self-esteem, avoidance of intimacy, and depression are also reported. Some doctors refuse to perform circumcisions because of ethical reasons. Relying on the presumed authorities (e.g., American Academy of Pediatrics or doctors who echo AAP views) is not sufficient. For more information see http://www.circumcision.org.

I had no decisions to make regarding circumcision. Surgery is for sick people, and I don't fix what isn't broken. My boys' bodies were perfect at birth, and any "reasons" to alter that are only in the pockets of the biomedical and cosmetic companies that desire newborn foreskins with which to create their products.

Just thought people would like to know... (As long as people are thinking that putting a child at risk for hemorrhage, such as the boy in Germany, is worth it for a potential reduction in HIV transmission...)

“It is a worrying development that at a time when we are promoting male circumcision as a preventive measure to combat HIV, we are recording a high prevalence rate amongst the group that has been circumcised largely due to uninformed risky compensation behaviours..."

WHO, PEPFAR, UNICEF, NIH, CDC, Johns Hopkins, Bill Gates, etc. WE TOLD YOU SO.

http://www.zimdiaspora.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8811%3Ahiv-infection-rate-higher-on-circumcised-men&catid=38%3Atravel-tips&Itemid=18

Circumcision does NOT prevent HIV.

Only condoms and education do, and circumcision undermines this.

The chickens are coming home to roost.

Academic and clinical experts have recently published an article in a peer-reviewed international pediatrics journal that addresses the issue. They examined all of the issues in detail and found that although circumcision can be performed at any age the best time is definitely early in infancy. The article can be downloaded for free at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2431/12/20/abstract
A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?
Morris BJ, Waskett JH, Banerjee J, Wamai RG, Tobian AA, Gray RH, Bailis SA, Bailey RC, Klausner JD, Willcourt RJ, Halperin DT, Wiswell TE, Mindel A.
BMC Pediatr. 2012 Feb 28;12(1):20. :[15 pages]

Infancy is an optimal time for clinical circumcision because an infant's low mobility facilitates the use of local anesthesia, sutures are not required, healing is quick, cosmetic outcome is usually excellent, costs are minimal, and complications are uncommon. The benefits of infant circumcision include prevention of urinary tract infections (a cause of renal scarring), reduction in risk of inflammatory foreskin conditions such as balanoposthitis, foreskin injuries, phimosis and paraphimosis. When the boy later becomes sexually active he has substantial protection against risk of HIV and other viral sexually transmitted infections such as genital herpes and oncogenic human papillomavirus, as well as penile cancer. The risk of cervical cancer in his female partner(s) is also reduced. Circumcision in adolescence or adulthood may evoke a fear of pain, penile damage or reduced sexual pleasure, even though unfounded. Time off work or school will be needed, cost is much greater, as are risks of complications, healing is slower, and stitches or tissue glue must be used. Infant circumcision is safe, simple, convenient and cost-effective. The available evidence strongly supports infancy as the optimal time for circumcision.

Professor; you are obviously ... a complete -- idiot!

Professor ...! Take a long shower ... and don't call me in the morning!

we are Jewish no issue for us

Too bad Jews were born with a "Flaw" ...!

"It is written; so therefore it shall be? We are the chosen people? Such a wicked fantasy."
Einstein stated in a letter recently auctioned that the bible was a collection of primitive legends. He said believing in God was childish and he as a Jew is no different than another person and not chosen by God.
To see the religious lunatics manipulate government and our lives is shameful.

Anyone who performs a circumcision ... should be charged under the law with child abuse! Furthermore ... the children should be removed from their home!

Infants have "low mobility"...? Then why the need for a circumstraint? Sure, sutures aren't required, but the head of their penis is a bloody mess from being skinned prior to the foreskin being crushed or sliced away. Removing the foreskin from an infant is like tearing off your fingernail. Sure, if you're going to mutilate a human, it's far easier to do it in infancy, for many reasons. The risks of infant circumcision outweigh the potential benefits. Infants have been maimed and killed by the procedure. Another problem is that there is no way to guess how big the foreskin or the penis will be in adulthood, so too much skin can be removed which causes painful erections and sexual dysfunction, as well as contributing to an abnormal curvature of the penis. And then there are skin bridges and other complications. Anyway, it's NOT YOUR PENIS!

Any religion that calls for ritualistic mutilation is probably a bad religion.

I performed circumcisions in residency and for two years after residency. Then I said enough of this bizarre and mutilative ritual being passed off as a medical procedure. It was the most unethical and disturbing thing I have ever done as a physician. It was so clearly torture and mutilation of innocent people (babies are people too) who tried to tell me they did not want this done. I felt trapped by demanding parents and a warped medical system, but finally I stood up and said NO. The only thing circumcision prevents is a normal sex life and normal protection of the glans, normal immunologic functions of the foreskin, and a normal psyche free of PTSD. My sons are adults now and have never been teased or harassed because they have foreskins nor have they ever had any problems. It is cleaner and easier to leave males intact just as for females. The foreskin should never be forcibly retracted and only needs to be washed off on the outside. When it is retractable, the boy will clean it himself in the tub or shower-no problem. Their circumcised friends are envious.

"Any religion that calls for ritualistic mutilation is probably a bad religion."
Steady on. In fact circumcision is anomalous within Judaism (as it is in medicine), being contrary to the mitzvah against marking the body and the general principle of beneficence.

I am circumcised. I do not remember ever feeling any psychological or physical trauma. Furthermore it is difficult to miss something I do not remember having. That said, I do harbor a slight resentment toward my parents for having the procedure done. It is only a slight resentment because I realize that they thought they were doing the right thing. I am not Jewish so it was not a religious requirement. It was simply the custom in the US back then (1958) and they probably would have been considered bad parents if they had not allowed it.

Do not underestimate the power of peer pressure. Had I looked different “down there” I might have been the subject of ridicule. Bullying was certainly prevalent in the 1960s and 70s. Anyone who was thought different was a potential victim. I do not remember any talk of uncircumcised boys in school. But the country has changed. Conformity is not as important as it was. Children of diverse religions and cultures are mixing in the schools and they are encouraged to be proud of their differences.

I do not have any male children, but if I were to father a male child today I would strongly oppose circumcision. The scientific studies seem to contradict each other. However there are likely several billion men walking around with uncircumcised penises. I am not aware that this is an international health crisis. I think the risks of circumcision are too great and the benefits negligible.

Hey! Mutilator! Leave those kids alone!

I've seen The Wall/Roger Waters ...! Sounds like you are really smart!

I think some people really "need some education" ...! Yea ...! "Leave those kids alone" ...!

I don't think circumcision is useful as I can see more and more new members at PozGroup,,com, a dating and support community for people with STD that I joined several years ago.

Marcella md. Thanks for being such a strong voice about this topic. It warms my heart to hear how your sons feel about it now that they are grown. None of my friends with children have left their boys intact but me. I really had to change my husbands mind too. Every day im thankful my husband told them NO every time the nurses asked. They asked like 6 times..every time one would notice we had not signed the circumcision consent form they asked again. Despite their persistance we took our WHOLE baby boy home with us. :) and herpesfish...what you say is very true..my circumcised husband gave me HPV the first year we knew each other a long time ago...i now have a higher risk for cervical cancer. Circumcision does not protect women from HPV or the cancer it can cause.

We did not circumcise our son 25+ years ago.It was my husband's decision. He was born in a place where circumcision was not done routinely and felt strongly that our child should be left as he was born. Don't worry about how the child will del when he sees that other boys look different. Here is the crux of a conversation related to me by mom son's preschool teacher as she observed him and his friend side by side at the urinal. Friend: "Your penis looks funny." Son: "No, it doesn't. It's perfect and I love it."

Wasn't it Aldous Huxley who called Jehovah a "prepuce collector"? Seems fitting.

Equal rights. FGM for a woman, and circumcision for a male. let's see that floats.

Just released: The American Academy of Pediatricians says insurance companies should pay for circumcisions, because the health benefits outweigh the risks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/circumcision-benefits-outweigh-risks-and-insurers-should-pay-pediatricians-revise-stance/2012/08/26/49663aae-efb7-11e1-b74c-84ed55e0300b_story.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/27/science/benefits-of-circumcision-outweigh-risks-pediatric-group-says.html
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/27/health/aap-circumcision-recommendation/index.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20120827_GROUP__CIRCUMCISION_CLEARLY_MAKES_THE_CUT.html