How do you feel about circumcision at birth?

[Hanley!]

Cutting a part of a baby's penis off for no good reason other than "just get it done" is bizarre.

Well that's not the only good reason. Many medical professions would say the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. It decreases the likelihood of developing penile cancer or UTIs. And about 2% of men can develop problems that will require them to get circumcised later in life. Which sounds like a small percentage, but it's still a hell of a lot of people.

It does seem weird that it's so prevalent in the US when it's not on this side of the Atlantic, but they don't do it for no reason. To me, it still seems like a judgment call. You have to ask yourself if you're willing to put your baby through pain now to possibly save him more pain and grievance later.

I'd be in favour of getting my kid circumcised, if I was to ever have a son, but I can understand both sides of the argument so I wouldn't judge anyone who chose not to do it.

[UTK]

I feel the same, I don't think it's okay to put a baby through unnecessary pain and discomfort without genuine medical reason.

Oh please. I promise you I have no memory of, or trauma from, when I was circumcised.

I don't see the big deal. Makes it easier to keep clean, makes the person less susceptible to STDs. People make a case for the sex being better if you're uncircumcised but they actually just started a study on that and it turns out it doesn't. So what's the fuss?

There is no scientific correlation between circumcision and cleanliness or ability to contract STDs. The only benefit might be you have no chance of skin cancer on your foreskin, but that's like rejoicing that you can't get athletes foot because your leg was cut off.

1. That's literally not true
2. I don't think missing foreskin is comparable to missing a leg

[Chewy]

I feel the same, I don't think it's okay to put a baby through unnecessary pain and discomfort without genuine medical reason.

Oh please. I promise you I have no memory of, or trauma from, when I was circumcised.

I don't see the big deal. Makes it easier to keep clean, makes the person less susceptible to STDs. People make a case for the sex being better if you're uncircumcised but they actually just started a study on that and it turns out it doesn't. So what's the fuss?

There is no scientific correlation between circumcision and cleanliness or ability to contract STDs. The only benefit might be you have no chance of skin cancer on your foreskin, but that's like rejoicing that you can't get athletes foot because your leg was cut off.

1. That's literally not true
2. I don't think missing foreskin is comparable to missing a leg

The study you quoted is from 1998, I've seen more recent studies that state that whips there is a downgrade in risk with regard to STDs, and UTIs, its a one in a thousand chance that the child would have the issue in the first place.
Whereas a much higher chance exists that the child would experience complications from the surgery than receive the benefit of reduction of cancer risk or STDs.

I've also seen that studies on the topic that seem to change the narrative based on the country of origin.

Much like most practices that are culturally, religion or socially based, getting it done seems more about what the parents want than what the child needs.