aka non consented circumcision is a human rights violations rule

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
4 points

While I agree that most cases of phimosis would be better to wait until teenage/young adult years before intervention is considered, if it’s bad enough that their pee balloons under the foreskin, it requires surgery. However, that surgery does not require full circumcision either in babies or adolescents.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Ballooning can be harmless and doesn’t mean that there’s severe phimosis, much less severe enough to require surgery. The process of natural separation takes time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Okay, I’m incredibly anti-circumcision, but you’re just being obtuse. The whole point of medical science is to prevent suffering. For example, we vaccinate babies to prevent harmful illnesses. They cannot speak for themselves so we have to make those decisions for them, but only in their best interests.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Even if there’s phimosis going straight to circumcision is not medically defensible, first there’s testosterone creme and mechanical stimulation. Don’t have statistics at hand but the number of cases where that’s not enough should be lower than that of intersex folks.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The standard of care should be too take the least invasive approach possible, especially when the more radical option has lifelong consequences. Not sure how that position is obtuse. And if a child is too young to speak, nobody should be recommending this operation because any diagnosis of ‘phimosis’ at that age is plain bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply