Baby Boy circumcision

Generally we either circ during the first 6 weeks or delay until the baby is a year old.

With modern anesthetic techniques, the babies handle this very well.

My brother had this done when he was 10 or so. Not sure what the rationale is for doing it earlier. Anyone?

I was uncircumsised and when i was 21 i got a tear in my forskin which got infected. The operation was unbearable (well, i did have one fun story, actually involving a student nurse, but another time). I've just read that circumsicion is on the rise to help protect in the std's situation. In Judeo-Christian rite, babies are circumsized much less than 3 months old.

Jewish boys traditionally were circumcised on day seven after birth. These days, grown up men get this procedure done on a need basis simply because urinal or urinal tract infections/complications might occur. So, in HK, mothers usually arrange for their school aged boys to get this done during the summer holidays. You could contact surgeon, Dr Daniel Lau @ 2868 1980, Melbourne Plaza, Central.

There is no compelling reason for circumcisions. The arguments are STD (totally false), hygiene, cervical cancer in partners, and bladder infections. All of which has very poor studies showing minimal benefits if any exist at all.


That being said, the reason for circumcisions is a social one and many families feel strongly about it so do what you please. The ealier it's done, the better because it will be harder to remember the event, not that it is any easier.


The one year cutoff is because the risk of anesthesia is consideraby greater in infants less than 12 months. Of course you could do it at 3 month with only local anesthesia. I always thought that it was bogus that newborns tolerated it better. I think that the reality is that parents tolerated seeing the newborn in pain more easily than a 3 month old in pain and forget about a boy that can talk and resent you for the rest of his life!!!

Great find - the boys who had the plastibell circumcision and had very little/no crying, did their mothers actually accompany them into the room?

I am curious because I have assisted in close to 120 plastibell circumcisions over the past 20 years and I have never not seen one of these dear little babies not scream! And I have seen many different doctors and surgeons perform the procedure( I was one of the only paediatric nurses in my unit in Australia that was prepared to assist - probably because I was young and didn't have children and didn't think too much about what was happening, most of the other nurses would refuse to assist).

I am sure that the five year old would have had a general anaesthetic for the procedure, if not I would have to say it would be impossible for a child of that age to go through the procedure without flinching.

There is still cutting involved with a plastibell. Normally over 12 weeks the baby needs to have a general anaesthetic and so they will wait till the child is one. Under 12 weeks no anaesthetic is used. The glans penis is seperated from the penis with a probe, the plastibell is inserted under the glans penis, a string is tied securely and tighly around the skin sealing it to the plastibell (it is at this stage that the baby is screaming so loundly that they look so pitiful). The glans is then cut away from around the tie and plastibell.

The baby is then wrapped up tightly and held by the nurse. Normally the surgeon will come out and tell the parent that the little procedure is over and all went well. The baby appears to be sleeping and snug, parents unaware of what went on in the room - If only they knew, the baby almost is in a state of shock, but you could call it slumber if you wanted to look at it that way!

I had a father INSIST on watching once, he would not wait out and wanted to see the procedure, He went pale and looked like he wanted to throw up and then told the surgeon to stop - All I had done was strap the baby down into the harness in preparation, clearly he would have been in for a shock if he had seen what was to come.

Sorry to be so gruesome, it was not until years later when I had my own babies and held my own son that I actually wept thinking about all those dear little boys and the pain they went through.

I know my post will make some people very defensive and uncomfortable but it really is a horrible thing to do to such a perfectly created being.

Great Find,

Thank you for clearing that up and making the call. I was quite concerned that they had the procedures done without anything.

I know its been said to death and you wont even care to listen, but people should speak out against such practices because these little babies cant.


It is totally unnec. and cruel, even if your intentions are not. My friend wanted her son done and when she approached one Dr he said "only if you watch". I hope you watch and see how much your baby isn't bothered.


The most common reason for this procedure to be performed on newborns is religious. Religion needs to change with the times, and stop inflicting mutilations on the defenceless.

I disagree, the majority are done just out of habit. When most boys get done in any society then most boys will get done. I was amazed when I started in pracice in the US in the 60s, we did not even get a consent form signed. We did them in the delivery room while waiting for the placenta to deliver. In my first 4 years in practice I only once had a baby boy NOT done. Now that has changecd and as the numbers go down, they will continue to go down, Also when I was in boarding school in the UK a boy who was 14 and not circumsised was done because he was tired of all the kiding he took about his 'strange looking organ' that presumably would not happen now.