Discussion in 'Community' started by Whitey, Oct 2, 2012.
Please watch this video. It's very enlightening as to the value of a foreskin.
Not to everyone. Don't get me wrong, I'm not part of the Jenny McCarthy brigade on this issue, but some parents have reported serious problems occurring in the immediate aftermath of vaccinations. Even if we totally discount these reports there is still a theoretical risk involved. And it's without consent.
No major medical organization condemns vaccinations as a violation of human rights to my knowledge. The Finnish, Swedish, Royal Dutch, and South African Medical Societies have all stated that infant circumcision is a human rights violation. No major medical organization recommends infant circumcision.
That is not true of vaccinations.
Furthermore, a small minority of people do have problems with vaccinations. However, the risks clearly outweigh the benefits. The negative consequences that every single vaccinated person experiences is an unconsented needle-stick for a legitimate preventative medical reason. Every single person who was circumcised as an infant has permanently lost 10-15 square inches of erogenous skin from their body. These actions are hardly comparable. One is a surgical amputation. The other is an injection.
Everyone who is circumcised experiences significant adverse effects. It is a small minority of those vaccinated who experience any adverse effect beyond a needle prick. I think that parents have the right to make that decision for their children because it is a legitimate medical decision. Genital mutilation is not a legitimate medical decision. Excision of portions of the genitals is the parents' call to make if there is a medical indication.
There is no medical indication for prepucectomy of a neonate.
Christ, I'm still reading this thread. It's like staring at a car accident or rereading Devilman - only pain can follow, but you can't help yourself.
While tact is a concern when you're dealing with patients, to a certain extent with regards to actual curriculum you have to occasionally suck it up and take what you need to take, and I'm pretty sure that's the thrust of the pediatrician's point - even if OZK has strong objections to circumcision (Which by this point I'm pretty sure everyone who posts in Community is aware) he needs to at least be familiar with the technical aspects of the procedure in case it comes up. Regardless of one's approval, the reality of the situation is it's a very common infant care procedure in the US, and that necessitates some familiarity - hell, even if he doesn't actually slice the sausage, he might have to someday deal with a botched circumcision or complications arising in older patients as a result of what was at the time an improperly performed circumcision. What I'm finding most unsettling about this latest revelation is that a philosophical objection is being taken as grounds for omitting a possibly necessary portion of education, which is especially disturbing considering we're discussing medical school.
Um, no. The pediatrician's point was that I shouldn't make people uncomfortable by acting as if it's a medical issue and just do them as not to stir the pot. I absolutely refuse to be a participant in the unnecessary removal of healthy tissue from a non-consenting person's body.
It's no more an "infant care procedure" than cutting off someone's clitoris. How disgusting. How is this a NECESSARY portion of education? If it's about learning to fix damage from genital mutilation, I would love to do that. But I'm not going to learn how to damage someone's genitals simply for the sake of damaging them.
Would you perform a circumcision on a grown man?
Because it happens, and you're in med school, and I can assure you that if you encounter a case of paraphimosis your patient and the institution you work for are not going to appreciate "Oh, sorry, I skipped that course." I respect your right to be opposed to the procedure, I respect the fact that you would not wish to perform it in non-duress situations, but I do not respect a decision made by a medical student to hamper one's ability to treat patients as a result of personal beliefs.
If a grown man came to me requesting circumcision and there was no medical indication for the procedure, I would refer him to another physician. I'm not going to perform surgery without a medical indication (I also am not planning to do liposuction, facelifts, tummy tucks, breast lifts, breast augmentations, breast implants, gluteal implants, etc. - but if consenting adults want that done to them, sure, they can go ahead).
If there were a medical indication for it, like if he had preputial necrosis, then certainly, I'd be willing to do it. I'd honestly probably refer him to a physician who had more experience performing adult circumcisions. If I were the only physician available for it, then certainly, I would consider it my ethical duty to treat that patient.
Well, I'll learn to do the procedure on patients for whom there is a medical indication. I refuse to practice and learn this procedure on non-consenting patients for whom there is no medical indication. If I don't have the opportunity to learn on a patient for whom there is a medical indication, well, I guess I won't end up learning it.
Really, the type of logic you're presenting here is astounding:
"You need to learn to do this procedure when there is a medical indication. The best way for you to learn this procedure is a way that you consider highly unethical. So that you can learn this procedure, you need to learn it in the manner that you think is highly unethical so that you can perform it properly in the rare cases that it is medically indicated."
Circumcision isn't treating a patient unless there's a medical indication, anyway.
Basically, convince me that it's actually ethical or this conversation is going nowhere.
What branch of medicine are you going into? What's going to be your practice?
I'll let you know in March of 2016.
Until then you'll just have to sweat and be nervous at the thought of all the poor women who will have to undertake the difficult task of finding another doctor to prescribe them birth control or do their tubal ligation, and those poor men who will have to go to another doctor to get a vasectomy, and those poor infants who will have to have another doctor circumcise them.
And oh no! Those poor women who will have to go to an abortion clinic I don't work at for a surgical abortion! Or the women who will have to go to another doctor for a medical abortion!
Or those suffering patients whose lives I refuse to end? Don't they have the right to have me help them kill themselves? (We're talking physician assisted suicide here, not removal of care).
The horror! What trauma I could cause as a doctor by refusing to perform five procedures and prescribe drugs for two purposes, all of which are elective in 99.9% of cases!
EDIT: P.S., WTF does this have to do with my foreskin growing back?
You cut guys are missing out. Getting in the water is like 100x easier now.
I'll admit my posts were based on a presupposition that such a course was necessary to your specialization, so if that's not the case, okay then. The presentation of the original stuff made me think otherwise, but if not, well, I recommend not going into such areas, I guess.
I dunno, you mentioned it.
Well, It's an unknown as to what my specialty will be, but I am intending orthopædic surgery at the moment. And while an orthopædist was the one who first got the circumcision bandwagon going in the late 19th century, they don't do them anymore.
I did do fairly well in undergrad, (4.0 GPA, 99%ile MCAT), so I suspect that my performance on Step I and my grades in medical school will be good enough to warrant placing into the speciality of my choice, which, presumably, will not involve doing lots of things that I think are unethical (I have no plans to become an OB/GYN, for example).
I asked you what caused this current obsession with foreskin, and you told me it was something that happened in medical school... it was pretty natural for the conversation to drift in that direction.
On a different note...
Are you really looking forward to this? You kind of sound excited.
Absolutely I'm excited to restore my penis to full sensitivity. Why wouldn't I be?
Whatever floats your boat, man... if wearing a sheath because of chronic penis pain gets you excited, who am I to judge? If you're into pain, though... you could probably save yourself a lot of time by paying a dom to beat the **** out of you.
The chronic penis pain means that my glans is softening and becoming normal mucosal tissue like it should be. Which is exciting. It also means that my preputial remnant is continuing to grow, so I'm making progress towards having at least, a restored foreskin.
Not that the pain itself is exciting.
Also, FORCE_SKIN is responsible for the greatest JCC thread of all-time.
But aren't you really happy for me and gonna let me finish?
So, my son got up to get a glass of milk... kinda crept up and startled me. He saw the title of this thread, and asked me what foreskin restoration is (thanks for that, ***holes ). I explained circumcision to him... told him that his dad and I chose to have him circumcised when he was a couple of days old, and told him that you are stretching your penis skin in order to regrow your foreskin. I asked him if he's upset that he was circumcised, and he said he trusts me, and that he's not going to miss something he never really had... and wanted me to tell you that you're kind of weird.
Don't people pay dominatrices to do more....pleasurable things? Or have I been going to the wrong ones...
I guess they're all different (I'm not one, and I've never been to one). I know a guy who cleaned a woman's house regularly in exchange for electric shocks and beatings, though--true story.
I really have no idea why I'm still posting in this thread.
I would clean a woman's house for better reasons.
Let's end this line of talk before I saw something ban worthy.
This entire thread.
Guys, just seriously, just stop it. Seriously. Guys.