Heated Circumcision Debate Pitches One Parent Against Another

Why is there no mention about the person most affected by circumcision, the son? I am a son who was circumcised shortly after birth. I do not like being circumcised. There are many other men who feel the same way. I dislike being circumcised so much that I am restoring my foreskin.

There is no clear medical need to support infant circumcision. Babies are healthy when they are born. Let them keep all their parts until they are old enough to decide for themselves. It is my sex organ, not my parents. I am the one who uses my penis, not my parents. I am the one who should decide if part of my sex organ should be removed, not my parents. My body, my choice.

This article was aimed at parents faced with the decision as to whether to circumcise or not. I am considering an article about adult males opinions of circumcision. If you would like to contribute to this article, please get in touch with me; I'd be more than happy to promote your point of view. Thanks for stopping by.

Having a foreskin is what Nature/The Creator wants. Why should there be a discussion about something that is inherent in the grand design of the male body? It simply is 'what is.' End of the discussion.

"Male Circumcision"
A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right.

“For tens of thousands of years, Billions of men kept their foreskin without a problem. And now, in the last 100 years, it suddenly poses a risk?”
Humans are out of touch with their true nature and thus we have male genital mutilation in the US in 2010.

What if circumcised guys think that they are off the hook and decide that they don't need to wear a condom, after all they can still get HIV and other STDs, though they may not be as susceptible as their uncut brothers. Wouldn't that create a bigger public health problem? Kind of reminds me of when light cigarettes were introduced back in the 70s. Everyone thought that reducing tar and nicotine levels would eliminate the health risks. Most smokers switched to lights and but smoked even more, so any health benefits (if there ever were any) were negated.

Those parents who would offer 'personal hygiene' as the reason for circumcising their newborn sons, apparently don't believe they(as parents) are capable of teaching their sons how to wash themselves or they don't believe the boy is capable of learning such a task...or is it a combination of both?
I wonder if these same parents ever considered that their male dog or male cat gets along quite well without their genitals being mutilated?

------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202464033969&Atlanta_Lawyer_T akes_on_Botched_Circumcision_Claims_Nationwide


Atlanta Lawyer Takes on Botched Circumcision Claims Nationwide
Katheryn Hayes Tucker

07-29-2010

Although the $10.7 million default judgment David J. Llewellyn of Johnson & Ward just scored may be tough to collect, the case is a dramatic statement about the Atlanta attorney's development of an unusual national practice: suing over botched circumcisions.

In the latest case, Llewellyn brought a suit on behalf of a boy and his parents against Mogen Circumcision Instruments, claiming one of its devices severed the head of the boy's penis during a bris, a Jewish ceremony for a male infant. The company failed to answer the suit, and Senior U.S. District Court Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the Eastern District of New York ruled the company owed the eight-figured sum.
"He's the expert in this field," said Llewellyn's New York co-counsel on the Mogen case, John L. Juliano, a personal injury and medical malpractice attorney in East Northport, NY. "I don't know many other people who handle these cases."

Llewellyn said he has sued doctors, hospitals and medical supply makers around the country for circumcision-related malpractice and personal injury during the past 15 years. He has won, lost and settled in the area, which he estimated is about half of his practice, with the other half a broader range of personal injury and malpractice litigation.

Last year he won a $2.3 million verdict in Fulton County against the doctors of a child injured during a circumcision. That was his biggest award before the recent New York case.

"I didn't set out to be a circumcision lawyer; it just sort of happened," said Llewellyn.

According to his firm's website, Llewellyn was born in Salem, Mass., in 1950, grew up in South Carolina and Pennsylvania, and went to college and law school at the University of Virginia, with a four-year stint in the U.S. Navy in between.

In the early 1990s, he said he and his wife had begun researching the subject of circumcision to make decisions for their own children. In 1993, he started a group called the Atlanta Circumcision Information Center, which opposed the practice.

One of his group's guest speakers was an anti-circumcision activist who later got a call from a lawyer in Alabama looking for help with the case of an infant who was circumcised without his parents' approval. She recommended Llewellyn.

He said he remembers putting up with laughing and joking and questions like, "what does it matter?" But he said jurors went silent after he played a videotape of a circumcision procedure on an infant. After the jury went out to deliberate, he remembers an elderly bailiff sitting down somberly and saying, "If I'd have seen that before, I wouldn't have done that to my boy."

He said he and his co-counsel, Hugh V. Smith, won a $65,000 verdict. Afterward, they settled for a smaller, undisclosed immediate payment.

Soon, Llewellyn began getting calls for other cases of wrongful circumcision or circumcision injuries. He's handled cases in Alabama, Colorado, Kentucky, Texas, Arkansas, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Maryland, Nevada, Missouri, Georgia and Canada.

"Part of the reason I do this work -- which isn't making me a rich man -- is to inform people," Llewellyn said. "That's part of the function we perform as lawyers. These cases are important."

As his practice has evolved, so has his reputation as a speaker on the subject of circumcision, which he contends is unnecessary and harmful. This week Llewellyn is speaking on the subject at the University of California at Berkeley for the 11th International Symposium on Circumcision, Genital Integrity and Human Rights.

"The circumcision of infants is the American sickness, and unfortunately, we're spreading it around the world because of a small group that's pushing it," Llewellyn said.


The American Academy of Pediatrics has not taken a pro-or-con view on circumcision. In a 1999 report, which the group reaffirmed in 2005, it said, "In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child."

The report cited studies estimating that that the complication rate of circumcisions "is somewhere between 0.2% and 0.6%."

Most of the complications that do occur are minor," the report added.

One regular courtroom adversary, Roger E. Harris of Owen, Gleaton, Egan, Jones & Sweeney, said Llewellyn's position is not mainstream based on the testimony of opposing experts.

"David Llewellyn is a very passionate attorney and believes strongly in his cause. He's a strong litigator who advocates well for his clients," Harris said. "Obviously, I disagree with him when it comes down to the way the facts are portrayed."

Harris represented a pediatrician, Cheryl J. Kendall, who treated a child after a circumcision injury in the case that resulted in a $2.3 million verdict last year. Llewelyn and Harris said they reached a private post-verdict settlement.

"I respect him for his advocacy but I disagree with his opinions," Harris added.

The case against the Mogen circumcision instrument company involved a circumcision that went wrong in Florida. According to a magistrate judge's assessment of the case, the boy was examined by a pediatric urologist who found that all of the penile shaft skin was missing and the glans penis, or head, was completely severed. The severed tissue was reattached, but the surgery was not completely successful. Part of the reattached portion became necrotic and black and had to be removed later. As a result, the boy does not have a glans penis. He will likely require more surgery and have other medical problems, according to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs presented testimony from a child and adolescent psychiatrist, Joseph A. Shrand, who said the boy is "greatly at risk" for psychiatric disorders, possibly even increased suicide risk, and would need ongoing psychiatric treatment, as would his parents.

The case was heard in a teleconference by U.S. Magistrate Judge Marilyn D. Go, who issued a report and recommendation to the district judge, Weinstein, for the $10.7 million in damages. She noted an instructional brochure accompanying the Mogel clamp stating that "no injury to glans is possible," even though other amputations had been reported.

The telephone number for the Mogen company was disconnected.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution last week quoted a representative of the Mogen company in New York saying that the company didn't have enough money to defend itself in court. The woman added that the Mogen clamp is safe when used properly.

Llewellyn said his clients have already settled privately "for a modest amount" with the mohel, a person trained in the Jewish ritual, who did the procedure.

Discussing his role in so many circumcision cases around the country, Llewellyn said he was reluctant to "give away his trade secrets," adding, "Anyone who is interested can call me and I'll talk with them. I'll probably wind up assisting them in their case.

One secret Llewellyn did share is that he has a unique perspective on circumcision. Although he was born during an era when most American baby boys were circumcised, he was not. The reason: he was born premature, and the doctor refused to do the circumcision because he weighed less than five pounds.

"I think if I were not intact -- if I were circumcised -- I would not understand this," he said. Similarly, he added, "If you had not had something since birth, it would be impossible to imagine the advantages of being intact."

Circumcizion has been performed successfully for centuries, there is a reason it is still practised. Just like the tonsils and the appendix, humans no longer require a foreskin on the penis. There are many health benefits for circumcized boys. Infections can occur later in life requiring the foreskin to be removed. It is also benefitial for the future female sex partners for the male. There is a lower risk for women to get cervical cancer if their partner is circumsized. Also, condoms were not built for circumsized men are likely to slip off. I have been married twice, once to a man who is circumsized, and a man who was not. I prefer a man be circumsized. Thank you.

That Plastibell looks like it is painful. I looks like the head of his penis is red and sore as anything. Also is that not where most of the nerves are located in the penis? The only place there are more are in his testicles.

I grew up intact, but had many UTIs growing up... nasty. By the time my boys were born I had learned of the minimal circumcision, which removes only the bundle or tube at the end of the foreskin. This is enough to prevent UTIs, improve a guy's aim, keep it out of his zipper, and to the casual observer, it looks "normal." It's intact improved. 3 boys, 3 minimal circs, no infections and no complaints.

as the picture of the plastibell shows the circumcised penis of a baby is not a nice thing to see even when its healed knowing what has been lost is very distressing even to the most casual observer the penis looks deformed . its well known that exposing the glans of a child is not a good idea as it is not an external body part and is meant to be protected by the foreskin. in circumcision of a baby the foreskin is fused to the glans surface and has to ripped away by force, the discomfort cannot be accurately measured but must be extremely painful in the extreme,it is unacceptable to put babies or children through this experience and circumcision should be banned as soon as possible. the mythical protection its gives against hiv is dubious at best and a condom is far more effective against all std's period .

Are there any pcitures of adult male circumsion? I need one and want to know what will happen.