“This debate has facts on one side and opinions on the other.” -comment on Facebook
From the article Separated at Birth:
The baby, J. Hernandez, is less than a day old . . . tiny head still slightly misshapen, eyelids puffy, mouth half-open in sleep. The nurse has taken him from his mother and is carrying him to a side room in the pediatric ward. The nurse pops on a white heat lamp with her elbow, removes the child from a blue blanket, and lays him in a molded plastic form bolted to the counter. This bathtub-like shell is called a Circumstraint. There are indentations for the baby’s arms and legs. The nurse binds Velcro straps around his limbs, bends the light over him and steps back. The baby is naked and spread-eagled, and he begins to cry.
. . .
The doctor enters the room, scrubs his hands in the sink, and snaps on plastic gloves. The nurse passes him a package, and he opens it on the counter beside the child. Inside are several large, light blue cloth napkins; some squares of gauze; a squeeze-tube of Betadine (an antiseptic ointment); and an assortment of stainless-steel utensils: a pair of scissors, two hemostats (small needle-nose pliers), a heavy metal clamp attached to a hollow cone, a scalpel handle, and a scalpel in a sterile packet.
. . .
The doctor swabs the baby’s testicles and penis with antiseptic-soaked gauze, then lays one cloth over his torso, another over his legs, and a third, with a small hole in the middle, over his genitals. He pops the tiny penis through the hole. The baby is still crying. The nurse mentions that babies feel safest in the fetal position. She says they hate having their arms held away from their bodies. The parents are not in the room. The nurse shuts the door.
. . .
The doctor snaps the scalpel blade onto the handle, then places it beside the baby. Lifting the hemostat, which resembles a sharp-tipped pair of pliers, he begins. Holding the penis in one hand, he moves the point of the hemostat through the hole at the end of the foreskin. The foreskin is tightly attached to the glans, like a fingernail to a finger. The doctor begins pushing the point between the foreskin and glans. The operation is similar to running a razor blade underneath the fingernail. The baby bucks on the plastic form, in obvious pain.
. . .
The child struggles against the straps. The foreskin is attached firmly to the glans, and it’s difficult to pry loose. The doctor scrapes the point of the hemostat in a circular motion around the glans, tearing the skin off the head of the penis. The child continues to buck on the plastic form. This is why the Circumstraint is bolted to the counter.
. . .
The foreskin is still attached to the glans, and the doctor must rake the hemostat around the head of the penis several times. The baby is shrieking now, his face red, his eyes squeezed shut.
. . .
The foreskin is finally separated from the glans. Using a second hemostat, the doctor runs the point up inside the foreskin, clamps it to constrict blood flow, moves the hemostat a quarter inch, takes up the scissors and slices the skin along the clamp line.
. . .
Suddenly the baby is quiet. . . mouth open, but no sound; body rigid. The foreskin is splayed open and bleeding. The doctor tears a hole in the skin and forces a hollow cone up inside the foreskin. The baby begins screaming again, straining at the straps. The stainless-steel cone keeps the glans from being cut off. Using both hands, the doctor places a heavy clamp over the child’s penis, which protrudes through a hole in the clamp. The doctor tightens the clamp, picks up the scalpel, and in one smooth, practiced motion circles it around the foreskin.
. . .
The foreskin is peeled away like the rind of an orange. The baby is still crying. After several minutes, the doctor removes the clamp, pops off his gloves, and leaves. The nurse quickly applies an antiseptic ointment and returns the trembling child to his parents.
To my disbelieving foreign friends, yes, this does happen every single day in the United States.
To my disbelieving American friends, yes, this is what happened to you, your father, your brother, your husband, your son.
“Circumcision is the worst fraud in American medical history.” -Marilyn Milos, founder of NOCIRC and mother to three circumcised boys, as quoted here.
Related articles
- Culture is the culprit (mama-raw.com)
March 2, 2012
Ashley
9 responses to “The worst fraud”
Amy Vickers
March 2nd, 2012 at 17:25
Oh my god, that’s horrible. Parents say no! That amount of detail is going to haunt me now. I can’t believe parents let their babies go through this mutilation. The poor babies.
Ashley
March 2nd, 2012 at 20:37
Sorry! It’s pretty tame compared to a video of the procedure…
Denise
March 13th, 2012 at 06:06
Chemical drugs must have destroyed the mind of people who would allow a baby to be strapped in a restraint traumaticaly cut,sexual future altered forever as his first major experience of life. What demonic monsters. A normal person with heart and feelings could not begin to imagine such a cruel diminishing violation of a babies life in any such way. There really is no good argument for the birth of a brand new infant to even be mentioned in the same sentence with the word aids or viruses. A new infant is a beautiful wondrous little spirit and not a social disease risk. Americans can’t stay balanced and fair in this issue where infants are truamatized, penis reduced at birth and who really knows how many killed (since covering up and burying mistakes sees pretty commonplace) and everybody walks around like business as ususal. Attacking an infant like this should certainly guarantee these profit monsters plenty of patients for life without a doubt. No mother in her right mind would think a natural uncut baby looked funny nor would one allow this knowing what takes place. I guess its is a good thing the babies were traumatized in one sense, otherwise, there would be even more violence against society than ever due to such cruel early life torture inflicted on newborns. What a dire shame and sad situation. All of this is a heinous, destructive hoax formulated by ignorant greedy monsters to ensure their continued wealth and control. I guess monsters are real, and just planning their financial futures with innocent baby blood. The betrayal of innocent blood can’t be retributed. I would not want that in my reality. I believe there is ample room in hell for all who allow this.
Ashley
March 14th, 2012 at 19:03
Denise, thank you for your comment. I’m curious what country you live in. Many of us in the US who’ve given it much thought know it is not demonic monsters who do this, although sometimes the situation makes me so angry, I’d like to use these same names. These are parents who just want to do what’s best for their child, and doctors who for the most part think it’s the right thing to do, or are male and circumcised and don’t want to think of themselves as deficient in any way, or truly believe, rational or not, that parents have the right to make this decision for their sons. That’s why it’s a hard topic to deal with–because it’s not like child molesters, whom you can just call evil across the board. It’s far more complex than that. I totally agree, though, that such a violent assault is no way for a precious baby to begin his life. It breaks my heart and pisses me off, and I’m always glad to encounter others who feel the same way.
staci
March 3rd, 2012 at 11:53
i want to scream
Liz Grier
April 15th, 2012 at 11:23
It is my understanding that despite the emotional description above, that is not the only way a circumcism occurs. Doctors are not out to be sadistic, and one must respect religious tradition. Besides this, nurses and doctors for the aged note that uncircumcised men often find it more difficult to clean themselves and have a greater infection rate.
Ashley
April 15th, 2012 at 12:48
This is the way newborn circumcisions occur. There are a few different methods, but none eliminate the tearing of the foreskin from the glans or all of the cutting. None eliminate all the pain, as newborns are too young for general anesthesia and for pain medication beyond Tylenol after the procedure.
Doctors are not out to be sadistic, I agree, but that doesn’t make circumcision any less barbaric. Just as American parents are products of a culture that normalizes circumcision, American doctors are, too.
If one is to respect another’s religion, then one must respect another’s religion. No, that’s not a typo. One must understand that her own religion ends where another’s body begins and children don’t necessarily adopt the religious beliefs of their parents.
Conveniently, I bet this old age myth is only found in countries where circumcision is “normal.” Even if true, this in no way means a healthy body part should routinely be removed from a non-consenting individual. Should we remove breast buds because they might become cancerous. Should my dad’s bowels have been bypassed and a colostomy bag put in place when he was young because it might be cleaner or easier to change than the diapers he had to wear in his last weeks of life?
I can only hope you’re new to considering this subject and will pursue additional information on it.
Also, if you have a son or sons whom you’ve had circumcised, rest assured I will never imply you are a bad parent for doing so. I’m sure you did the best you knew how to do at the time. Sadly, however, circumcision for either sex is not what’s best for a child or the adult he or she will grow into (or his/her sexual partners).
Andrea Baron
July 9th, 2012 at 23:31
We circumcised our son and it was not horrible. We were in the room, the tray was on the bed not screwed down, my son NEVER cried. I understand there are two sides to this decision and both sides feel very strongly about it. But please leave it at that don`t type an extremely biased story to scary people that aren’t directly affected (foreign and American friends). This posting is not how it works in my town and I believe your readers need to know that. I did it for my son and I would do it again. This is a personal decision and it should be left at that, I feel these articles help mothers look down on other mothers instead of uniting and staying strong together.
Ashley
July 17th, 2012 at 06:18
People respond to pain in differerent ways. Some cry, some swear, some pass out or go into shock. A lack of crying does not indicate a lack of pain. I did not cry either time I gave birth, and my husband didn’t cry when he cut off his thumb, but we would tell you these experiences hurt like hell. Regardless of whether it was painful, however, surgical removal of a healthy body part without the consent of its owner will NEVER be OK, and people from other countries are shocked that this is routinely done in the US.
You’re exactly right. It is a personal decision–a decision to be made by the person who owns the foreskin. What if your son grows up to regret having a part of his body taken from him he can never get back? What if he lives with anger and depression because of it. This isn’t bias or fear mongering; this is truth.
I don’t look down on other mothers who’ve chosen circumcision; I recognize the vast majority were uniformed when they did so. Mothers need to be educated on the subject, however, and united toward staying strong for our sons by ending routine circumcision.