Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 02/18/2006 6:34:25 PM PST by dpa5923
I don't know if anyone will notice or care in the heat of this debate, but it's possible to anesthetize babies before they're circumcized. My son was circumcized--partly so he'd look like his dad, partly for the health reasons we had read about including STD transmission rates, and partly as a favor to my future daughter-in-law. But I was worried about the pain he would experience, so I got some prescription analgesic cream called "Embla" and put it on him half an hour before the procedure. He screamed at being tied to the backboard that restrained him, but quickly settled down. When they actually clipped him he didn't make a sound but continued to look around alertly. He came back to my room and was peaceful and happy afterwards, and I saw no evidence of pain.
I'm sure that the procedure hurts like hell if it's done without anesthetic. We have no reason to believe babies aren't as sensitive as we are. But if the baby's pain is one of the considerations, it can be prevented.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
>>>This is ridiculous. The kid is way too old. Probably plays with himself by now. I can't imagine that having his privates sliced up would be anything other than totally devastating. The mom's an idiot. At this point, she should just wait and let the kid decide for himself when he's older. Good thing the judge isn't a woman.>>>
Yes, this is why I said that people haven't bothered to read the article. "Wait till he's older to decide", but if he needs this MEDICALLY, as the article states, what will happen when he's older?
The pediatricians do it for free?
Nope, it has to do with people engaging in speculation about her motives. Which is exactly what you are doing when you keep pointing out that one sentence where "she says" that two doctors recommended it. Note the "she says" part? Note that nowhere in the article does it say "medical experts testified that the procedure is necessary?" Note that nowhere in the article does it even suggest that she put forward any medical testimony? Note that the article says that the judge is ordering the procedure halted until the father gets a chance to argue his case? Meaning that the mother has already argued hers?
When you keep insisting that other people "haven't read the article," you are insulting other people for doing the exact same thing you are doing; that is, engaging in speculation about the facts.
>>>So ya ready to go get that ole crusty skin lopped off yet? I'll date ya
Only if ya get that nasty clit hood lopped off.>>>
You got a deal.
When my sister split up with her last boyfriend, she inherited their dog, and promptly had its nuts cut off. She's never quite admitted why, but I know why.
My guess is this woman is expressing the same impulse, just even more contemptibly.
And it's not tough to find doctors that advocate circumcision for some contrived 'medical' reason or another.
>>>Dinner's ready. Go look it up yourself. Book of acts, somewhere, I believe.>>>
So in other words, you don't know. You just heard it somewhere.
So I'll go with what I learned in church thank you very much.
Ditto here. And I am a married woman who is opposed to circumcision.
I was specifically told by the doctor that it is very dangerous to anesthetize a newborn and that's why it is not done. Did he lie to me?
You go first.
Another example of your inability to read the entire article, instead of just the one inconclusive sentence that you seem to be hung up on.
At least you admit it is a guess. I would like to hear the testimony myself, before I made a decision.
>>>Which is exactly what you are doing when you keep pointing out that one sentence where "she says" that two doctors recommended it. Note the "she says" part?>>>
Yes, and of course since she is attempting to do something you have some freakish problem with, you of course imply and call her a liar.
I'm sure if this gets to the supreme court, medical testimony will be required.
There are plenty of uncircumcised conservative Americans around.
For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.
Galatians 6:15
>>>You go first.
Hehehe
I would like to hear what type of medical testimony the father's lawyer comes up with. Perhaps there are other doctors who will say it is not necessary. If it is necesaary for medical reasons, the decision should be a no-brainer for the judge.
This sounds like it may be nothing more than a nasty power struggle between the two parents. It's too late for this boy now, anyway, as far as emotional protection goes. His name can be withheld, etc., but he will find out and it will damage him and his relationship with his parents, whatever the outcome.
>>>I was specifically told by the doctor that it is very dangerous to anesthetize a newborn and that's why it is not done. Did he lie to me?>>>
I think they were speaking about numbing the skin, not being knocked out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.