Anonymous
Anonymous asked in HealthMen's Health · 1 decade ago

Re: Circumcision - Why did my parents cut off part of my body when I was born? What gives them the RIGHT?

I am a 20 year old male and have a deformed penis. I never understood what the problem was until I started doing some research online. When I was mutilated as a baby I guess I didn't heal right, or the drs. didn't do it right or something because I look deformed (I have bridges where they shouldn't be) and intercourse is quite painful for me.

I no longer speak with my parents as they completely destroyed my manhood. It's going to cost a lot of money to try to get my penis somewhat fixed and I do not have the money and also have no insurance. Can I sue them being as it is THEIR fault and NOT MINE?

Apparently my parents did not think I was good enough left whole and natural and chose to cut off part of my body, my foreskin without my permission. How can they be able to do that? It should be illegal. It's MY body, not THEIRS.

21 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Personally I think infant circumcision is horrible, it amazes me that it is still done. (The US is the only first world country that does this to the majority of the infant boys). I do not think you have a case against your parents, but I do think you can blame them. Regardless of what other said about it being automatic, it still required your parents to sign a consent form.

    Even though people above said they didn't know any better back then, here is what they said in the 1977 version of the AAP circumcision policy (effective till 1989):

    There are no medical indications for routine circumcisions, and the procedure cannot be considered an essential components of health care.

    You might have a case against the doctor that did this. There have been cases won. I would contact http://www.nocirc.org and see if they can recommend a probono lawyer. If nothing else, they will be very knowledgeable in such cases.

    There may be a brighter future for those who were circumcised and unhappy with it. The FGM act of 1996 banned female circumcision in all forms. This includes the removal of the prepuce (clitoral hood) of underage girls. The female prepuce is the same skin and serves the same function of the male prepuce (foreskin), so technically with equal rights, it should be illegal. Boys born in 1996, could be the first generation with a legal leg to stand on, but you never know how judges will see it.

    Answering to Albert's claim about penile cancer:

    http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/content/CRI_2_4_...

    Even if Albert's claim were true, you are much more likely to have breast cancer than penile cancer. So if this is about prevention, why isn't breast tissue removed when they are to young to remember it? Isn't breast tissue useless skin in males?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    A lot of people would have a bad relationship with their parents if they shared your attitude whether there was anything messed about with the procedure or not. It does you no good to have those feelings about your parents, it only hurts you mentally and affects you physically too. You can disagree but if you face the truth you will find that holding grudges really does make things harder for you. People sue each other so much these days it's hard to trust each other. You are trying to punish your parents for doing what they thought would be good for you. If anything, talk to them about it and ask them to pay for surgery to get it corrected but nothing more than that. I read bad things about circumcision on the internet and I grew it back years ago and now I regret it, I wish I hadn't read those things. I was upset with the doctor and my parents but being upset doesn't help. Being happy can be a good thing believe it or not.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 4 years ago

    I understand ur frustration but they did it thinking it was the best thing to do. Kids don't come with manuals and back then they thought it was healthier. I do think though u can sue the Dr. All birth defects and procedures done to a minor are sue-able in most states until the child is 21 so look it up soon.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I am sure your parents were only doing what they thought was right for you in the light of knowledge 20 years ago. Blaming them is not just. Of course nowadays some of us are beginning to realise that this is a human rights issue: that the only person who should actually permit his penis to be permanently modifed is the penis "owner". This means that if the penis is completely normal at birth, delaying the operation until he is old enough to decide for himself (15/16y.o.?). No excuses like "it'll be easier to clean" (untrue in infants), "it'll be more painful later", "he won't remember" and certainly NOT "he's my kid and I'll decide this for him", are valid enough to override the decision to leave him natural.

    I know this doesn't help your immediate problems but it would be far better if you put your anger and frustration into preventing it happening to other kids. A guy called Shane Peterson in Australia was heavily disfigured by his circumcision and is now a leading light in continuing to make people aware of the risks of cutting by telling his story on the internet.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It would certainly be a test case -- and while I agree with your position -- I must advise you that I think you would lose, as it was considered medically normative when you were born. I am aware that sometimes circumcised penises have real problems, this is particularly true if the doctors circumcised too tightly, or there was too much scarring.

    I'm sorry that I cannot offer more help. I hope that you find a route to restoring wholeness to yourself.

    Kindest thoughts,

    Reyn

    PS As for what Jinenglish68 says -- there is no relativity. We have long illegalized female circumcision, which came out of the same original mind set and similar religious customs. We recognize that female circumcision is child abuse -- we should recognize the same for male circumcision. Feeding a child is a responsibility, circumcising them is a decision that should be deferred to the child when they are old enough (18) to make it rationally.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • GeoffB
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I totally agree that nobody should have had the right to mutilate your genitals. They did that to me too and I hate it. The penis forms as one organ and at birth the foreskin is usually fused to the glans like a fingernail to its finger. You have suffered skin bridges because the doctors never told your parents to be careful, during healing, to stop the cut edges of foreskin from fusing to the glans, which was raw from where they ripped away the fused foreskin so they could cut it off. It happens to quite a lot of circumcised guys but because it's not noticed till later this never shows up in complication statistics. This is just one of the many reasons that circumcision should be stopped.

    The claimed benefits of circumcision are a beat up (based on flawed studies) and don't really exist but medical authorities have worked out that the overall complication rate is higher than all the benefits claimed by the pro-cutting advocates. One by one the claims are disproved but the pro-cutting zealots come up with more and keep quoting the old ones despite the evidence against them. For example you have more chance of dying from a circumcision or losing your penis from infection than from penile cancer. The rate of penile cancer is higher in the largely-circumcised USA than in European countries where less than 1% of the male population is circumcised. Plus circumcised men have been found to have penile cancer, mostly on the scar. (Remember this is a very rare disease in intact or circumcised men).

    A very recent study in New Zealand followed a cohort of boys through life from birth to age 32. About 40% were circumcised. The intact males had a slightly lower rate of sexually transmitted infections than the circumcised but there was no significant difference.

    Using surgery to mutilate the genitals instead of washing in a modern western society makes no sense. Normal intact male genitals are, if anything, easier to wash than female ones and the same substance, smegma collects in the genital folds of both sexes.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    The same thing happened to my brother. They didnt do it right or something and when he got older and began having sex it was very painful for him and he had to go to the doctor and they circumsized him again to fix what they messed up in the first place but he is all healed and can have sex without pain. My husband is not circumsized and i prefer it that way. I think they never should have done that to you in the first place. Good Luck!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    A lot of guys resent being circumcised. I can see why, but the parents shouldn't be blamed. Everybody has been conditioned to think that being circumcised is normal. If I ever had boys, I would let them decide whether to be circumcised or uncircumcised.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Circumcision is unnecessary. It disturbs me to still see the penile cancer, cleanliness and other pseudo-medical arguments here - the fact is, there is no link between penile cancer (one of the rarest of all cancers) and circumcision. Daily cleaning is all that is necessary for health.

    The American Association of Pediatrics rejects routine circumcision for infants.

    I'm sorry for you. There is no way to rectify this. Although you can, over a long period (typically two years) restore the 'look' of a foreskin, you can't actually restore the nerve endings that were lost in the operation.

    Thankfully in the US, many parents are now realizing this practice is barbaric. Circumcision rates drop each year, and are below 50% in most of the country. Hopefully it will eventually disappear completely.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Your parents had the right to circumcise you. The doctor had no right to mutilate you. There is a difference - circumcision done correctly is not mutilation. If my parents had me circumcised I would thank them.

    I very much doubt that sueing you parents will be successful. You should find out who the doctor was that did it.

    You can get this problem corrected at a cost of probably not much more than an adult circumcision. Discuss this with various doctors. There are actually more benefits to being circumcised than not and that is probably the reason that your parents had it done. Good luck.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.