CODA

There is no surgical procedure nor any drug which will benefit mankind which does not also have some potentially undesirable effects. Even common events like taking an aspirin, being vaccinated or having a whitlow lanced are not without hazard to life. Thus it is not surprising that there is dispute about the merits of circumcision depending on whether one stresses the advantages or possible disadvantages of the operation. I have attempted to present both sides of the argument but some readers will suggest I am biased because I have produced more points in favour than against the operation. If one ignores the extremists who would either forbid circumcision by law or seek to impose it upon everyone, then the evidence does suggest that the advantages do outweigh the disadvantages. A common sense view is that the prepuce is a useless structure which, if it is not causing any trouble, should be left alone but if it is the least nuisance, or likely to be so, in preventing the enjoyment of a full sex life is best removed.

I am disturbed by the number of mature males who consult me about penis problems or are found to have these problems when they attend with other conditions. In most cases questioning reveals that actual or potential trouble in the foreskin or frenulum was present when they left school. Unfortunately no doctor or parent asked the appropriate questions at what would have been an opportune time for surgery. As soon as he starts work the lad has money so he can afford to meet girls and is likely to start his sex life. If he has a sex problem he rarely is able to talk to his parents as he would about other ailments so he runs the risk of developing a 'hang up'. He may also feel unable to consult his doctor because of a sense of guilt about having extra-marital intercourse. A man who has read this booklet need only spend a few minutes talking to his son to discover whether or not all is well. When everything seems to be normal he will at least have prepared the way if his son wants to discuss sex topics in the future. Should there be any doubt about everything being satisfactory the opinion of a doctor with special experience in this field should be sought even if the lad was said to be normal at a previous examination.

Finally it is left to the reader to decide whether routine circumcision at birth is a 'barbaric mutilation' or a sensible preventative measure. If the latter you will have to decide if the slight risks involved justify the advantages of freedom from phimosis and balanitis in early life and from cancer of the penis in later life. After his sixteenth birthday a boy is responsible for seeking his own medical advice and his consent is required if circumcision is advised for occupational or other reasons. Parents may therefore want to give the lad this booklet to study for himself. When he becomes engaged the young couple must jointly decide if circumcision for one of the optional reasons would be likely to benefit their future married life. Eventually the wheel comes full circle when the couple decide if they want their own boys circumcised at birth.