LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Janet Vandenberg <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 8 Mar 1998 22:42:28 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
Carla,

I feel compelled to say what has not been said.  I do not wish to go off
the list topic but I do think a little more needs to be said on this
topic.  LACTNET has often discussed the right's of infant's to have
their mother's milk and the right's of parents to be informed of the
hazards of  interventions.  Dr. Newman mentioned the other day that we
should not tolerate a surgery  that prevents an organ from performing
its primary function.  The foreskin does have a function.  While I
cannot speak from experience since I don't have the requisite organ,
circumcision apparently causes desensitization of the penis and exposes
it to abrasion among other effects.  In Mothering Magazine in last year
there was an article  by Paul Fleiss, ( whom I believe has posted to
LACTNET in the past) that discussed the hazards of circumcision along
with a listing of the purposes of the foreskin..  The reasons for
circumcision are not supported by the research.  Is it reasonable to
suggest removing tissue to prevent a possible problem in the future?

As for its impact on breastfeeding?  Others have already responded that
these babies are affected by their experience. When those babies are
having that long sleep they are not frequently stimulating the breast so
that we are jeopardizing their milk supply and wasting those hours when
the nipple and areola are easy to suckle to perfect their latch.  They
may be receiving supplements as one post mentioned.

Also if a baby can be traumatized by having his mouth probed by suction,
as was suggested earlier, is it so hard to believe that a procedure that
causes baby to be restrained, frightened and cut (usually without
anesthesia) would traumatize him?  Don't we have an obligation to
educate people about procedures and interventions that interfere with
breastfeeding?  Isn't it not a poor excuse to say that the parent's are
asking for circ's so they get them?  When parents ask about  formula
don't we cringe and try educating about the hazards of formula?  When a
physician recommends something we know will impact on breastfeeding
don't we try to sneak in some education?  Like those starfish on the
beach we need to think about the impact on each baby.   As a society, if
we stop cutting off those foreskins before you know it, having one will
be the norm.

Perhaps Dr. Fleiss would have more comments to add about the
relationship between circumcision and breastfeeding.

Fleiss, Paul. The Case Against Circumcision.  Mothering Magazine. No.
85, Winter 1997, p36-45.

Janet Vandenberg
RN, BScN, LLLC Leader
Mother of three intact boys

ATOM RSS1 RSS2