Answered 2 months ago
My son was circumcised after birth and now that we’re home I’m starting to notice that while it’s healing it still covers majority of his head almost as if he wasn’t circumcised at all. His father isn’t in the picture and either is my father. Is this a part of the healing process and should I have done more research into circumcision. If I’m honest I don’t know too much about it.
Have an answer?
My son was circumcised at four weeks old, using the plastibell method. When the plastibell came off, I thought that would be it, but no, it looked really gungey and still very swollen and red at that point. I worried so much that I took my son back to the clinic, only to be told that it would all be ok after another week, and sure enough, after another week, it looked heaps better. Now, three months on, I am very happy with how it looks and have no regrets getting it done.
I am starting to look into the ins amd outs of circumcision as my partner wants our baby boy to be circumcised. I am supportive of the idea from a health and hygiene point of view, but I do worry a little about the gamble we are making in terms of the cosmetic outcome. It just feels like a big leap of faith, handing bub over and hoping he ends up with a good result.
As I said below, I did a lot of research about circumcision but didn't end up having a boy (and even if we had have, after doing the research we probably wouldn't have gone ahead with the op anyway).
I am sure most parents don't understand the different methods and what they can mean cosmetically and functionally. In their minds all circumcisions are the same.
However, they are not. Some tend to result in skin being bunched up behind the head when soft while others leave the skin on the shaft smooth and wrinkle-free (which means less skin movement when erect, or what's referred to as a "tight" circumcision).
Likewise, different methods result in the cut line (and thus the scar) being closer to the head of the penis of further down the shaft.
And there are some that tend to result in a darker scar than others (although this can depend on the practitioner as much as the method sometimes).
Finally, sometimes the frenulum (or "banjo string") under the head is removed and sometimes it's not.
When I was researching I found all this sort of information easily on the internet. It was a bit overwhelming actually and a reason that we probably wouldn't have had it done.
You're making a decision for him that he can't undo so please make sure you understand everything about the procedure and what the outcome will be.
I would highly recommend going with this clinic / method if you can.
I need to look into this topic because I'm due to give birth to my boy soon, and hubby wants him to be circumcised as a baby. I am still not sure about it, mainly out of worry about something going wrong. Otherwise I'm happy to go along with hubby's wishes and have bub circumcised.
Have you gone back to the doctor who did your son? I'm sure it wouldn't be fun to have to re-do it, but is that an option?
Certainly of all the circumcisions I have ever seen, there is no remaining skin covering any part of the head, but maybe for little boys it's different until they get older?
I know one method involves a plastic ring and the other is more of a traditional cut. I am still not sure what is the best way to go though, as i have read inconsistent reviews of each.
I didn't have a baby boy and if I had he probably wouldn't have been circumcised. However I remember what's above from when I was doing research.
My nephew had a small adhesion which had to be pulled apart again by the doctor.
Luckily my son had a complete circumcision which means that the head is always exposed, but we still applied vaseline in the first three weeks to be on the safe side.
All is ok now, but unlike your sons, his foreskin was completely taken away. Our sons have not been done but they're too young to pull it back yet.
It’s completely normal for it to look like that as he will grow into it. Nothing to worry about.