You’ve just had a baby. You’re in that surreal, sacred space between exhaustion and wonder—staring into the eyes of a child who has never known pain, confusion, or harm. Your instincts rise to meet theirs: to protect, to soothe, to ensure that nothing in this new world hurts them.
Now imagine this: a doctor walks in and calmly says,
“We recommend removing your baby’s eyelids. It reduces the risk of pink eye later on. Eyelids can trap bacteria, after all. It’s a quick procedure. They won’t remember it.”
You would be horrified.
No matter how common pink eye is, no matter how clean the surgical room, no matter how calm the voice delivering the suggestion—your answer would be no.
Because removing healthy body parts to prevent a possible, treatable condition goes against everything we instinctively know to be right.
And yet, every day, this is the logic used to justify the removal of a baby boy’s foreskin.
When Logic Fails Us
Circumcision is often defended as a preventative measure. It might reduce urinary tract infections. It might lower the chance of certain infections or diseases later on. It might make things “easier” in the long run.
But “might” is not a medical necessity.
We don’t amputate fingers in case they get jammed. We don’t remove nipples because breast cancer exists. We don’t pull teeth from toddlers because cavities are common.
The foreskin is the only part of the body that we treat this way—removing it before it has a chance to function, on the off chance that it might one day pose an issue.
We call it tradition. But tradition is not proof. And it’s certainly not justification for surgery without consent.
The Foreskin Is Not a Flaw
There is a quiet, dangerous message embedded in the practice of circumcision: that babies are born needing correction. That there is something inherently wrong with the male body as it comes into the world.
This is simply untrue.
The foreskin is not extra skin. It serves a protective function in infancy, shielding the glans of the penis. As the child grows, the foreskin begins to separate naturally, allowing for retraction and, eventually, its role in intimacy and sensitivity later in life.
It is not an evolutionary mistake. It is part of the human body—just like eyelids, fingernails, or earlobes. It is only in certain cultures, at certain moments in time, that we decided it didn’t belong.
We owe it to our children to question that decision, especially when the alternative is permanent removal without their voice, their knowledge, or their consent.
If It’s Not Necessary, Why Are We Doing It?
The truth is, circumcision persists not because it’s medically needed—but because it’s familiar.
Because it was done to us.
Because a doctor suggested it.
Because we’re afraid to be different.
Because it’s easier to go along with what everyone else is doing than to ask: Why?
But “everyone else is doing it” is not an ethical foundation. And when it comes to permanent, irreversible procedures on children, it should never be enough.
We are not failing as parents when we ask questions. We are doing exactly what our children need most: protecting them.
The Role of Consent
In all other areas of medicine, consent is sacred. It is the cornerstone of ethical care.
Adults can choose circumcision for themselves. They can weigh the risks, consider their values, and make an informed decision. But infants cannot.
They cannot say no.
They cannot say yes.
They cannot say, “Please wait until I can decide for myself.”
And so we must ask ourselves: if this is a procedure that can wait—shouldn’t it?
If there’s no emergency, no life-threatening condition, no immediate need—then what’s the harm in leaving the choice to the person whose body it affects most?
What the Research Really Says
Supporters of routine circumcision often point to potential benefits. But when we look closely at the research, the picture becomes more nuanced:
- Urinary tract infections are already rare in infants, and treatable with antibiotics.
- STI prevention data comes largely from studies in adult men in specific high-risk regions—findings that don’t justify surgery on healthy newborns in low-risk environments.
- Penile cancer is extremely rare, with or without circumcision. It affects fewer than 1 in 100,000 men.
Meanwhile, the risks of circumcision are often understated:
- Pain, even with anesthesia
- Infection
- Excessive bleeding
- Poor cosmetic outcomes
- Adhesions
- Meatal stenosis (narrowing of the urinary opening)
- Psychological effects later in life, including feelings of violation or loss
When a procedure is not necessary and carries real risks, the ethical response is to pause—not proceed.
A History Worth Revisiting
Circumcision was introduced in the United States during the Victorian era—not as a medical breakthrough, but as a behavioral deterrent. At the time, physicians believed that reducing sexual sensation would discourage masturbation, which was thought to cause mental illness.
The intent was control—not health.
Over time, the reasons changed. Hygiene became the new justification. Then aesthetics. Then “just in case” arguments about disease.
When the rationale for a practice must shift to survive, it’s worth asking whether it was ever truly justified in the first place.
The Global Perspective
It’s easy to assume that circumcision is universal. But the U.S. is one of the few developed countries where it is still practiced routinely on newborns.
In Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and most of Latin America, circumcision rates are low or nearly nonexistent. These countries have not experienced a public health crisis as a result. In fact, many of their medical organizations explicitly discourage routine infant circumcision.
There is no global consensus in favor of the practice. If anything, the consensus is moving in the opposite direction.
The Emotional Toll
For many parents, the moment they learn what circumcision actually involves—how it’s done, what’s removed, what the baby experiences—there’s a wave of grief.
And for many men, learning as adults what was taken from them without their knowledge or permission can lead to confusion, sadness, even anger. Not every man feels this way. But some do. And their pain is real.
It is not an attack on parents to say that more information is needed. It is not an insult to anyone’s identity to say that children deserve a choice. It is a call for compassion—for space to grieve, to question, and to grow.
When Parents Deserve Grace, Not Guilt
It’s important to say this clearly: most parents who choose circumcision are not acting out of harm—they’re acting out of trust. Trust in doctors. Trust in the system. Trust in the idea that what’s common must also be correct.
No one hands new parents an unbiased, full-scope explanation of what circumcision is, what it removes, or how rare and non-essential it actually is. Most are given a form and a quick sentence: “It’s routine.” “It’s cleaner.” “Most people do it.”
That’s not informed consent. That’s inherited confusion.
So if you’re a parent reading this and feeling regret or pain, know this: you did the best you could with the information you had. This isn’t about blaming the past—it’s about reshaping the future. With grace. With care. With love.
For Adults Circumcised as Infants
If you’re someone who was circumcised as a baby, you may be reading this with a mix of emotions—some hard to name, some harder to sit with.
Maybe you’ve never questioned it before. Maybe you’re wondering what it would’ve been like to have a choice. Maybe you’re grieving something you didn’t know you lost.
All of that is valid.
Your feelings are not an attack on anyone—they are your truth. And your truth matters.
This movement isn’t just about protecting the next generation. It’s about recognizing the quiet impact of decisions made without consent. It’s about giving voice to those who didn’t get to speak. And it’s about allowing space for healing, even when the wound isn’t visible.
A Call for Change
We are not powerless. We are not stuck.
We can shift the norm.
We can delay decisions that are not urgent.
We can give our children the right to decide about their own bodies.
This isn’t about shame. It’s about dignity.
About recognizing that routine infant circumcision belongs in the past—not because it was always malicious, but because now, we know better.
And knowing better is the first step to doing better.
Letting Them Stay Whole
Every child is born whole. Complete. Enough.
They deserve to grow into their bodies without unnecessary intervention, without cultural pressure, and without a medical procedure that was never truly theirs to begin with. We don’t cut off eyelids to prevent pink eye. And we shouldn’t cut off foreskins to prevent hypothetical concerns that rarely materialize and are easily managed.
Let’s choose a new path—one grounded in trust, respect, and love.
Let’s protect their bodies like we protect their hearts.
Let’s let them stay whole.
No Comments