Pros and Cons. Majority of caucasian americans + all muslims +jews are circumcised. Majority of european, hispanics +asians not. Fathers, sons + siblings like 2b similar. Utis in babies >frquent in incircumcised but utis in baby boys r uncommon. Indicated if urinary tract abnormalitise present, not if hypospadias or penile chordee. ? Reduce or increase premarture ejaculation. !10% un circ. Males trouble sometime.
Yes. It is not necessary to circumcise a boy but it does improve hygeine. Uncircumcised boys and parents will have to deal with that foreskin for many years to come. Most other males in this country are circumcised and this can become an issue in locker rooms. Circumcised males have fewer uti's and foreskin infections and there are some concerns about std transmission from long foreskins.
No. There is really no medical reason to have your newborn circumcised. If you have a personal or religious reason, it can be done safely and with relatively few complications. "looking like dadddy" is not really enough of a reason. Do some reading, ask your pediatrician. If you choose not to circumcise, your doctor can instruct you on how to care for the baby's foreskin.
No. From a medical viewpoint, the answer is no. There is huge variation in the percentage of baby boys that get circumcised. It depends on the ethnic group or the religious group that the family belongs to. Overall, in america, my estimate is that 2/3 of the baby boys get circumcised. Circumcised babies, however, have a lower chance of getting a bladder infection, compared to the uncircumcised.