cutnbulls2ox,
sparkey49 (imported) wrote: Thu Nov 30, 2017 8:57 pm
we had not had circumcised but when he was two he had an issue with his foreskin getting infected it would not retract either.
Sparkey49,
Attempting to retract a boy's foreskin before the age of 10 to 12 years will always result in a damaged, sore and infected foreskin.
When a male is born, the foreskin is attached to the glans with a membrane. This is the same type
nails to the nail bed. As the boy matures the foreskin membrane detaches from the glans over time.
Any doctor that is stupid enough to attempt to retract a foreskin before 10 to 12 years of age should lose their medical license. In fact many parents that do not want their son's circumcised until they are an adult and can decide for themselves, will insist on watching every well baby exam. Parents will remind every nurse, every doctor and even the guy that sweeps the floor that their son's foreskin should not be retracted.
Doctors often cite urinary track infections as a reason to circumcise infants. They claim (correctly) that urinary track infections are greater among American boys that are not circumcised. What they fail to tell the parents is that in Europe among a similar population of intact male infants, urinary track infections are far less than in the United States among circumcised infants.
Why? Because in Europe they know that foreskins should NEVER be retracted. Why not? It causes the exact same symptoms you described. Your doctor damaged your son twice. First when he foolishly retracted your son's foreskin, then when he circumcised him. American doctors don't know how to handle foreskins on men because they've seen so few of them.