http://www.jewishledger.com/articles/2006/02/23/news/news02.txt
"In metzitzah b'peh, a mohel orally sucks blood from the site of the
genital cut he makes
during the circumcision procedure."
http://www.jewishcircumcision.org/jnews90.htm
Jewish News - September, 1990
Circumcision: New Information Raises Questions
By Ronald Goldman
Though many divine laws, rituals, and traditions are ignored by numerous
American Jews, such as
observing Shabbat and Kashrut, many Jews have accepted circumcision
without subjecting it to
any intellectual or emotional scrutiny.
There have been several reasons. Many Jewish parents have not considered
circumcision a choice
at all. It was expected and not seriously questioned. There was little
awareness or knowledge
of its effect on the infant. Some parents have had doubts, but they were
buried under the
avalanche of thoughts related to tradition, history, and fears and
insecurities about
nonconformance to group practice. Health beliefs may have also played a
role.
Recent medical reports have now caused concern and provoked questions by
some Jews about this
ancient practice. In the March, 1988 issue of the Journal of the American
Medical Association,
Howard J. Stang, M.D. and colleagues at Group Health Inc. and the
University of Minnesota
report, "There is no doubt that circumcisions are painful for the baby.
Indeed, circumcision
has become a model for the analysis of pain and stress responses in the
newborn. Not only does
the unanesthetized newborn cry vigorously, tremble, and in some cases
become mildly cyanotic
because of prolonged crying, but other stress-related physiological
reactions have also been
demonstrated, including dramatic changes in heart and respiratory rates
and in transcutaneous
oxygen and plasma cortisol levels."
In the November 19, 1987 issue of New England Journal of Medicine, Anand
and Hickey, in a
comprehensive review of recent medical literature on newborn pain,
conclude that newborn
responses to pain are "similar to but greater than those in adult
subjects." Concerning the
memory of pain in neonates they write, "The persistence of specific
behavioral changes after
circumcision in neonates implies the presence of memory. In the short
term, these behavioral
changes may disrupt the adaptation of newborn infants to their postnatal
environment, the
development of parent-infant bonding, and feeding schedules. In the long
term, painful
experiences in neonates could possibly lead to psychological sequelae,
since several workers
have shown that newborns may have a much greater capacity for memory than
was previously
thought."
Dr. Richard Schwartzman of Philadelphia and Dr. Charles Konia of Easton,
PA help patients
resolve past traumas. Dr. Schwartzman reports, "I have had patients who
have re-lived the
experience as evidenced by the severe pain felt at the site where the
foreskin was cut." Dr.
Konia reports, "I can tell you that from my clinical experience in
treating patients who
relived their circumcision as well as observing newborns being circumcised
in the delivery room
it is a nightmarish experience. I shudder each time I witness patients
going through the horror
(emphasis by Dr. Konia)."
Dr. Thomas Verney has conducted more than twenty years of medical research
on prenatal
experience. In his book The Secret Life of the Unborn Child, Dr. Verney
writes that the unborn
child is aware and leads an active emotional life from about the sixth
month on. "The fetus can
see, hear, experience, taste and, on a primitive level, even learn in
utero. Most importantly,
he can feel... What a child feels and perceives begins shaping his
attitudes and expectations
about himself." Dr. Verney concludes that parents can actively "help shape
the personality of
their unborn child. They can actively contribute to his happiness and
well-being, and not just
in utero, nor in the years immediately following birth, but for the rest
of his life (emphasis
by Dr. Verney).
Frederick Leboyer has delivered more than 10,000 babies. In Birth Without
Violence he writes
"People say - and believe - that a newborn baby feels nothing. He feels
everything. Everything
- utterly, without choice or filter or discrimination." Dr. Leboyer found
that babies born with
minimal trauma developed into happier and emotionally healthier children.
Other studies have
shown that babies who are touched develop more quickly and gain more
weight.
The new evidence supports the conclusion that the infant's experience in
the womb, birth
itself, circumcision, and contact after birth have a significant impact on
future well-being
and functioning.
<<Does everyone get that point? Is it no wonder so many Jewish males are
neurotic?>>
Jewish circumcision has nothing to do with health factors. However, some
people believe it has
health benefits. In the past routine hospital circumcision has been
promoted as a preventive
cure for masturbation, mental illness, venereal disease, cancer, and
uncleanliness. Recent
studies have disproved all of these claims. Edward Wallerstein's book
Circumcision: An American
Health Fallacy addresses this issue in convincing detail. The incidence of
health problems
related to the foreskin is so low that removing it as a preventive cure
would be tantamount to
performing routine appendectomies to prevent appendicitis. The American
Academy of Pediatrics
and the American College of Obstetrics have concluded "there are no valid
medical indications
for circumcisions in the neonatal period."
Some Jews believe, without any specific knowledge, that circumcision
methods of mohelim are
superior to those of doctors and cause less pain to the infant. Actually,
traditional mohel
methods such as using sharp fingernails for cutting and sucking blood from
the cut by mouth
have been abandoned in favor of modern clamp devices.
Most mohelim get their training in hospitals and many are also doctors.
Orthodox mohelim do not
use the clamp devices because they believe bleeding is a religious
requirement. Consequently,
infants circumcised without clamp devices have more risk of hemorrhaging.
In any case, there is
no reason to believe that circumcisions by mohelim are less painful to the
infant.
Whether an infant is circumcised in the hospital by medical staff or in
the home by a mohel,
there are medical risks as with any surgery. Though the incidence is very
small, there is
potential for hemorrhage, infection, and surgical injury. On rare
occasions death has resulted.
For this reason Jewish law allows for exemptions when other children in
the family have died
from the effects of circumcision.
There is considerable misunderstanding of the anatomy of the foreskin.
Little information has
been available about foreskin for laymen or medical professionals. The
assumption that it had
no useful purpose and could be cut off as inconsequentially as hair is
false. Foreskin contains
erogenous tissue with a high concentration of sensitive nerves, and it
serves an important
purpose in intercourse. During erection the foreskin shifts to cover the
upper shaft of the
penis, a location which would contact the vaginal wall during intercourse.
Foreskin also has
the purpose of protecting the penis against irritation and is not normally
retractable until
two or three years after birth.
Without this protection, the penis loses some of its sensitivity. A rare
adult who had a
circumcision (while under general anesthesia) reported later that the head
of his penis "lost
its sensitivity and as it did I realized I had lost something rather
vital. Stimuli that had
previously aroused ecstasy had relatively little effect...Circumcision
destroys a very joyful
aspect of the human experience for both males and females."
Some who have witnessed circumcisions report little or no crying response
from the infant.
There are three explanations for this. Nobody wants to hurt infants.
Anyone involved in
circumcision does not want to believe that it is painful to the infant.
Otherwise, he would
have to question his support for the practice. Circumcision has been such
a fixture in American
Jewish culture that questioning it can be very difficult. For many people
it is easier to
resolve this potential conflict by denying the reality of infant pain.
Rosemary Romberg, author of Circumcision - The Painful Dilemma regrets
having her three sons
circumcised. The third son, unlike the other two, was born at home into a
gentle, loving
environment in a Leboyer-type birth. She reports a "profound and dramatic
difference in the
nature of the baby born in this manner, compared to the baby born by
conventional
techniques...The baby born to conventional birthing procedures is in a
state of trauma anyway -
whether he is circumcised or not!! This explains why some babies do not
cry or appear to react
when their foreskins are clamped and sliced off. The baby is already in a
state of withdrawal,
simply from other common traumatic procedures associated with conventional
birth...Another
explanation for the absence of crying during circumcision is that for some
babies the shock of
the assault is so intense that they cannot cry!" (All emphases are by
Romberg.) Rather than
endure the experience of overwhelming trauma and pain, the infant may
escape into withdrawal or
a semicoma state. As adults we also have escape mechanisms for traumatic
overload, such as
fainting. Therefore, vocal response alone is not always a reliable pain
indicator.
Jews have always been supportive of human rights. Human rights must
certainly include a right
to one's own body. Some Jews are now asking if anyone has the right to
represent infants in
such a critical irreversible decision as removing a normal, functioning
part of their anatomy
for religious reasons.
Many Jews associate circumcision with their Jewish identity. However,
being circumcised does
not make one Jewish. More than one million infants are circumcised in this
country every year
and the overwhelming majority are not Jewish. Of course, females are not
circumcised and some
are Jewish. Any child born of a Jewish mother is a Jew, whether
circumcised or not.
Since circumcision remains the most commonly practiced American Jewish
ritual, choosing not to
participate may raise fears about acceptance by other Jews. For some this
fear may become the
sole or primary justification for circumcising their son. This fear may be
highly overrated.
Reports from American Jewish uncircumcised males indicate that it has not
been an issue for
them, their friends, or parents. In Europe, where there is no routine
hospital circumcision,
many Jews do not circumcise their sons.
In addition to ignorance of previously discussed medical issues, Jews may
have engaged in an
unintentional silent conspiracy. Those that have been afraid to question
or even talk about
circumcision have created the illusion that they are alone, when in fact,
many share their
concerns and are also afraid to express themselves. For many Jews the
pressure to conform to
tradition may have prevailed over their experience and gut feelings.
Maimonides wrote in The Guide for the Perplexed, “No one, however, should
circumcise himself or
his son for any other reason but pure faith.” If parents are not aware of
the religious purpose
of circumcision or do not believe it is a divine requirement, then the
decision to circumcise
becomes an emotional one instead of a religious one. This seems to be the
case for secular Jews
as well as many observant Jews.
The decision to circumcise need not be an automatic one. The effects on
the infant have been
shown to be serious and significant. Not only is his foreskin amputated
but a part of his
spirit and capacity for pleasure as well. By the time parents hear his
painful cries and notice
the feeling in their guts it is too late. Before they get to that point it
is important for
Jews to carefully consider what they would do if they were to have a son
and why.
<STOP>
More on the bizarre rite of Jewish circumcision.
http://www.jewishledger.com/articles/2006/02/23/news/news02.txt
"In metzitzah b'peh, a mohel orally sucks blood from the site of the
genital cut he makes
during the circumcision procedure."
http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/std/std-bris.shtml
Communicable Disease : NYC DOHMH
Before the Bris: How to Protect Your Infant Against Herpes Virus Infection
Caused by metzitzah b'peh
Circumcision has health benefits. Recently, however, the Health Department
has documented several cases of herpes infection in newborns after
circumcisions that included metzitzah b'peh. Metzitzah b'pehis a religious
practice performed by some mohelim (religious circumcisers) in the Jewish
community. Some of these infants became seriously ill. One baby died, and
another suffered brain damage.
Because there is no proven way to reduce the risk of herpes infection
posed
by metzitzah b'peh, the Health Department recommends that infants being
circumcised not undergo metzitzah b'peh.
To help you protect your baby, we want to make sure that parents
understand
the risk of metzitzah b'peh BEFORE the day of the bris, while there is
time
to explore other options.
How metzitzah b'peh spreads herpes
In metzitzah b'peh, the mohel places his mouth on the freshly circumcised
penis to draw blood away from the cut.
If the mohel is infected with oral herpes (as most adults are), metzitzah
b'peh
can expose the infant to the herpes virus. While severe illness associated
with
this practice may be rare, there is a definite risk of infection.
Oral herpes spreads easily through saliva, especially when saliva touches
a
cut or break in the skin, such as during metzitzah b'peh.Most people with
oral herpes don't know they are infected and don't have symptoms. Even
without symptoms, however, people can spread the infection.
Because the immune system of newborns is not developed enough to fight
serious infection, herpes infections pose grave risks to infants.
There is no proven way to reduce the risk of metzitzah b'peh
Although a mohel may use oral rinses or sip wine before metzitzah b'peh,
there is no evidence that these actions reduce the spread of herpes. A
mohel
who takes antiviral medication may reduce the risk of spreading herpes
virus
during metzitzah b'peh, but there is no evidence that taking medication
eliminates this risk.
Many mohelim do NOT practice metzitzah b'peh
While some religious authorities consider metzitzah b'peh the only
acceptable way to draw blood away from the circumcision cut, others use
different means. For example, some mohelim use a glass tube - or a glass
tube attached to a rubber bulb - to suction blood in a way that does not
include contact between the mohel's mouth and the baby's cut. Others use a
sponge or sterile gauze pad to wipe blood away. Unlike metzitzah b'peh,
there is no evidence that any of these practices causes infection.
Ask about metzitzah b'peh BEFORE the day of the bris
Some parents whose infants had metzitzah b'peh say they did not know the
mohel would perform it. The Health Department recommends that parents ask
the mohel several days before the bris if he practices metzitzah b'peh.
This
will give time to talk to your doctor and consider other options for
circumcision.
For more information on circumcision, talk to your family doctor or
pediatrician.
More information
An Open Letter to the Jewish Community from the New York City Health
Commissioner (PDF)
http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/std/std-bris-commishletter.pdf
<STOP>
http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/mohel.htm
Shabbath 19:2
They may perform on the Sabbath all things that are needful for
circumcision: excision,
tearing, sucking [the wound], and putting thereon a bandage and cumin. If
this had not been
pounded up on the eve of the Sabbath a man may chew it with his teeth and
then apply it.
The Mishnah
Translated by Herbert Danby
Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1933. pp. 116-117.
Shabbat 133B
II.1.
A. Suck [out the wound]:
B. Said R. Pappa, "A Surgeon who didn't suck out the wound - that is a
source of danger, and we
throw him out."
C. So what else is new? Obviously, since we are prepared to desecrate the
Sabbath on that
account, it is certainly dangerous not to do it!
D. What might you have supposed? That this blood is stored up. So we are
informed that it is
the result of the wound, and in the status of a bandage and cumin: Just as
when one doesn't put
on a bandage and cumin, there is danger, so here, too, if one doesn't do
it, there is danger.
The Talmud of Babylonia: An American Translation
Translated by Jacob Neusner
Number 275. Volume II.E: Shabbat Chapters 18-24.
Program in Judaic Studies Brown University
Atlanta: Scholars Press. 1993. p. 45.
"There are three stages required for the performance of a ritually correct
circumcision in
Jewish law: the removal of the foreskin; the tearing of the underlying
membraene so as to
expose the glans completely; and the sucking away of the blood,
m'tsitsah." Roger V. Pavey. The
Kindest Cut of All. Bognor Regis, W. Sussex: New Horizon. 1981. pp. 87-88.
"The method to be adopted is laid down thus: 'One excises the foreskin,
[that is] the entire
skin covering the glans, so that the corona is laid bare. Afterwards, one
tears with the
finger-nail the soft membrane underneath the skin, turning it to the sides
until the flesh of
the glans appears. Thereafter, one sucks the membrane until the blood is
extracted from the
[more] remote places, so that no danger [to the infant] may ensue; and any
circumciser who does
not carry out the sucking procedure is to be removed [from his office].' .
. . The operation
itself, then, consists of three distinct acts: the excision of the
prepuce; the laceration of
the mucous membrane covering the glans; and the sucking of the blood from
the interior of the
wound." Immanuel Jakobovits. Jewish Medical Ethics: A Comparative and
Historical Study of the
Jewish Religious Attitude to Medicine and Its Practice. New York: Bloch
Publishing Company.
1959. pp. 193-194.
"The baby cried, blood flowed on to his penis and - as the rabbi had
predicted - Graham [the
godfather] did not faint. The rabbi then bent over the baby and sucked the
wound. I know this
sounds awful, but it is part of the Jewish tradition. It's supposed to
help the healing." Jack
Shamash. "My Son on the Cutting Edge." Independent (London), no. 3,797
(Thursday, December 17,
1998): p. R8.
"And what of the practice of sucking the bleeding penis? While condemning
the procedure, some
physicians contend that it was used to stop bleeding.47 Not only is there
little evidence for
this theory, but it was also a largely ineffective method. Furthermore,
even in antiquity,
surgeons had better methods to stop bleeding, such as pressure,
instruments, and medication.48
According to Dr. H. Speert (1953), Maimonides 'staunchly supported this
procedure [sucking the
bleeding penis] as a prophylactic measure against inflammation.'"49 Edward
Wallerstein.
Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy. New York: Springer Publishing
Company. 1980. p. 160.
"mezizah -- Hebrew term for the third step in the Jewish circumcision
ritual, in which the
mohel applies his mouth to the freshly circumcised infant's penis and
sucks up the first drops
of blood. In more recent times this procedure has been carried out via a
tube, as infections,
venereal disease, and tuberculosis, sometimes resulting in the death of
the infant, have
occurred due to contamination of the wound. Most Jewish circumcisors today
have eliminated this
step from the circumcision ritual. Critics have attributed sadistic and
homosexual implications
to this practice, while defenders claim that this was simply all that was
known during ancient
times to stop the bleeding." Rosemary Romberg. Circumcision: The Painful
Dilemma. South Hadley,
Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey, Publishers, Inc. 1985. p. 395.
"The traditional practice of metzitzah b'peh, which has its roots in the
earliest history of
the Jewish people and has survived unchanged to the present time, should
be viewed with great
respect. It is spoken of very positively in the Jewish literature on
circumcision both as an
essential part of the ritual and as a health measure which prevents
infection and promotes
healing." Henry C. Romberg, M.D. Bris Milah: A book about the Jewish
ritual of circumcision.
Jerusalem/New York: Feldheim Publishers. 1982. pp. 57-58.
<STOP>
http://web.archive.org/web/20020712085004re_/www.torahcc.org/mishna/23-1-00/friday.htm
Torah Community Connection
Misha Yomit Program
SHABBAT: CHAPTER 19: MISHNA 2
One may do all the needs of circumcision on Shabbat: one may circumcise,
and tear, and suck,
and put on it a bandage and cumin. If he did not grind before Shabbat, he
may chew with his
teeth and he may put. If he did not mix wine and oil before Shabbat, he
may put this by itself
and this by itself...
Kehati
This mishnah lists the needs of circumcision which may be performed on
Shabbat.
One may do all the needs of circumcision on Shabbat: one may circumcise -
circumcising and cutting the foreskin, and tear - the thin membrane under
the foreskin, which
the mohel tears to reveal the corona, and suck - out a small quantity of
blood to cleanse the
wound and put on it a bandage and cumin - a type of plant, used for
medicinal purposes.
<STOP>
http://web.archive.org/web/20070412092003re_/www.jewishgates.com/file.asp?File_ID=786
Gates to Jewish Heritage
Regulations and Stories About Circumcision
....The vast majority of Talmudic material dealing with circumcision is
found in the tractate
Shabbat. The discussions focus on what aspects of the circumcision may be
done when the eighth
day of a male child's life hits on Shabbat. Circumcision (as we shall see
later) supercedes all
prohibitions of Shabbat. The Mishnah and the Talmud go into great detail
about circumcision,
which defines for us what the circumcision operation consisted of. It's
the only place in the
Talmud where we get this information.
Shabbat 133a:
MISHNAH. WE PERFORM ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF CIRCUMCISION ON THE SABBATH.
WE CIRCUMCISE, (Cut off the foreskin)
UNCOVER [THE CORONA],(Peri'ah: Splitting the membrane and pulling it down)
SUCK [THE WOUND]...
Our sages now discuss each step of the circumcision:
Shabbat 133b-134a
GEMARA: Consider: He [the Tanna] states them all [separately]: what is ALL
THE REQUIREMENTS OF
CIRCUMCISION to include?
It is to include that which our Rabbis taught: He who circumcises, as long
as he is engaged in
the circumcision, he returns both for the shreds [of the corona] which
invalidate the
circumcision and for those which do not invalidate the circumcision.
The circumciser, from now on called the mohel, must do a clean job and can
"fix things up" so
long as he does it as part of the ceremony.
Once he has withdrawn, he returns on account of the shreds which
invalidate the circumcision,
but not for the shreds which do not invalidate the circumcision.
The text goes into a discussion about who the anonymous Tanna is who made
this ruling. I shall
spare you...
Our Rabbis taught: The penis must be trimmed, and if one does not trim it,
he is punished with
karet.
He has cut on Shabbat (something forbidden...) without fulfilling the
mitzvah of circumcision.
He is therefore guilty of breaking Shabbat, a crime whose punishment is
karet.
The Talmud asks a fascinating question.
Who (is responsible)?
R. Kahana said: The surgeon.
R. Papa demurred ‘The surgeon'!
he can say to them, ‘I have performed half of the precept: You perform
half of the precept.'
R. Papa is no longer talking about a circumcision which takes place on
Shabbat! He's talking an
adult who is commanded to circumcise himself. He's hired a surgeon. The
surgeon does 3/4 of the
job; the surgeon has broken no laws which deserve punishment; he just
hasn't finished the job!
Rather said R. Papa: An adult.
The adult who is uncircumcised must finish the task or receive karet.
R. Ashi demurred: Of an adult it is explicitly stated, and the
uncircumcised male who is not
circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, [that soul shall be cut off from
his people]?
R. Ashi notes, reasonably, that the situation being discussed isn't an
adult circumcision; it's
a circumcision which takes place on Shabbat.
Rather said R. Ashi: In truth it means the surgeon:
If he came at twilight on the Sabbath, and they warned him, ‘you have no
time, (to do a really
good job)' but he insisted, ‘I have time:"
So he performed it but had not time [to complete it]. Thus the net result
is that he [merely]
made a wound (on Shabbat!), hence he is punished with karet.
WE SUCK OUT. R. Papa said: If a surgeon does not suck [the WOUND], it is
dangerous and he is
dismissed...
<STOP>
Here is a victim of Jewish circumcision (in all likelihood) whose pedantic
neurosis is
indicative of a person most likely traumatized as an infant;
On Thu, 1 May 2008 07:17:15 +0000 (UTC),
<Xns9A91399E64FETheonlyonethatcares@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
"I'll Always Be Here" <aussiessuck@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Craig Stevens <craig_stevens@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>news:6k1i14dldocndnajsf0fg62mei1ktmlagd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:55:41 +0000 (UTC),
>> <Xns9A90A18B747Theonlyonethatcares@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "I'll Always Be
Here"
>> <aussiessuck@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>In metzitzah b'peh, the mohel places his mouth on the freshly
>>>>>>>circumcised penis to draw blood away from the cut.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those who do such should be prosecuted for being pederasts and
child
>>>>>> abusers.
>>>>>
>>>>>So you truly believe that the mohels derive sexual pleasure from this
>>>>>procedure?
>>>>
>>>> I made no such claim that they derived pleasure but the act itself is
>>>> pederastic thus being a form of child abuse.
>>>
>>>Your claim that the act is pederasty contains the legal implication of
>>>sexual pleasure. So either you are kurt knoll lying or kkkramer stupid.
>>>
>>>Circumcision is no more pedophilia than taking a picture of a naked
baby
>>>on a bearskin rug is.
>>
>> True but sucking an infant's penis is pedophilic.
>
>But not in a religious ceremony. Of course cutting someones chest open is
>assault, but surgeons do it all the time.
You are truly hilarious in your pathetic apples to oranges comparison.
>Do you have a point that doesn't prove you have a sick mind.
>
>>>You have a sick mind.
>>
>> It is you who has the sick mind if you condone penis sucking on
infants.
>>
>> Many Gentiles have their babies circumcised too but the doctor doesn't
>> go down and wrap his lips around the penis and suck like the Jews do
>> after removing the foreskin.
>
>And maybe there would be a better crop of gentiles if the doctor did go
>down and wrap his lips around the penis and suck like the jews do after
>removing the foreskin.
You have eliminated all doubts I have had about you. You have no idea how
pathetic you look in your justification of perversion not commanded by the
Law of Moses. I suspect you are a Jew and what the mohel did to you
twisted
your mind as well as many of the others of your tribe who have such vain
reasonings.
The fact that gentile doctors don't suck the penis is proof that it isn't
necessary.
Sucking the penis most likely started with an old Jewish sage who was a
pervert
and liked the taste of blood. Thus a new tradition was born.
<STOP>
Hence those mohels are in truth "sock cuckers" or "nick dibblers."
There is an unsubstantiated rumour mohels are taking infant foreskins and
selling
them as chewing gum to fellow rabbis. :-)
|
