Price of a circumcision procedure

[Bral]

Just mainly out of a curiosity, how much does a circumcision procedure cost? I'm wanting to know what my parents spent on mine without approaching them directly with the question.

[finman]

In the UK it varies - as much as they feel they can charge, £1000 -£1500, or £1050 - £3010. One place does it from £75 which is a snip at half the price In the USA cost per newborn is typically $165. Postneonatal circumcision, however, is 10 times as expensive.

One advertisement says: "Many men talk of the hygienic benefits of this procedure - yet others report that circumcision heightens sexual pleasure". LIES

There is a very good link, in the 'best answer' section
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...7010715AA2exiy

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question...7194652AAu8xl5

By the way it hurts for up to six weeks just so you know and no sex for like two months

.

Why bother? that's going to mess you up man. That's going to hurt a lot. Babies cry for a long time, and they bleed for a while too. is it worth it?

Now we know the price, the true cost is for the male who has a mutilated penis for the rest of his life.

[Joseph]

I recommend the following link:

http://circumstitions.com/$$$.html

Doctor Pollock charges $395.00 for children under 2 months.

http://www.circumcisionvancouver.com/

However, I've heard of doctors charging as much as $800.00.

I'd be weary of Dr. Pollock's site though; he pushes the same outdated crap to sell his business.

Check out some of the shit he has on his site:

Why do parents choose to circumcise their sons?

Research shows that:

It reduces the risk of urinary tract infection. (It most certainly does! http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1043807.html)
...

It reduces the risk of getting some sexually transmitted diseases including Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) and AIDS (HIV). (Newborn children need to be protected against these diseases because...)

It reduces the risk of penile cancer and cervical cancer in partners.(Actually, no, no it doesn't. http://www.fathermag.com/health/circ/acs/)

Circumcised men have less risk of sexual dysfunction later in life. (???)

Why do parents choose not to circumcise their sons?

They are concerned that they may be doing a procedure on an otherwise healthy baby that may cause pain or complications.
They wonder whether their child will wish that he had not been circumcised at a later time.
They are unsure of the medical reasons in favor of a circumcision (No, this belongs up top.)

Most people pushing will tell you it makes the penis "cleaner." But check out Pollock's FAQ page...

Q: There is stool on the gauze around the penis or on the penis after the gauze is removed.

A: Try to clean it as best as you can using soapy water and then rinse it.

And finally:

Q: What complications are possible from circumcision?

A: Complications are rare. Occasionally, there can be bleeding from the circumcision many hours after the procedure. This is treated by putting some pressure with a gauze on the penis for 2-3 minutes to close the oozing blood vessel. (This will be demonstrated to you by our staff). Very rarely, more serious bleeding can occur which may require a visit to the hospital. Infection is also a possible complication. It is extremely rare and can be associated with redness, pus, and a foul smell from the circumcision. It is treated by putting Polysporin five times a day on the penis which usually resolves any infection with one or two days.

OR, part of the glans could get cut off...

http://www.icgi.org/2009/03/atlanta-...other-and-son/

A huckster through and through.

[Mister.Barbecue]

Originally Posted by Joseph

I recommend the following link:

Doctor Pollock charges $395.00 for children under 2 months.

However, I've heard of doctors charging as much as $800.00.

I'd be weary of Dr. Pollock's site though; he pushes the same outdated crap to sell his business.

I did some research into Dr. Pollock's site, and looked at earlier copies of the site. The site is nearly identicaly except for a few changes. His consent form has also changed over the years more significantly.

The changes to his site are: (not necessarily an exhaustive list, but pretty close)
Old site: "Newborn circumcision is a preventative health measure which, when performed properly, is quick and safe, and results in a lifetime of medical benefits."

New Site: "Newborn circumcision when performed properly, is quick and safe. Some studies show that it may produce small benefits. "
His language is much softer but he still links to the medicirc website, which still has the ridiculous line that says "a lifetime of medical benefits" and glorifies circumcision. I guess this is his way of passing the buck while still making circumcision look good.

This didn't used to be on the website:
"For more information regarding Infant circumcision, please visit The College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC.They offer a guide for physicians regarding routine infant male circumcision in light of evidence-based medicine and contemporary principles in ethics, law and human rights."
(Now a broken link. Actual link: cpsbc.ca/files/u6/Circumcision-Infant-Male.pdf. I'm surprised he links to this because the guide is quite anti-circ, actually. Perhaps he put up this link up to cover his ass.)

His more recent consent form has new points: (not an exhaustive list of changes)
"I have carefully considered the risks and benefits of this procedure and have discussed this with my family doctor or pediatrician or other health care professional prior to coming to see Dr. Pollock.

I understand that according to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC Infant Male Circumcision manual from June 2004 that the current medical consensus is that infant male circumcision is not a recommended routine therapeutic procedure.

I understand that I am making consent by proxy for my infant for a non therapeutic procedure."

The last line is really amazing to me. Proxy consent for a non therapeutic procedure? Is it even legal to do that or is it still legal if it ostensibly confers a marginal prophylactic benefit?
I guess it's good that he provides this full disclaimer, but my sense reading it is that he is keenly aware of the possibility for lawsuits further down the line (circumcision is most of what he does and he does LOTS of them). By the way, his prices went up, it's $445 now (it used to be $199 in 2004). He says he does about 2500 per year, so that's over one million dollars gross income from his sexual mutilation practice alone (he also has a vasectomy practice).

Is anyone here from Vancouver? It's upsetting to me that a guy like this operates in my city and is making a killing. I wonder why so many people are going to him, actually. Why do parents go to the trouble of going to an outpatient clinic and getting a circumcision for their son when it's not necessary (or convenient)?

[Dasher]

When doctors are desperate to circumcise, and they think money is an issue, they will drop the price. When my youngest son was born and we said "No thanks" to circumcision, the doctor dropped the price all the way down to $50. We still said no, and he stormed out of the room furious.

So I'm thinking that harvesting baby foreskins for use in the engineering of replacement body parts is what is driving the circumcision business now. The circumcision business itself is only worth $400 to $800 million per year in the U.S. But baby foreskins are worth billions to Novartis.

[Mister.Barbecue]

I read somewhere (can't remember where, sorry) that they don't really need foreskins in order to make things like skin grafts anymore. Do you have any supporting evidence for the claim that doctors tend to make a lot of money selling them? What proportion of doctors/hospitals just throw them away?

[photenman]

Originally Posted by Mister.Barbecue

"I understand that I am making consent by proxy for my infant for a non therapeutic procedure."

The last line is really amazing to me. Proxy consent for a non therapeutic procedure? Is it even legal to do that or is it still legal if it ostensibly confers a marginal prophylactic benefit?

No, it's not legal to do that. Physicians cannot operate without consent; otherwise they commit a battery. U.S. law is clear that parents can only consent to medical treatment. They cannot consent to unnecessary surgery, meaning their consent is invalid. As the Royal Dutch Medical Association wrote in a policy statement, the rule (for physicians and parents) is, do not operate on healthy children.

Moreover, when parents consent to medical treatment, they must act in the best interest of their children, and choose for their children what they would choose for themselves if able to make the decision themselves. Meaning that the argument that parents can circumcise for religious, cultural, or personal reasons is B.S. Parents' religious, cultural or personal beliefs cannot be taken into account.

As to what men would choose for themselves, there is no need to guess. Intact men say no to circumcision.

[broken]

Originally Posted by Joseph

I'd be weary of Dr. Pollock's site though; he pushes the same outdated crap to sell his business.

Organisations such as Trading Standards or their equivalents cover sales of goods or services on the internet too, so contact them (with references to research) when you read crap like that.

[DPX1]

Originally Posted by Bral

Just mainly out of a curiosity, how much does a circumcision procedure cost? I'm wanting to know what my parents spent on mine without approaching them directly with the question.

I don't know when or where you were born, but up until the 90's the procedures were still covered by many insurance policies in the US.

[frizzen]

I don't know how much was paid to have me mutilated, but do know that I'd pay just about anything to be intact.