In her article “Second--Even Third--Thoughts on Circumcision,” (Jan. 16), Robin Abcarian describes how R. Wayne Griffiths, founder of RECAP--one of a network of anti-circumcision groups--claims his sex life greatly improved after stretching his foreskin.
As a urologist, it’s easy to argue, not with Griffiths’ personal feelings, but with the implication that circumcision affects sexual performance. During the past 25 years, neither I nor my associates have ever seen one person complain of diminished sexual capacity as a result of being circumcised.
On the contrary, many uncircumcised men presented themselves with sexual problems due to acute and chronic recurring infections, scarring of the tip of the foreskin, and adhesions between the foreskin and the head of the penis that tore with intercourse. Many required surgical repair, with excellent results if the scarring was not too far advanced.
There is no serious medical data that proves circumcision causes sexual dysfunction. Do you really think that 70% of American males are walking around chafed, uncomfortable and sexually diminished? If this were true, there would be no need for anti-circumcision groups.
I do not advocate that every male must be circumcised. Parents have a right to do what they think is best for their children based on valid information.
False threats of sexual dysfunction and emotionally charged arguments hardly qualify as valid reasons to deter you from doing what is best for your son or giving up your beliefs.
DR. SAMUEL A. KUNIN