Something I found from another forum

This is something I found on a forum.  These are not my words but I do agree with it
"
I was recently at the hospital having a conversation with the nursing staff. One of them brought up the topic of circumcision. She was telling us about what the urologist she took her 2 year old son to. Apparently when he was circumcised as a newborn the doc only took "a little off the top." She wanted to have him recircumcised because the remnant of foreskin was there and partially covering the glans. The urologist declined the surgery and explained to her that his circumcision was better the way it was done. He stated it was better to leave some foreskin there for the skin to stretch as he got older. He also went on to explain that he has had many teenage boys come in to his office for painful erections that are secondary to scarring from the circ. She is now pregnant with another boy and is considering leaving this baby intact.
I was also amazed that the physicians, OB/Gyn's, in this conversation agreed with the urologist. They all agreed that is was better not to circumcise the baby.
The circumcision consent used at the hospital I work at says nothing about the affects of the scar to the penis as it grows. More parents need to know the complications of the circumcision later in life than just the immediate effects to the baby."