Anesthesia during circumcision
Hello,
A question that bothers me and may become relevant for me soon.
I corresponded with you once, and it came up from your words (and I agree with you) that in order to surrender my soul to something, I need to be convinced of it on a much higher level than the level of conviction required to say the blessing of everything before drinking water.
And now to the question: Circumcision (the act itself) is in my opinion a very difficult and cruel act and perhaps even immoral. And even if we assume that I am convinced enough to do it, why do it without anesthesia? Is it moral to hurt a child without reason? I don’t know of any religious/halakhic argument that prohibits this. I believe that you circumcised your sons without anesthesia.. What do you think?
Hello generation.
First, if anesthesia in a word is possible, then you don’t need spicot to do it. And if not – then what good are spicots? Only if there are sides here and there, then perhaps the question of spicots is relevant.
I think that in principle there should be no problem putting the baby to sleep. The problems raised are side-tracked and unconvincing (mainly conservative). See Comprehensive review By Avraham Steinberg in Tecumin 22 (also appears online on the Daat website, but for some reason it doesn’t come up for me).
The act is not that painful for the baby, as it is done in one second. I don’t think it is fundamentally different from the anesthetic injection.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
