I had a circumcision on Monday - for medical reasons.
Brief background - a few years ago my frenulum had become short make it painful to full back my foreskin when erect. Also my foreskin had become a little tight but not so much to be a problem. So I had a frenuloplasty (Z-Cut) to try and lengthen my frenulum.
It didn't really work - the frenulum stayed about the same length but was now scar tissue so less stretchy then ever.
I tried to work with it but, this summer I saw the urology specialist again and he immediately said he would refer me for circumcision, which I accepted. It was a very short consultation and he wasn't one for discussing the pros and cons and types of procedure. However, as I was leaving he said "or we could try a frenuloplasty revision, which do you want". Again he offered no advice other than saying that I could leave it open and decide on the day of the operation which way I wanted to go.
I read up on circumcision with my wife and after reading lots of views against I decided that I would give the frenuloplasty revision a go - if it didn't work out I could always do the circumcision at a later date.
I had also read up about circumcisions so had a good idea of the different cut styles.
On this Monday I checked into the hospital and when the doctor came to see me I showed him the letter saying that I could choose a frenuloplasty revision if I preferred and he was very good. I gave my reasoning that circumcision was pretty drastic and final so would like to consider other possible options first. He confirmed that he had already seen that option in the referral letter and asked to inspect the frenulum. He concluded that he was happy to give it a go but recommended that because it was so scarred success would be very unlikely and that circumcision was the best course. I was happy with that as at least he had looked at the possibility.
He then described the procedure for a 'Normal' circumcision. Scar line a cm or two so below the glans, medium tight foreskin. He even described the different skin tone colour above and below the scar line. I was happy with this as that was the style I would have chosen myself.
Operation done, I was in the recovery ward and the doctor came to see me before I left. he said that all had gone well and that he had decided to do a 'Low and Loose' cut based on my concern that a circumcision was drastic.
Really disappointed and annoyed about this.
Basically he described one procedure, got my consent and then did another procedure. There was no medical reason dictating the need to change. Fine if he thought that was a good idea but he should have discussed it with me first.
Because if he had discussed it with me first I would have said "no, hell no".
Couple of reasons :-
I am a grower so when flacid I have a lot of loose foreskin. The type of cut that he has done means that only a small amount of foreskin has been removed which means that when flacid the glans is mostly covered but has the tip protruding and exposed - doesn't look too good.
Rather than have a nice flat scar line on the shaft I think I am going to be left with an ugly ridge scar just behind the glans.
There is no inner foreskin remaining which I understand is the most sensitive.
I suspect that this cut is also final - there is no way in reverting it back to the cut I wanted and thought I was getting - is that correct?