During his infancy his mother was from time to time advised on matters of child hygiene by a medical practitioner who was a close relative of her own. He seems to have had a mania for performing the operation of circumcision, and very few children who came within his ken escaped this fate. His own children were circumcised.
In spite of the fact that our patient's prepuce and glans were normal in every respect, this surgeon never failed to impress on the patient's mother the inestimable advantages to be obtained from circumcision. There were evidently good psychological reasons for this vicarious sacrifice on his part, but, except in so far as these contributed to a somewhat intimidating personality and thereby increased the child's apprehensions concerning this father substitute, they need not concern us. He seems to have been a man of sombre disposition, with a heavy, overbearing manner, and the patient as a child was not slow to accept the uneasy valuation of his possibilities current among his holiday playmates, the doctor's own children.
On the occasion of a particular holiday visit the mother's scruples were finally overcome, and she consented to have the circumcision performed on her child. The final step in gaining her consent took the form of visiting the nursery. The patient was awakened out of his sleep by having his bedclothes abruptly pulled away: He woke up to find the sinister figure of the doctor leaning over the bed. His penis was unceremoniously seized by the surgeon's left hand, with the right the motion of cutting was imitated and the mother, who stood on the opposite side of the bed, was asked to note how simple a matter it was to cut off the foreskin, or words to that effect. She was rather concerned at the whole performance, and observed that he son showed signs of panic, but she did not interfere with the demonstration.
The technique must have been rather crude, because the process of healing was delayed. The wound had to be dressed daily, and each dressing aroused agonized anticipations and was followed by wailing protestation. On protestation in particular took the form of a reproach directed at his mother.
The day after the operation he is said to have cried out to his mother, 'Why did you let him cut it off?' After a week's dressings the wound began to heal by granulation, and there is no exact record of its subsequent course. There was, however, no doubt in the mother's mind that the experience was an agonizing one for the child, and she regretted her decision for a long time afterwards.
