Physical Examination & Diagnostic Procedures Forum.
www.PhysicalExamForum.com
www.PhysicalExaminationForum.com


VoyForums
GIVE FREE FOOD
www.TheHungerSite.com
Protect Habitat for Free
www.TheRainforestSite.com
Non-profit ad served by VoyForums...

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678910 ]
Subject: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
(Smedley on behalf of) Fiona.
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: Sunday, October 07, 2012, 07:57: am

Fiona: Please note I have reposted your entry because you started the thread with "Re" and as such it is liable to get deleted. (See the instruction at the top of the page)

Replies can now be posted here and the thread will be preserved.

THE FOLLOWING IS AS POSTED BY FIONA ON OCTOBER 7TH 2012:

I did several stints many years ago as a nursing assistant to different doctors visiting schools to carry out medical exams. It is true that many boys do have an erection during the exam but it is normal at that age. This was in the UK and judging by some of the comments the procedures in different areas and countries vary considerably.

The examinations are always carried out by a female doctor and female nursing assistance for both girls and boys. The duration for each is about 20 to 30 mins, and they were seen individually. The genital exam is usually about half to two thirds through when the patient had become used to the process and normally takes only half a minute or so. The boys would strip down to underpants on arrival, which is how they would remain until the genital exam, and then asked to dress immediately afterwards. When I first started it was usual for the assistant to leave the room. But a requirement was introduced that the doctor should have an assistant present all the time. Most of the doctors I worked with would move on to the genital exam without warning the patient, by pulling down the underwear or simply pulling the front forward to expose the penis and testes whilst they are standing. Sometimes prior to that it would be clear that the patient was uncomfortable and showing tendency to erect, but the doctor usually waited and did other things until it subsided. They were instructed not to handle an erect penis, but sometimes it was unavoidable. It was either that or postpone the examination. I've known doctors send them away to return later, but most just carry on and ignore it. They had what is called a tanner scale and the doctors job was to assess this and also look for abnormalities. This involves a certain amount of intimate handling, (retracting the foreskin etc) and they will often erect then. You can often tell that it's going to happen and occasionally it's very quick. I've never seen an emission, and it is very rare but I have heard of it happening. Doctors will do everything they possibly can to avoid it.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, October 07, 2012, 08:28: am

Fiona, thank you for posting your recollections. As you will have seen, this subject has attracted much interest on previous threads - especially if someone such as yourself, who was on the 'other side' of these medicals - contributes.

I'm sure the same will happen here, and I hope you will feel able and willing to elaborate on your recollections.

As someone with a particular interest in this subject, I would like to begin by asking you:

1) In which years where you working in this field?

2) You gave some detail about how the boys were examined; could you tell us something of how the girls were done?

3) What was the age range of the pupils you were seeing?

4) The genital exam done on boys usually consisted of feeling the testicles, checking for hernia, and (as you mentioned) retraction of the foreskin. Was this the model that was followed? Was there any palpation along the shaft of the penis?

I will leave my questions there for now: I do have others in mind but I have no wish to 'swamp' you! Others will also have questions for you, I'm sure - especially if our friend Jean (Hi Jean) is around, and it is as well to avoid getting bogged-down.

By the way, you will note that any replies you type will have "Re" in the 'Message subject' box - this is normal and done automatically, it's just when "Re" is put in the title of a thread that there's a problem.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Boys erection during physical (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, October 10, 2012, 07:10: am

I didn't read previous threads, apart from the one I commented on - which now seems to have disappeared. I was looking up something completely unrelated when I encountered it.

In answer to your queries:-

1. It was in the 1970's and 80's. I can't remember the exact dates. This was something we were asked to do from time to time. The doctors were more specialised, but they only did a few weeks a year of school visits.

2. The girls exams were less invasive. It was more verbal with a list of questions, whereas the boys were primarily based on observation. The object was to monitor progress and identify problems when they appeared. Which is what was achieved.

3. Mainly they were 13 years old plus or minus a few months. Most visits would cover an entire year of pupils which could be anything up to around 300. We also did other screening such as TB, which involved different ages. But normally they were between 10 and 14.

4. Sometimes there would be more detailed examination. For example if there was a suspicion of abnormal discharge, in which case the doctor would use thumb and forefinger. But that wasn't usual, and only if necessary. The instructions were quite strict and only to report. But obviously false positives are a nuisance, and some doctors are more detailed than others.

I've taken re: out. I'm not sure what that is about. As you say it happens automatically.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]


[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Mike A.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, October 07, 2012, 02:36: pm

Yeah, Fiona, that rings true with my experience. I had two different exams from the same NP who did pediatric exams when I was 13 and again at 15 and I got an erection each time. She had done one on me a few years earlier, and I liked her, but I did not get hard then as best I remember. But in fact I was erect before the exam at age 15 even started. I was surprised about that because the first time I was very embarrassed. I was probably red-faced throughout that exam but as it began I realized to my horror I was very turned on. Since I have a foreskin she tested that both times, too. I got worried I would ejaculate but fortunately I did not.

Since then I have always found nurses and female doctors very sexy and I think it came from those two experiences. I wonder how many others were affected the same way by your experiences, Fiona.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Filipino Orderly
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, October 08, 2012, 12:20: pm

I do not have extensive experience in being present with physical examinations for boys. However, I have a great deal of experience with giving boys enemas, but more of the boys have been adolescents as usually younger pediatric patient enemas where I work are done by the midwives and other female asides. At puberty, it is a male orderly, even though the patient may be confined in the pediatric ward.

I have found that some but not most pre puberty boys get erections with enemas. Almost all boys going through puberty get hard however, and while certainly not the majority, I have seen and tried to reassure the older boys when occasionally there has been a spontaneous ejaculation.

I don't have much experience even with my own 4 sons on erection status for clinical phyicals as my wife is an MD who has done their routine physicals, and even on the rare occasion she has referred one of our sons to one of her colleagues for specialty, she has been the one to take them.

However, I can say that pre puberty it was not uncommon for them to receive erections at enema time, and it was almost always the case during puberty. Presently one son is in early puberty, one late puberty, and two are now past puberty. All of them, even today, usually are erect during their enema. It is natural, normal, and not a big thing. As they have grown up with regular enemas, that may assist in the lack of embarrassment, plus to some extent I thnk we may be more accepting of being seen nude in the Philippines. I say that from a cultural prospective as with our tropical climate it is very common for boys and even teen agers to be in public without a shirt, and sadly, it is not uncommon to see small children playing without any clothes or being bathed on the walkway by the street due to our high poverty rate.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Rodger
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2012, 09:11: pm

without a shirt, and sadly, it is not uncommon

Why do you say sadly?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Filipino. orderly
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2012, 10:27: pm

To clarify, the sadly was referring to the next part, children without any clothes and or taking their bath on the walkway of public streets in slum areas. To be young and without wearing a shirt in a warm tropical climate is not necessarily sad. Regardless of economics often older boys and mnen often wear sans or I think you call them tank tops in the US....shirts without sleeves. Regular short sleeve shirts and polo type shirts are also very common, especially for middle and upper class.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, October 11, 2012, 04:01: am

As "Smedley" has said in a former message, the second one of this discussion, I have some further questions to "Fiona",
who has decided that the presence of an assistant was required in the room of examination all the time aside the doctor since you said that it was not the case at the beguinning of your job with a doctor, what was the explanation and when did it happened?

"But a requirement was introduced that the doctor should have an assistant present all the time".

also what does it means when you said that some doctors send boys who had obviously their penis in erection away and told them to return later instead of waiting and doing other things until it subsided ? did the boys have in that case to dress again because they were in underwear since the start of the exam ? it was a great loss of time?

and last question : how were pezrformed the examination of the girls of the same age since you said that it was less invasive than for boys and more a verbal with a list of questions whereas that of boys was more based on observations ? did the girls have nevertheless to undress in panties at the start of the exam? and how could you explain this strange difference nat physicals of boys and girls?
" The girls exams were less invasive. It was more verbal with a list of questions, whereas the boys were primarily based on observation. The object was to monitor progress and identify problems when they appeared. Which is what was achieved".

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, October 12, 2012, 10:22: am

Fiona, thank you for addressing the points I raised.

Please don't worry about the "Re" problem in respect of this thread, there's no need to remove the offending letters from any response you post to a current thread: that is to say, one on the 'front page' such as this is. The "Re" will appear in the message subject box anyway and is meant to. It's only when a new thread is STARTED with "Re" that there's a problem. I think in your case this may have occurred because you replied to a thread in the archives and that will then have started afresh at the top of the current topics. Anyway....

I'm assuming the thread you referred to in your 2nd post was the one started by 'Mandy'. Unfortunately, she didn't return to answer queries which were raised by me and others. That thread is still in the archives here.

The dates you gave of when you were doing this work certainly make sense to me, as by the early to mid 80s school medicals were starting to 'wither on the vine', as it were; though as with many aspects of this subject there were variations from region to region.

Like Jean, I would be grateful if you would give a few more details about the girls' examinations and how far they had to undress. I'm assuming they would have been stripped to the waist and had the stethoscope on their chests and backs.

A common thread which runs through accounts of UK school medicals (and often those from other countries) is that girls were not examined as intimately as boys nor, as a consequence, did they have to take off so much of their clothing. Another former school nurse, Sara, who was with us in this discussion some months ago, pointed out that the view was taken that there was little or nothing to be gleaned from looking at a girl's vulva and, unless a specific problem was mentioned by the girl being examined (or an attending parent) the doctors she worked with did not do so. As I have pointed out on many occasions though, not all examining teams worked by the same methods (even within the same area) and I have read many accounts where the doctor would pull a girl's knickers open and take a quick look down.

It certainly wasn't uncommon for boys to be instructed to strip naked as soon as they entered the examination room (that happened to me on 2 occasions) and they would be nude for the whole procedure, including eyesight tests. The way you operated - boys stripped to underpants which were then pulled down or open by the doctor - was also a common practice, as was doing it without warning! A feature (and often a complaint of those who were examined) of most school medicals was that things were done without explanation or benefit of words such as 'please' or 'thank you' - you were just told what to do and were expected to do it.

I, too, was a little surprised by the notion of getting boys to return at a later time if they presented with an erection. Since the doctors had been instructed not to touch an erect penis, this would, as you said, have left them with little option. There could have course have been no guarantee that the boy would not have had an erection the second time around, and this would have only served to increase his embarrassment. I can also imagine some teasing from others in cases where someone had had to make another visit to the medical room. Like so many things that are supposedly designed to avoid problems, it seems to me that this policy had the potential to increase them.

I'd like to ask you a couple more questions.

1) Roughly, what percentage of boys would you say had partial or full erections?

2) Did any boys or girls show any reluctance to undress when instructed to? By this I mean not just that you would detect a natural reticence or modesty, but did you have any who would not undress as far as you'd told them to, or any refusals?

3) What was the rate of parental attendance at the medicals?

4) Am I correct in assuming that your part in the proceedings was to get the pupil undressed, weigh them, check their height and witness them being examined by the doctor?

Many thanks.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jack
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, October 12, 2012, 09:47: pm

I would also like to make a few questions to Fiona, if she is still around.
You say that most, almost all, boys were 13 years old. So you must have seen a big veriety of genitals, since at that age some boys are not into puberty yet, some are just starting, and some are well into it. At that age I had full pubic hair already, while other boys same age were still smooth, though still capable of erection.
Also penis size didn't have anything to do with this develoment, since some boys were quite big even though they were still smooth. So there was a big variety at that age, from very small genitalia to very big, and from late to early developers.
Can you give us an account of this from what you saw, and which ones tended to erect most?

You also said that the exams were held for the whole school of around 300 boys of that age all at once.
What was the setup for preparing all those boys for the exam? Since you said that the boys entered the exam room in just briefs there must have been school staff to control and guide all those boys in the waiting room to undress in briefs. Were there any female staff or teachers in charge of those boys?
As you say, erections could be seen even while the boys were wearing briefs, since this forms a prominent tent in the briefs, so these school staff must have also seen this in many of the boys in the waiting area.
Any comments about these?
Thanks.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
To Smedley
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, October 12, 2012, 10:02: pm

Are these type of exams still held in UK schools?
In what way do they vary from Fiona's description?
Was there a lot of nudity involved, especially in front of non-medical staff, like parents, chaperones, or school staff?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, October 13, 2012, 07:04: am

To answer the questions put to me - not sure if this was also from 'Jack' but I suspect it may be, looking at the time of posting. Here is an answer to a similar question put to me on an earlier thread.

Quote< There were no teachers present at any either of the school medical examinations I had, and I have never heard of it happening elsewhere in the UK. Of course, I cannot categorically say that such a thing never happened in the UK, but I would be very surprised if it had.

On the previous thread, the former school nurse (Sara) said that she too had never encountered this. She was in that job from 1966 to 1980, and would have officiated at thousands of medicals.

Certainly in the schools I attended, no supervision from teachers would have been necessary when the examinations were taking place. It was pretty common practice for pupils to be called out of their class two or three at a time - any more than that would have been impractical because the medical team would take around 15 minutes to see each boy, and the powers-that-be wouldn't have wanted us having any more time out than was strictly required! As I've mentioned previously, it was usually rather like a conveyor-belt: typically, two in the exam room (one with nurse and one with doctor) and one or two waiting outside.

As for chaperones, as someone who grew up in 1960s Britain I can tell you this was an unheard-of concept back then. There would have been a few procedures done at hospital consultations where a nurse (just about always female then) would be present, but that would tend to be more for general 'patient re-assurance' (sometimes this was literally a hand-holding exercise, and with either gender of patient) rather than because of any suggestion that there could be inappropriate behaviour on the part of the examiner, which of course is the primary reason for third-party presence these days. > end quote.

My interpretation of Fiona's reference to boys "stripping down to underpants on arrival" is that she was saying this is what they did on arrival in the medical room, not outside of it. I'm sure she will clarify.

There were some instances (some have been detailed on earlier threads) where schools didn't have dedicated medical rooms. Where this was the case an office may have been used (my first medical was done in the headmaster's office) but if no-one was willing and/or able to vacate their office, the examinations were done behind a screen in the assembly hall. Where this happened, those waiting to be seen could number just two or three, but may well have been considerably more.

Once again, practices varied. The doctor conducting the examinations would advise the school how he or she wanted the 'conveyor belt' to run and the level of undressing that would be required. I have heard cases of: a) no undressing until behind the screen; b) boys stripped to the waist (trousers kept on) girls in vest and knickers; c) boys down to underpants, girls in vest and knickers.

Where this system was used (and I only ever heard of it being used in primary schools) it is quite possible that teachers were around - as indeed would be parents - but this wouldn't be thought of as untoward in those days. It has to be borne in mind that it was quite normal back then for boys and girls to strip down to their underwear to do PE lessons.

So whilst teachers may have seen pupils undressed as far as I have detailed above, this would have been no different to how they would have seen them doing PE - that of course is very different to them being on the other side of the screen (or in any room used for the purpose) and seeing the actual examinations which, as I said, I personally have not heard of so far as the UK is concerned.

As for nowadays, it is no exaggeration to say that the practices of yesteryear would be utterly unthinkable now. Some schools do medical examinations but they are very different affairs indeed. There was quite a furore a few years ago when the government wanted (in a bid to tackle the obesity problem) to introduce weight and height checks for all pupils. There were cries of "nanny state" and suchlike - and bear in mind those being checked would only have to take off their shoes! The programme went ahead but less than half of parents gave their permission for their offspring to be included.

As I understand it, many schools do some tests when children begin school at age 5 or so, but this will mostly be sight and hearing tests, and assessment of 'cognitive function'.

I hope that addresses the points raised, feel free to ask anything else.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2012, 06:17: am

The presence of an assistant was a policy change to protect the doctor against accusations of abuse by having a witness present. I never heard of any complaint, but this is the kind of thing that was increasingly introduced. Previously I suppose it was felt that there would be less potential for embarassment if the doctor was alone.

The occasions when boys were asked to return were quite rare, and they would just come back when all the other boys had been seen. They were not differentiated in any way except that their exams were done in two parts. If any teasing took place it would be only because they discussed it themselves. They were not told the reason why the exam was carried out in two parts in their case. Hearing and eyesight was also done later in such cases as far as I can recall.

The object of these exams was to screen for any abnomalities that could require attention. Apart from the gender specific items, the procedure was the same for boys and girls. Obviously with boys it is easier to pick up abnormalities visually, and an erection was not a hinderance, just something to avoid if possible for the sake of the patient. Most doctors were comfortable with it and very occasionally one would wait to see how the penis looked when it was fully erect if she thought something might be amiss.

My job was simply to support the doctor and provide and collect equipment. Two or three pupils would be waiting in a nearby room collected there by the staff and I would go and get them one at a time. No undressing or any tests were done outside the medical room, with the sole exception sometimes of checking for head lice. That was one particular job I did from time to time, and also checking for warts and verrucas on hands and feet, but that was carried out in the medical room. The doctor did everything else including completing the records. No parents were ever present at any of the examinations I was at, nor anyone else. That was completely out of the question, and none of the details were ever shared with any of the school staff.

Some of the pupils were a bit shy, but I don't remember any actual refusals. Erections were usually very embarrassing for them, and you always have to be sensitive and understanding about that. It's difficult to put a percentage on it, because some days there would be a lot, and others hardly any. I would say typically about half would begin to straighten during the time they they were exposed, and they would be covered up and dressing before it developed any further. But sometimes they would erect strongly and quickly especially when they were touched, and occasionally very strongly and then you could see the heartbeat pulsing the penis as it stood up. Irrespective of whether they were well developed or not it could still happen.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Curious
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2012, 09:38: am

Fiona, did the doctor retract the foreskin if the boy was erect?
Also, why was the doctor always a woman?
Was this the schools or the medical policy?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Paul
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, December 10, 2012, 02:29: pm

My experience was quite similar. I would have been 13, and we were called in twos, and I was in the second pair to go to the medical room. We waited in a side room with the one who was still waiting and when the first boy came out from his exam, he was talking about being stripped naked. Standing there with only his watch on was what he said. I was wondering what this exam was all about, because we had no advance notice that there were to be medical exams. When it was my turn to go in I was only asked to strip to underpants. So I assumed then the other lad was just making a joke to get us all worried. I'd been in there quite a while having all sorts of tests, and I was quite relaxed about it. Then the doctor got me to stand next to a chair and she called the nurse over and then reached down and pulled my underpants forward. I was so surprised because they didn't give any clue, and the funny thing is that it didn't even cross my mind I would get an erection. They both looked at my penis and I could feel a flush of embarrassment. Not too bad, but then I could feel it begin to stiffen. The doctor touched it and must have noticed it straightening, though I was trying to suppress it. She slid my underpants down out of the way with both hands, which sent me into an uncontrollable erection. The doctor said a couple of times not to worry because it's normal etc. I was actually worried because I'd never been in such a situation before, but they were both of them smiling and I felt really silly. The doctor had a really good look around and retracted the foreskin, and it became quite a pleasant feeling which I'd not felt before. Obviously I know now, but I didn't then. Afterwards was an anticlimax, because I was asked to dress and I had hearing tests, and that was about it. I never said anything about what happened to the other boys, in case I was the only one.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Bob
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2012, 05:07: pm

"Fiona, did the doctor retract the foreskin if the boy was erect?
Also, why was the doctor always a woman?"


The simple answer is that a male doctor should not be initimately examining another male, particularly with a procedure involving retraction of the foreskin.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jack Curious
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2012, 07:55: pm

I agree with you in a way.
I would certainly feel more uncomfortable with a male giving me an intimate genital exam rather than a female.
But I suspect this was not the real reason for the school employing only female doctors for these exams.
It was probably because the same doctors also examined the girls at the school, and so they did not want male doctors to examine the girls,.which would make them more embarassed and uncomfortable. The same old double standard, but I suppose in this case it helped.
I could be wrong, so I will let Fiona comment on this and answer these questions.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012, 04:34: am

one more question to "fiona" who has not answered on one point to my previous ones.

When at a school phyical, the doctor told to a boy to leave of the examination room to come again after when his erection was finished, what happened then ?, did the boy dress again before leaving the room since you said that the boys undressed once in the room, not before outside or in a locker room?

In that case, it was really a loss of time?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012, 04:29: am

I presume that "jack curious" was right on his comment about the realreason of the presence of women doctors at school physicals. Of course, it was in a certain way the result of a double standard since the school did not want to make girls examined by male doctors ( it was not true many years ago) while it did not matter if boys were examined by female doctors but it was logical in my opinion: the modesty of boys was not considered as so important as those of girls (and it is an historical point of view),so if the school could not hire two doctors, it was more logical to hire a woman doctor, more over since many boys preferred to be examined by a woman doctor than by a male doctor when they had an intimate check of their genitals (don't forget that they were already used since their childhood to be examined mainly by women pediatricians)

You must alspo take in account the fact that the job of school doctors was generally in most countries not well paid, so few male doctors wanted to do it while women liked to do it because this job left them time to care of their family.

It is the major reason why in Russia most of the military doctors are women doctors at draft physicals and it was the same until last year in Germany when there was still a mandatory military service. It was for money reasons and also because male doctors did not like to do a job where there was mainly routine exams.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012, 11:48: am

Fiona, thanks for your further comments.

I'm a little surprised by your saying that the doctor did everything except the checking of hands and feet, and looking at hair and scalp. In every other set-up I have heard of, the nurse (or healthcare/nursing assistant) would weigh the pupils, measure their height and conduct their eye tests. I suppose it just goes to show how practices varied.

You are certainly correct to say that it would be very embarrassing for a boy undergoing a medical to have an erection. This was the great fear (despite some of the 'bravado talk' of some) when we knew we were to be examined. As you have said, you handled such occurrences with as much sensitivity as you could: this was not universally the case.

I know from many people on this forum and others (as well as personal experience and other anecdotal evidence) about the unfeeling way many medicals were done. Full nudity from start to finish was often - literally - the order of the day, and many were left feeling as though they had been processed like so much meat, rather than humans. School clinics, in particular, seem to have had a very bad reputation for this.

I was a little surprised by your saying that the pupils you examined were "mainly 13 years old plus or minus a few months". As ever with these things, there were variations, but that age group seems somewhat odd as a 'target'. School medicals were usually done at entry to primary school, on leaving or joining senior school, and on or a year or so before leaving school altogether. So that would be at 5/10 or 11, and 15 or 16. I was only examined at 5 and 16, though I know of some people who had 5 or 6 medicals in their school life.

Do you know what was the theory behind examining this particular age group? Was it perhaps that they would be well into puberty at that age and the idea was to check how that was progressing?

Finally, you said: "No parents were ever present at any of the examinations I was at, nor anyone else. That was completely out of the question, and none of the details were ever shared with any of the school staff."

I'm assuming that your reference to "out of the question" applies to the "anyone else", rather than to the parents. Just about all parents (almost universally mothers) would be present at medicals done on 5 year olds, and though this figure would be much lower for those aged 10 or more, parental attendance would not be unusual. Indeed, some mothers saw their 15 or 16-year-old sons examined, even though they were well aware the boys would be subjected to genital inspection and could be nude during the whole medical.

Since you were doing this work for some years it is indeed surprising to me that you said no parents were ever present. Certainly when I was at school in the 1960s, parental presence at medicals was actively encouraged - and others on here have attested to the fact that this was the case in later years. The note I was given for my leaver's medical said "The doctor will welcome your attendance and the opportunity to discuss your child's welfare with you." "You" in this case meant the parents of course, since the note was addressed to them - and was given to me in a sealed envelope marked "To the parents or guardians of ......" We who were to be examined were pretty much made to feel our only part in the proceedings was to turn up and do what we were told!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Boys erection during physical


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2012, 10:22: pm

I did do this work over a number of years, but it wasn't a full time occupation. Usually it would be for a few weeks and some years I did it and some years I didn't. As I said before, there was never anyone else present. Maybe in other areas the practice was different.

These were routine screening exams, and I'm sure they were also done for other ages, maybe in a different form, but I was not involved with any other age groups. There is talk of double standards on here, but I think it was more practical to send female staff to carry out this work. A lot of issues were picked up and the genital part of the exam was no less important than any other part, and I suppose on balance, as someone has pointed out already, most boys would feel less comfortable being handled by another male. Children of this age group, particularly boys, will often not report concerns they might have. So that makes screenings like this very much a worthwhile and important exercise.

Someone was asking if foreskin retraction took place if there was an erection, and the answer is that normally the doctor always checked the glans, but in most cases the foreskin self retracts slightly when it erects and that is usually sufficient. If it doesn't the doctor would do that but only fully retract it if there was an unusual feature that indicated a more detailed examination. It was usual to avoid full erections if possible, but some doctors on occasion could induce one if there was a suspected condition that merited it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Jean.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2012, 12:12: pm

Hi Jean, hope you are well. As always, you make some interesting and valid points. I wanted to address the question of the gender of doctors who carried out school medical examinations. I am only speaking about the UK here, and I am referring to school medicals as carried out until they began to disappear in the late 80s or thereabouts - as ever there were variations.

I was first examined in school at the age of 5 by a female doctor, and it was pretty unusual at the end of the 1950s to see a female doctor in any role, most GPs were male, and though you were probably likely to see a few female doctors working in hospitals, they were still well outnumbered by the males. I was again examined by a female doctor when I left school at 16 and, by that time, I had heard quite a few accounts of these examinations and it seemed that the one constant factor was that the doctor would be female- and by this time of course more women had entered the profession, though of course the ratio was nowhere near the 50/50 mark that we know (at least in the UK) today.

It certainly was not unknown for male doctors to carry out school medicals, and on both genders, but this was pretty much the minority. I have a female friend who was seen by a male doctor at the school medical she had done at the age of 14 in the mid-1980s. She was only required to remove her blouse for her chest to be listened to with the stethoscope. I have to say I never heard of a girl older than 5 being examined naked by a doctor of either gender.

You may recall I raised the question of doctor gender with the former school nurse, Sara, who joined us in discussion here on this subject last year. She replied that the School Health Service employed paediatricians to carry out this work, and in those days most paediatricians were female. This made complete sense to me, since I know that paediatrics was a branch of the profession which had a very high proportion of women. I simply hadn't taken account of the fact that the SHS would have made a point of using paediatricians, I had assumed they would use local GPs to do the work.

This brings me to another aspect of UK school medicals which should be made clear. In the years we are talking about, UK schools had nothing whatever to do with the employment of the doctors and nurses who carried out school medical exams. This may seem strange in view of the fact that these things were called 'school medicals', and there were references on the paperwork we were given to 'the school doctor' and there were 'school clinics': indeed, the clinics officially had that title - it was on a sign outside the very premises.

It has to be borne in mind that, whilst UK school medical examinations were done IN schools, they were not done BY schools or, indeed, FOR schools. The reasons for this lie in the origin of the examinations.

The school medical was instituted in the UK by Act of Parliament in 1907. This of course was at at time when the UK National Health Service didn't exist, and would not do so for another 40 years. Many people could not afford the services of a doctor, and those that gave some of their time for free were few and far between. There was concern that the nation's children were growing up with poor life expectancy and potentially debilitating defects that, if caught early, could be corrected with the aid of the school clinics that were also set up. The information which flowed from these checks led to the provision of such things as 'free school milk' and 'free school dinners'. A school dental service was also established.

The authorities reasoned that the best place to do these checks was in schools: they had the registers, the premises, and the means to organise them and notify the parents. Most obvious of all of course was the plain and simple fact that schools were the best place to catch whole groups of children neatly gathered together!

The School Health Service was run by the local city or town council (overseen by locally elected councillors who would also be responsible for a diverse range of things from schools themselves to road maintenance and parks, etc) and this was the case until 1974 when, following a big reorganisation of local government, responsibility for it passed to the NHS.

Schools could refer pupils to the SHS if, for example, there was unsatisfactory explanation given for prolonged periods of a child's absence. In such cases, the school would make their request to the SHS but the doctor would have to agree that there were sufficient grounds for investigation and, if there were, the parents would have to be involved and information given to the school regarding the findings would be the absolute minimum they needed to know. Fiona was quite correct in saying that no details of the examinations were passed to school staff.

Finally, I think you were correct, Jean, in saying that the modesty of boys was not taken into account. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence to support that assertion, and Sara's comment that in those days the modesty of children - especially that of boys - was not normally considered, adds further weight to it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, October 19, 2012, 10:33: am

some comments about the two last messages of "Smedley " :

first I know much more the french procedure at my time than the procedure applied in other countries even if by discussing in several forums, I have read a lot about them with the risk to read fictional relation,s and not true relations.

As regards France in the 50's and 60's, there was at least an annual school physical which was really mandatory. If you did not come to the physicals on the day you were summuned with your classmates, you were always summoned an other day with an other class of boys of the same age or younger of onevyear otr older of one year. Our parents receioved always a letter at hone and we were also informed by the vice-principal or the PE teacher at the end of a Pe lesson a few days before. It means that we had to note the day of the physicals and to come that daty at school with a new brief or a clean brief as well as clean socks and to take a bath or a shower or to wash for the boys who had no bath room which was not unusual at that time. These instruction were well respected by all boys in my opinion.

Our parents were never invited to come to school for the school physicals . the only time where they come was for the first year of elmementary school but the exam did not take place in the school but in a medical center.

So they knew that we had a school physicals every yearr after and they knew that it was mandatory, and they received a few days after a second letter to give them the results but it was not much detailed except if some issues had been detected which required to come to a doctor's office or a medical clinic.

I don't know if my mother would have come if she had received a letter from the school which had invited her to be present but I presume that she had come if she had thought that it was really useful. Of course, I would have not liked it but I am not sure that my opinion would have been taken in account.

So there were no parents but not to protect the modesty of the boys but because it was not required by the doctor or the school.

We were always until the last year of high school in an only boy school. It was some years after I left my school that all schools became mixed in France.

We had school physicals from the first year of elementary school at 5 or 6 age to the last year of high school at 17 or 18 age.generally the physicals were planned a few weeks after the beguinning of the school year but when I was in middle school from 11 age to 14 age, we had more than one school physical.

There was a first one rather thorough at the first term and two others at the beguinning of each term but less complete and performed only by the nurse without the presence of a doctor. The nurse checked mainly the weigh-in, the balance, the spine and the eye's. It lasted a more short time than the first examination with the doctor.

In middle class and high school, there was a permanent school nurse and a nurse' office where the school physicals were performed. Just aside, there was a locker room where we were instructed to undress normally in briefs by group of about 15 students or a little less, it was normally half of the class, in the locker room whre we all together undressed ein briefs even if we were among the last to be examined, we were supervised by our Pe teacher or occasionnally by a monitor.

In elementary school, we went with our class teacher(we had only one in elementary school) to a medical center and it was almost the same set up. We undressed ingroup in briefs in a locker room near the examination room whom the door stayed always opened and we wee examined one by one by the doctor assisted by a female nurse. I don't remember very well on the opposite of school physicals in middle class and high school but I think that we had doctors of both genders, it was not in all classes the same doctor, sometimes, it was a man, sometimes a woman.

After in middle and high school except one year, it was always a woman doctor but not the same each year while the nurse was the same for the years of middle school and after it was an other one for the years of high school. It happened a few years that there was one or even one year two young student nurses to assist the permanent nurse, so in that latter case we were examined by three female nurses and if the permanent nurse was rather a middle aged woman, the students nurses were young, may be between 18 and 20 age.

Besides, we had two times, one at the end of elementary school at about 11 age and the second at the end of middle school at about 14 age a special examination to check our spine for possible curvatures, it was performed in a gym in presence of a PE teacher even in elementary school. It was certainly the most unpleasant for a shy and modest boy because the check was performed quickly but without privacy, waiting in briefs in group and coming for the check one by one in plain view of the other classmates and the adults present without any curtain. In the last year of elementary school, we were instructed to low our brief until the knees to let the doctor and the nurse and the PE teacher look at our back including our naked buttocks. At the last year of middle school, it was worst since we were instructed to remove our brief and to put in on a chair aside the time of the examination. Of course, I was less embarrassed by that examination at 11 age than at 14 age. At least there was no parents invited and we were not seen by front without our brief, only by back, so that time we never exposed pour genitals to the view.

As regards who was responsible for the set up of the school examination, I am not sure but I think that it was shared by the principal or vice principal of the school and the permanent nurse and may be the doctor but it was more likely the school ad the permanent nurse who decided of the management of the physicals. And it was certainly not the same in all schools. at that time, I presume that the boys had to undress in group either in a locker room when thre was one, either in a corridor or in gym in almost all the schools. As regards the state of undress, I am also almost certain that the boys were at least in briefs for the examination and most of the time since the start of it because it was more practical even if it was not necessary to be undressed in briefs for an eye's test or a blood pressure and so on .., and sometimes it could happen that they were naked under decision of the doctor, the nurse or the PE teacher. It was the common rule and no one complained at that time. It was already a relief to notice that we were generally not instructed to strip completely to be nude immediately at our arrival in the locker room as we knew that it was practiced at military physicals.

I did not like to be submitted to these group school examinations because I was shy and rather a slim boy but I knew that they were mandatory, that there was no mean to escape from them and that my parents were convinced that they were useful like almost all parents at that time.

We had also mandatory physicals before a summer camp which were performed in a specialised medical center, or before entering in specialised schools such as military schools or also boarding schools and so on, even the apprentices who had left the school at 14 or later at 16 age had annual thorough physicals in medical centers

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, October 24, 2012, 09:02: pm

I have written my message again because there was too much mistakes in the previous one.

some comments about the two last messages of "Smedley " :

first I know much more the french procedure at my time than the procedure applied in other countries even if by discussing in several forums, I have read a lot about them with the risk to read fictional relations and not true relations.

As regards France in the 50's and 60's, there was at least an annual school physical which was really mandatory. If you did not come to the physicals on the day you were summoned with your classmates, you were always summoned an other day with an other class of boys of the same age or younger of one year or older of one year.

Our parents received always a letter at home and we were also informed by the vice-principal or the PE teacher at the end of a PE lesson a few days before. It means that we had to note the day of the physicals and to come that day at school with a new brief or at least a very clean brief as well as clean socks and to take a bath or a shower or to wash for the boys who had no bathroom at home which was not unusual at that time. These instruction were well respected by all boys in my experience.

Our parents were never invited to come to school for the school physicals. The only time where they came was for the first year of elementary school but the exam did not take place in the school but in a medical center.

So the other years after that first one they knew that we had a school physicals every year and they knew that it was mandatory, and they received a few days after the day of the physicals a second letter to give them the results of the examination but it was not much detailed except if some issues had been detected which required to come to a doctor's office or a medical clinic.

I don't know if my mother would have come if she had received a letter from the school which had invited her to be present but I presume that she would have come if she had thought that it was really useful. Of course, I would have not liked it but I am not sure that my opinion would have been taken in account.

So there were no parents but it was not to protect the modesty of the boys in my opinion, it was rather because it was not required by the doctor or the school.

We were always in an only boy school. until the last year of high school It was some years after I left my school that all schools became mixed in France.

As I have already said, we had school physicals from the first year of elementary school at 5 or 6 age to the last year of high school at 17 or 18 age.Generally the physicals were planned a few weeks after the beguinning of the school.

But when I was in middle school from 11 age to 14 age, we had more than one school physical.
There was a first one rather thorough at the beguining of the first term and two others at the beguinning of each following term but less complete and performed only by the nurse without the presence of a doctor. The nurse checked mainly the weigh-in, the balance, the spine and the eye's. It lasted a more short time than the first examination with the doctor.

In middle class and high school, there was a permanent school nurse at school and a nurse' office where the school physicals were performed. Just aside, there was a locker room where we were instructed to undress in the locker room normally in briefs by group of about 15 students or at least a dozen boys, and generally it was half of the students of the classs.
So we had to undress in briefs all together once we were entering in the room even if we were among the last of the boys to be examined, and we were supervised by our PE teacher or occasionnally by a male monitor.

In elementary school, we went with our class teacher(we had only one in elementary school) to a medical center and it was almost the same set up. We undressed in group until briefs in a locker room near the examination room whom the door stayed always opened and we were examined one by one by the doctor assisted by a female nurse. I don't remember very well on the opposite of school physicals in middle class and high school but I think that we had doctors of both genders, it was not in all classes the same doctor, sometimes, it was a man, sometimes a woman.

After in middle and high school except one year, it was always a woman doctor but not the same each year while the nurse was the same for the years of middle school and after it was an other one for the years of high school. It happened a few years that there was one or even one year two young student nurses to assist the permanent nurse, so in that latter case we were examined by three female nurses and if the permanent nurse was rather a middle aged woman, the students nurses were young, may be between 18 and 20 age.It was fortunately rather in middle school, not at the last years of high school.

So were always only wearing a brief since the start of the examination, even for a first roll call and for the check of our idendity and a few questions about family situation and health. We were in briefs for all the exams performed by the nurse, even the eye test or ear test or the urine test for which we were going to a small bathroom with a door. Sometimes the nurse went with us and stayed at the door of the bathroom to see what we were doing certainly to make us hurry up. The measurements were performed also by the nurse.

Besides, we had two times, one at the end of elementary school at about 11 age and the second at the end of middle school at about 14 age, a special examination to check our spine for possible curvature.
It was performed in a gym in presence of a PE teacher even in elementary school. It was certainly the most unpleasant examination for a shy and modest boy because the check was performed quickly but without any privacy since all the students of the class were waiting in briefs and coming when called for the check one by one. We were instructed to do a few steps straight in front of the doctor until a spot where we had to stand without any move while he was loking at our back in plain view of the other classmates and the adults present without any curtain. In the last year of elementary school, we were instructed to low down our brief until the knees to let the doctor and the nurse and the PE teacher look at our back including of course our naked buttocks. At the last year of middle school, it was worst since we were instructed to remove our brief and to put in on a stool aside us during the time of the examination. Of course, I was less embarrassed by that examination at 11 age than at 14 age. At least there was no parents invited and we were not seen by front without our brief, only by back, so that time we never exposed our genitals to the view.

As regards who was responsible for the set up of the school examination, I am not sure but I think that the decision were taken by the principal or vice principal of the school with the permanent nurse rather than by the doctor, in my opinion it was more likely the school and the permanent nurse who decided of the management of the physicals.

And it was certainly not the same in all schools. But at time, I presume that the boys had always to undress in group either in a locker room when there was one, either in a corridor or in a gym in almost all the schools. As regards the state of undress, I am also almost certain that the boys were at least in briefs for the examination and most of the time since the start of it because it was more practical and efficient even if it was not necessary to be undressed in briefs for an eye's test or a blood pressure and so on .., and less frequently it could certainly happen that they were naked under decision of one of the adults in charge of the physicals, the nurse, the nurse or even the PE teacher.
It was the common rule to undress in group and no one complained at that time. It was already a relief to notice that we were generally not instructed to strip completely to be nude immediately at our arrival in the locker room as we knew that it was practiced at military physicals.

I did not like to be submitted to these group school examinations because I was shy and rather a slim boy but I knew that they were mandatory, that there was no mean to escape from them and that my parents were convinced that they were useful like almost all parents at that time.

We had also mandatory physicals before a summer camp which were performed in a specialised medical center, or before entering in specialised schools such as military schools or also boarding schools and so on, even the apprentices who had left the school at 14 or later at 16 age had annual thorough physicals in medical centers.

Normally, the presence of a parent was only required at summer camp physicals for young boys under 12 age and it was always the mother who was present.

After 12 age, there was no parents except sometimes one parent who was volonteer to help the medical persons during the physicals by supervising the boys at the locker room. It was also always a women and generally the boys had to undress until briefs. So a mother could be present in a locker room to keep discipline among a group of 12 or a little more boys over 12 age until 16 age who were already all in briefs. It did not happen to me but I knew it by relations of school friends who went to summer camps, it was rather embarrassing but this mother never entered in the examination room where the examination for pre-teenagers was always performed one by one. Later in the summer camp, if they had a check of the weigh-in at the middle of the stay, they were weighted in group with just a brief by a nurse in front of a monitor.

For the admission at a military school at 14 or 16 age, it was the presence of the father which was required. I have learnt it by the relation of a friend. The examination was performed in a military style, mainly in the nude in front of a male doctor, assisted by a female nurse and the father and before the boys had to undress in group in the locker room in front of each other and each father under instruction of the female nurse.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2012, 07:42: am

Fiona, many thanks for your further comments.

There is indeed a lot of mention (on this and other forums) of the 'double standard' of how exams were done to boys and girls. A lot of this stems, I think, from the fact that very often the examiners were women, and that boys were usually made to remove more clothes than girls, and had their genitals examined in some detail.

There's been a lot of discussion on this aspect: the UK School Health Service's tendency to employ paediatricians (certainly up to the mid-70s) and the majority of these were women (and of course in those days just about all nurses were female) and the fact that boys' reproductive organs are outside of their bodies and easier to get to! I'm not 'taking sides' here, just reiterating what's been said.

As I acknowledged previously, the medicals you were involved with seem to have been conducted with more regard for boys' modesty and feelings than some of us experienced. Being made to strip naked at the start of the procedure and having to read from the eye chart and be weighed and measured with nothing on was an unnecessary embarrassment and (quite understandably) fuels the 'double standard' accusation. The practice you employed, where boys had to strip to underpants and were allowed to keep them on until the genital examination was done, seems entirely reasonable to me.

You mentioned the preference of some males to be examined by the opposite gender. Of course, everyone is different and has their own feelings on such matters. There's no 'one size fits all' when it comes to human nature. For my own part (having been examined naked at primary school by a female doctor and nurse) when my school leaver's medical approached I was hoping that the doctor would be male. I knew there was every prospect that the doctor would see me nude and examine my genitals, I was very worried about the prospect of getting an erection, and I think I assumed I'd be less embarrassed with a male - and less likely to get erect.

After the examination had been done, however, I realised I would actually have been more embarrassed with a male doctor. The reasons for this I cannot really explain, I guess it's just down to how we feel as individuals at a particular time in a particular situation. Many women say they prefer male doctors.

I agree with you that these medicals were worthwhile exercises, unfortunately they are no longer done universally. Even the weighing and measuring programme which was introduced a few years ago isn't compulsory and only has around a 50% take-up rate. It's arguable that such checks are just as desirable now as they were when they were introduced in 1907 - but for an opposite reason. A century ago a major worry was malnutrition, now it's obesity.

Finally, you wrote "It was usual to avoid full erections if possible, but some doctors on occasion could induce one if there was a suspected condition that merited it." What were these conditions, and how would an erection be induced?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 08, 2012, 05:35: am

Mention of obesity reminds me that the rate was about one in fifty, but on the increase. These days it seems to be more like ten times that, which I find truly shocking. Many doctors glossed over the genital exam and did the bare minimum required, but some doctors are more thorough. I don't think there were double standards, it was a practical system that by and large worked reasonably well. There wasn't the emphasis on politically correct, and expensive, procedures that there is now. It seems to me that if there is anything that can be criticised at all, then it is dropped, and general health standards fall as a result.

There are various conditions that deserve further investigation. For example lesions, apparent severe curvature. The penis often changes shape substantially, so it's sometimes impossible to judge how it will appear erect when it is still flaccid. Some of the more more diligent doctors would sometimes go further than minimum requirements in order to diagnose more effectively. I'm sure that graphic descriptions are well outside what would be acceptable on this forum, so I'll leave it at that.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 08, 2012, 08:44: am

Fiona, thanks for your reply.

I would substantially agree with the comments you made in the first paragraph. One of the reasons school medicals were dropped was because the relatively low number of problems found did not justify the expense incurred. There's a lot of arguments one could deploy against that view and I won't go into them all here, but I would just make a couple of points.

There are other screening programmes in the UK that, no doubt, would be regarded by the 'powers that be' as sacrosanct: such as cervical smear tests and breast screening. These actually have a relatively low diagnosis rate (that is to say, diagnosis of genuine problems) and throw up a large number of 'false positives' which can result in unnecessary treatment. One study - actually done by the National Health Service - found that a nurse doing the average number of smear tests in a GP practice per year (200) would have to work for 35 years in order to save one life.

There's a very interesting lecture on YouTube by Professor Michael Baum in which he says the breast screening programme is too broadly based, can result in the problems I have mentioned, and should be more effectively targeted - and he was one of the people who helped to introduce the programme.

It has to be remembered that, despite various economic difficulties, the overall standard of living has improved substantially, even since the 'heyday' of school medicals and whilst this has brought benefits it has also has a downside. Generally there is higher consumption of fatty foods and less exercise. For example, how many children were taken to school by car, rather than walking there, in the 70s compared to now? As you said, the obesity statistics are shocking.

I think there should be full medicals at 5, 10/11 and on leaving; though this is now 18 and there could be case for making that 16. There should be mandatory weight checks annually which would enable any problems to be further monitored. It's all very well to save money in the short term, but the obesity problem alone is projected to cost the NHS billions as it leads to diabetes and other problems - to say nothing of the misery this will inflict on the individuals concerned, the loss of revenue from taxation of those who will be unable to work and the state benefits that will have to be paid out.

You made the point about some doctors being more thorough than others - this entirely bears out my own experience and that of others. A lot of the variations (a word I have used probably more than any other on this subject) were due to this.

Those of my classmates I heard accounts of from who had their leaver's medical before me (by different examiners to those I had) were allowed to keep their underpants on until they were in front of the doctor, but they were given a full genital examination consisting of testicle palpation, foreskin retraction with full inspection of the head of the penis and opening of the meatus, and a hernia check. I had only visual inspection of my genitals and the hernia 'cough test' - yet it was considered necessary for me to be completely naked to be weighed and measured and to read from the eye chart! In my case, I'm sure the doctor was doing less than the minimum.

Finally, you did not feel able to give a description of how the doctors you worked with induced erections because you felt it would go beyond what would be acceptable on this forum. I entirely appreciate your feelings, but I think you would be perfectly safe in describing this procedure in the context we are discussing it - I've seen things written here that are more graphic than I am assuming you would be describing. Maybe, if the moderator reads this, he could give some guidance? I hope you will feel able to share the details with us: if not, if you click on my name here you will be able to access an email address for me - perhaps you would consider using that route? I give you my word I that anything you say will be kept in total confidence.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, November 09, 2012, 05:22: am

"Smedley and Fiona" :

I agree with many of your comments. I think also that it was mainly for financial reasons that the mandatory annual school physicals were abolished in almost all the werstern countries while they were common in the past when we were students. They seemed also less important after the decreasing of some diseases and the fact that more parents were able to go to a doctor office with their children or to send them to the doctor for teenagers.

May be there is nevertheless an other reason which is that parents are today very much more concerned by the opinions and feelings of their children, and as most of the children are often more modest than in the past for different reasons, they agree with them if they deny the interest of school physicals.

All the states and the school boards have taken in account this new opinion about school physicals and besides, today, the idea of group physicals is not admitted as it was in the past and it is difficult to manage school physicals where students would be examined one by one without any group undressing.

Like you, I disagree with this change. I am not convinced that the arguments against school physicals are right.

It seems to me on the reverse that these school examination for all students would be very useful again and it would not be a loss of money.

You talk of the increasing of obsity, it is true, it is the same in France.

But there is other issues very common like spine issues, eye's and dental issues and so on.

I think like "Smedley" that thorough school physicals would be necessary regularly, at least at the entrance to elementary schools, at the entrance to middle shool, and at the entrance of high school, and eventually an other and last medical examination for all leavers students whenever it happens at 16 or 18 age.

So at least four thorough physicals with an examination from head to toes, as well for the skin, the eyes, the ears, the teeth, the mouth, the balance, the reflexes, the spine, the blood pressure, the urine test and all the intimate examination for boys, inspection of genitals, palpation of testicles, foreskin retraction, hernia test and why not also a visual inspection of the anus.

And as it is suggested by "Smedley", also an annual examination less thorough and performed only by a nurse to save money in purpose to check each year the weight and some other measurements and a few checks like may be the balance, the spine and the teeth and eyes.

Each time it would be possible according to the school premises, it would be managed at school, and in other cases, at a medical clinic which would have signed an agreement with the school.

In my opinion, it would be mandatory for all students, even those whom parents can send them frequently to see a private doctor.

I am sure that this procedure of school physicals would not eventually cost more money than the situation of today because there would be many health results.

As regards the embarrassment of "Fiona" to talk in this forum of how the doctors worked with induced erections, I must recognize that I don't understand what would be so inaceptable in this forum.
We are all adults and we can read what happened in such situations in my opinion.

As regards what "Smedley "told about the leaver's medical, I have understood that it was different according to doctors and nurses : some boys were allowed to keep their underwears before being in front of the doctor which was obviously less embarrassing than to be weigthed and to read a chart eye's stark naked in front of the nurse.

It is strange that there was not a rule in the medical center about the state of undress of the boys since the start of the examination and that each doctor or even a nurse could decide how much the boys would be undressed.

Anyway, if I have well understood, it could happen that the nurse required to the boy to strip completely but after the doctor did not perform a full genital examination but only a visual inspection of the genitals and the hernia cough test while on the reverse, other boys who were allowed to keep their underwears in front of the nurse had a full genital examination in front of the doctor, very more thorough including not only the exams mentioned before but also a testicle palpation and a foreskin retraction with an inspection of the head of the penis and opening of the meatus.
As you said, your doctor was doing less than the minimum for that part of your examination and I am thinking that he was wrong.

In my opinion, once there was a medical examination of the genitalls, it would be better to do it the more seriously it was possible. If the boy was naked, it would be not an issue to perform a more thorough examination and may be useful for some boys. Anyway, it did not lasted a much more time to perform it and the embarrassment of the boy would not be much more increased than it was already.

To come back to your relation, normally I would have thought that it was when the boys were allowed to keep their underwear in front of the nurse that the doctor did not parform a full genital examination. So I was wrong. Thre was no link between the two situations.

I must recognize that if I were in your situation at 16 age, I would have not liked to be instructed by a nurse even if she was certainly a middle age woman, being so for a boy a figure authority,not a young one, to remove all my clothes and to come stark naked to be weighted on a scale or to read a chart eye's with all my body, genitals and buttocks, exposed naked to her view.
At that age for a male teenager, it might be vey embarrassing.

If I have had the choice between being naked in front of the nurse at the start of the exam or to have a full genital examination performed by the doctor but behind the screen, I would have preferred that option.

I try to imagine the embarrassment of the few teenager boys who were accompanied by their mother when they were instructed to strip completely and were climbing on the scale in the nude or reading the chart eye's knowing that not only the nurse but also their mother could look at them all the time ?

I am also convinced that as you are thinking, there was no plan to prevent a mother who accompanied a boy to go out of behind the screen after the doctor exammination when the other boy examined by the nurse was not undressed in the nude.
In my opinion, such a set up would have been to much complicate. It was only by chance that you were not undressed at your examination when it happened.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Jean.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, November 09, 2012, 12:03: pm

Jean, you make some very sensible and relevant points, as always.

I think you are correct to suppose that many of today's parents would be reluctant to have their children routinely examined. It has to be remembered that many people in their 20s and 30s will not have been subjected to school medicals themselves: in short, we have got out of the habit of doing these things and they have ceased to become normal practice.

Fiona mentioned the 'politically correct' issue. One of the other reasons doing these examinations would be shied away from is that it would - obviously - involve children having to undress to be intimately examined by complete strangers. In today's world many would find that scenario unthinkable, especially since various abuse scandals have been, and are being, uncovered. It may seem ludicrous to some people to in any way connect some of the disgusting crimes against children that we have heard about with routine health checks, but I suspect it would happen.

The other big issue is of course money. The whole 'apparatus' of doing school medicals has long been dismantled and there would be 'up front' costs as well as ongoing ones if they were reinstated. Governments short of money (and that's just about all of them right now) rarely look far enough ahead to concern themselves with possible savings that may not appear for several years, usually long after the politicians presently in power have left office.

The obesity problem seems to be one that is common to most western countries now, and for much the same reasons, I suspect. As you said, an annual check by a nurse could cover things other than weight - indeed, a general body inspection could be done.

There was, as you acknowledged, no link between a boy being allowed to keep his underpants on and whether or not (or to what extent) he had his genitals examined. It was simply a matter of how the examining doctor and nurse had decided between them that the medicals would be run, and I am sure it would be the doctor who would ultimately decide how things would be done. There were, as we know, some situations (such as recounted by 'EJ' on a much older thread) in which boys were only required to strip to the waist and had no genital exam; this was often because of the lack of facilities available at the school concerned - e.g. having to use screens in the assembly hall because there was no private room available.

Commonly used methods for examining boys were: strip to underpants for the nurse and keep them on for all of the doctor's examination until the genital check was to be done, then be told to pull them down, or the doctor would do it; strip naked for the nurse on arrival in the examining room and remain nude for the whole medical; strip to underpants for the nurse and be told to take them off as soon as arriving in front of the doctor and be naked for the whole of the doctor's examination. The last one I mentioned seems fairly rare, but it did happen.

This brings me to a point you made on the latest "UK School Medicals" thread, and you have made again here. I refer to the suggestion I made on the UKSM thread that those running medicals of the 'conveyor belt' type which I experienced would take some steps to prevent an attending mother from seeing another boy undressed.

It seems that there were some doctors who had some regard for the modesty of those they were examining - why else would some of them have allowed boys to retain their underwear for part of the medical? It would have nothing to do with time considerations: everyone would only have to have undressed once, and when someone was down to their underpants it would've only taken them seconds to remove them. Bearing that in mind, is it so hard to imagine that some doctors would have thought that it was unacceptable for a mother to be confronted with a boy other than her own son in a state of undress - even if there had been no concern for the boys' feelings?

You and I, Jean, have lived through these times in our respective countries and we are aware of what would've been generally 'socially acceptable' in those far-off days. It's my belief (cynical and critical though I may be about how some things were done then) that some doctors would've taken some steps to ensure that situation didn't come about, perhaps by suspending the 'conveyor belt' or any of the other ways I speculated on. I don't think it would have been so difficult to do because the parental attendance rate at older boys' exams (and it's that age group I'm thinking of) seems to have been only about 10%, and of course some examiners had pupils in one at a time, accompanied or not.

I fully accept, however, that some doctors wouldn't have cared about this - as I said, there's no such thing as 'one size fits all' when it comes to human nature.

As to the attitude of mothers in such a situation, that too would vary from person to person. Some would not have been bothered by it - and let's be honest here, some may have enjoyed what they saw: would most men not be pleased to see an attractive, naked 16-year-old girl? - but in either case some mothers may have been greatly embarrassed.

As to my own experience, of course you are correct that it was purely chance that dictated whether Simon and his parent emerged from behind the screen when I was stripped, but you have to remember: that parent was Simon's father, not his mother, therefore no steps to avoid our seeing each other would have been employed because we were all the same gender.

You are also correct in what you say about the embarrassment factor. Again, some people are more bothered by these things than others, but I knew some boys who thought that the medical was going to be a bit of a 'lark' and were joking about having an attractive doctor or nurse see them undressed and/or touch them, but this was before the event: having actually gone through it, most were not so light-hearted.

I found being examined naked at primary school embarrassing enough, but to be told to strip off completely at age 16 was much worse. My nurse was very young and very pretty, but I don't think I'd have felt any differently if she'd been middle-aged or elderly.

You know yourself that it's very difficult to convey to someone who's not experienced this sort of examination just what it is like to be fully dressed one minute, be called into a room by someone of the opposite gender (whom you've never seen before and will never see again) and be told to take off all your clothes in front of them. As I've said before, to really understand, you had to be there.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, November 09, 2012, 04:00: pm

Interesting - 'relatively low number of problems found'. Well that just shows how little credit people in the front line actually receive. I wouldn't describe the number of problems as low at all. Most people are surprised when I tell them just how many undetected problems these examinations uncovered, and the nature of them. Granted there were improvenments, but obesity was definitely on the increase, and we also discovered increasing outbreaks of head lice. Skin problems were another area, and I remember the advent of bio washing powders coincided with a noticeable increase. I'm not saying they were directly connected, because maybe there was simply an increasing awareness. But it was noticeable in hindsight. Also occasionally there were hygiene problems, which brings us back to the genital exam, which in my opinion was very important. The more diligent doctors would take the trouble to give a little bit of advice. Bearing in mind that the pupils were given little or no warning in advance of the exam and what it entailed. There was the occasional surprise, but I wouldn't say it was any worse than what one routinely encounters in other medical settings. I was a little bit miffed to read that someone is suggesting that I might be too embarrassed to describe on this forum details of events I have witnessed. That is not at all the case, but I do feel that it is not necessary to go into great detail, and we have to make our own judgement where to draw the line. I'll think about that one, but I'm sure most people would be aware what can be done to induce an erection without it being obvious to the patient that is what is intended.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, November 09, 2012, 05:44: pm

Fiona, thank you for your further comments.

I hope it was realised that when I spoke about the relatively low number of problems found I was repeating the official view of this matter, and not my own. I have done a lot of research into this subject and I have read a number of studies which have been reported in the British Medical Journal and other such publications. I always believe it's as well to listen to the troops at the front line, as well as the generals at HQ!

As I think you will have gathered, I am very much in favour of the work you and your colleagues did, and I wish you were still doing it.

It is interesting to note what you said about skin problems and head lice. This just goes to prove how important it is that the whole body should be inspected. As I said earlier, I think there is a case for having annual weight checks and body-fat measurements, and this could be combined with a full body inspection - all of which could be done by suitably trained nurses.

I'm sorry to note that you felt as you did about Jean's assumption that you were embarrassed to go into detail about the inducement of erections. I had intended to comment on that in my earlier post, but omitted to do so as I had a lot of ground to cover and simply forgot.

I had intended to say to Jean that I felt that you had made it clear that you had declined to give the details not out of embarrassment but because, as you stated, you felt - quote: "that graphic descriptions are well outside what would be acceptable on this forum". It has to be remembered though that some meaning can be 'lost in translation'.

Of course it is for any individual to only relate that which they are happy to relate.

One can speculate as to how the erection was induced, but it's only natural to seek clarification of something when that clarification has not been given.

I hope you will feel able to give that detail and perhaps also tell us what the success rate of the method was.

In the meantime, thank you again for your contributions to the debate, they are greatly appreciated.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, November 19, 2012, 08:27: am

I'll try my best then, since you request so strongly. I don't think I'll be giving away any secrets, although there is always someone who will object, and I'm very wary of posting something that might appear gratuitous to some people. I hope this doesn't upset anyone, if it does then please don't over react, and be assured that these examinations were carried out with sensitivity and as much respect for privacy etc as possible.

Medical staff of course are not permitted to intentionally stimulate or arouse any patient. So there is little room for flexibility, even though unintentional arousal is absolutely normal during such examinations. Because of the question of false positives, and it being the case that an erect penis will normally show up a lot more than when flaccid, it's not always the case that it should necessarily be avoided, although there is room for endless debate. Some doctors were not so thorough, but on balance I think this was the one opportunity available to discover problems that could seriously affect them later in life, but could possibly be acted on in a positive way at an early stage. These are mostly individuals who would not usually report a problem they had, or even be aware of it. It's surprising how little many people know about their own bodies, especially at that age. So despite the drawbacks I'm sure it was a good thing. Doctors that had been well trained and had experience of examining thousands of individuals would usually pick up on issues very quickly. Most boys in their early teens will erect quite readily, and sometimes the doctor would allow that to happen for diagnosis reasons, instead of the usual procedure which was to limit the time spent on this to about a half minute or so. About 5 to 10 per cent, or more on some days, would begin to erect in that time, most of the rest would just take longer. Sometime a penis would show no signs of erecting at all after a couple of minutes of attention, but usually they did. If not the exam would remain quite short and if the doctor had concerns these would be reflected in the notes. In this thread though, the discussion is about the ones that do.

Typically the doctor would tell the subject she is going to take a look and then pull forward the underpants with one hand to expose the genitals. This was usually done without any prior warning so that anxiety about being examined so intimately was minimised. Then she would check the testes and the glans etc with the free hand. If all was well that would completed quickly and the subject would then dress and proceed to sight and hearing tests. The glans would be checked with one finger to see if it slid back smoothly, and the colour and texture noted, also the opening of the urethra. If that wasn't satisfactory the doctor may then proceed with a more detailed inspection, and if two hands were required, sometimes slide the underpants down out of the way and do a discharge check. If there were signs of unusual discharge in the urethra, a finger or fingers could be run up the underside of the shaft from the base towards the tip whilst holding the penis in the other hand, to bring some of the discharge out. Doctors would occasionally do that with a penis that was slightly erect, which would have the side effect of bringing it on sufficiently to be able to retract the foreskin fully in a condition where any tightness or other problem could be detected. Most times the response is immediate and quite noticeable, and actually it's a simple way to advance to an erection that is slow to do so. As in the situation that maybe the patient is trying to suppress it and all it takes is for it to advance far enough that they can't suppress it any more. It was rare for the erection to subside once properly under way and I always kept a constant watch on erections when they occurred or were likely to occur, so that the doctor could also do other things such as make notes if necessary. Although of course as un-invasively as practicable. When the erection had progressed sufficiently, the doctor would take the penis gently in one hand and retract the foreskin if it would do so - sometimes they didn't, which is a significant problem - so that the corona and the shaft below that was normally covered could be seen. What usually happened was the penis would initially show signs of slightly stiffening, and eventually reach a point beyond which it would continue to a full erection unabated, and that would usually then progress quite briskly, and sometimes very rapidly. With experience one could anticipate when this was going to happen, and even sometimes by the demeanour of the subject even before the genital exam had commenced. Although for the vast majority they would be dressing again before it progressed very far. This is different from adult males who don't tend to progress to erection in that manner, and in any case not as quickly. If an erection is required in an adult it is normally done by administering an injection of something like Alprostadil, which is neither particularly pleasant nor convenient. Another difference is that if retraction of the foreskin is required, often a doctor asks an adult patient to do this themselves, to allow close examination but this was never the case with a youngster in my experience. The doctor always did everything, and in cases of rampant erection, tried to complete the exam before the erection became full. On rare occasions this was not possible because of it being so very quick, and in that case the exam was terminated immediately.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 12:40: pm

I was given a injection in the penis prior to having a ultrasound being done. I had worn some sweatpants figuring they would be easy to take off and put back on. What I didn't figure on was that I was going to have to walk though a crowded waiting room, get into an elevator filled with people and wait for a parking attendant to get my car with a noticeable tent in my pants. I wasn't told that the erection was going to last much longer than the procedure.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jake
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 11:27: pm

Thank you Fiona for typing all that. It's most interesting to see the "view from the other side", as most of us will never directly experience. Personally, having been in similar situations as the "subject", I'd rather know what's going on in the minds of the people on the other side, rather than have it hidden behind a carefully constructed wall of silence. That's just me - I know some people think the opposite. To me, knowledge = power. The more I know, the less I feel I'm at a disadvantage.

It's interesting that you say you can "anticipate... even sometimes by the demeanour of the subject" what will happen, in advance. I am surprised by this a little bit, since there's such an involuntary aspect. I don't always, umm... know in advance, so to speak, so I'm wondering what in their demeanour gives such a hint. I've sometimes been afraid it would happen and it didn't, and sometimes I've not thought it would, and it did.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
abner
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012, 06:22: am

i was examinesd in the mid 80s at school and was diagnosed with undescended testicle that was unnoticed untill then, except by myself, but i was too shy too shy to say anything about it before this school exam. i was in the begining of 6th grade and when the doctor lowerd my beiefs and started palpating my scrotum, i felt as if my "big secret" was revealed. few months later i was hospitalized to get the situation fixed. without school exams it could have taken years before i would have found the courage to do what was needed to do by myself.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012, 10:31: am

This is typical of the kind of things that were discovered during these medical exams. Sometimes even hypospadias was discovered surprisingly often. I remember one doctor told me that she discovered one that looked quite normal from above, but he erected and she spotted it from underneath and considered she wouldn't have done if he hadn't erected. Unusual, but it's a good example of the variety of issues that can be detected.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Alen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2013, 01:58: am

What was the quality of the hygiene problems you would discover? How was this to be treated?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Rhetta
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013, 10:28: pm

As someone who worked with children for many years, I can say it was quite common to see at least mild cases of smegma or irritation. Many of the boys, especially the younger ones, did not know how to properly care for themselves or were too afraid to seek help when something was wrong.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jamie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 12:49: am

Was there any difference in the frequency of erections between circumcised and uncircumcised boys? I would think the retracting of the foreskin would be somewhat of a sexual experience that could account for a lot of the stimulation.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Greg B
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 01:17: am

I remember from around age 12 on that everytime I had a genital exam by a female nurse or doctor I got a huge erection especially if there was a female chaperone also. sometimes just while sitting there in my underwear. They would always retract the foreskin even if erect. Occasionally there would be a comment or a look.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 04:39: am

Yes, there is a marked difference, and maybe I should have mentioned that. Circumcised boys still erected, but generally not as readily, and the doctor could see most of what she needed to without touching the penis directly, and erection would usually only reveal severe curvature. Whereas with uncircumcised the foreskin has to be retracted to see the condition of the glans and the area that is normally hidden, which is important to check. Of course all doctors and nurses know very well that foreskin retraction is very stimulating. But that can't be avoided, and it was always done as gently as possible. The majority were uncircumcised, and they are definitely more sensitive at that age.

Occasionally a boy would erect during the early part of the medical, and one of the things we used to try and do was make more effort to relax and distract them in the hope it would subside before reaching the genital exam. But it didn't always work. Retracting an erect penis was discouraged, but the doctors had to make their own judgement on that.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Brandon
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 08:52: pm

Even though I'm circumcised I get an erection every time the doctor checks my penis. It's not the touching as much as it is just being exposed that causes it. I start getting an erection as soon as the doctor pulls down my underwear and I feel it keep building until the doctor puts my underwear back on. I find this really embarrassing but I can't help it. I'm 20 btw.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 10:38: pm

That is something that is quite noticeable. About ten per cent of young men seem to be acutely affected by exposure. Sometimes if you look away, they subside again.

I've been out of it a long time. But now you've reminded me, that is something we used to notice. And usually they are also more sensitive to touch, but not always.

I wouldn't worry about it too much. It really does happen all the time. And seeing an erection taking place is an impressive sight. Even if you've seen lots of them. The ones I don't really like are those that are a bit exhibitionist about it. When it is involuntary it's okay.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Sharik
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 09:51: pm

Fiona have you heard of cold metal spoons being used on erections or is that just urban legend?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 20, 2012, 10:28: pm

Yes, I have heard of it. But I don't know of anyone who has actually done it. Maybe it is urban legend. Does it work?

My attitude was always to leave them. Most of my colleagues were the same. With youngsters sometimes a bit of reassurance was needed. If there was a chance to let them dress before it became too strong it was always taken.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Greg B
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2012, 09:52: am

I had a nurse pinch the base of my penis once as I was getting an erection. She said "none of this in my office" and proceeded to pinch me firmly which stopped the erection. She was the only one that ever did that and I think I also got hard because of the complete exposure of standing or lying naked.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Raymond C.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2012, 10:09: am

Gee, what a nice nurse...pinching your erection. You should have reciprocated and pinched her nipple.

Then both of you would have shared in the fun.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jamie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2012, 12:39: am

I don't mean this in a bad way but would you say its more interesting to examine the uncircumcised boys as opposed to the circumcised ones? I never thought about it but their exam must have been far more in depth. What would you say the percentage of circumcised boys was?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 11:35: am

Interesting is not a word that really applies to this. We were just doing a job, although of course the day goes better if you are interested in what you're doing.

Circumcised is obviously more simple to examine, but sometimes they have their own issues. Non-circumcised require more detailed inspection, and as per this thread, an erection is sometimes an advantage. In an ideal world, at the age of subjects we are talking about, the genitals would always be examined in the erect state. But owing to the sexual connotations, and perhaps emotional as well, that is not the case. So the doctors carring out exams were left to their own devices. Some glossed over this area, others didn't. I found it noticable that it was the doctors who had children of their own that tended to be more thorough. When it is necessary to examine erect, an adult male is given an injection to artificially induce an erection. That's not a particularly pleasant process for the individual and the effect lasts a lot longer that the procedure. You couldn't do anything like that during a routine screening of adolescents. But if it was warranted, we had our own ways to induce erections as I have already explained, and usually that worked very well.

I didn't intend to become a regular contributor, but I was happy to answer sensible questions. I hope this is sufficient to exhaust the subject matter, at least for now.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2012, 11:44: am

Did any of the boys reach the point of no return and end up ejaculating. If so I am sure this was way more embarrassing that just getting an erection. If so, how was this handled in terms of cleaning up the mess, saying anything and/or continuing with the examination.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, November 21, 2012, 08:54: pm

Fiona, many thanks for posting the description. I particularly appreciate that you did so despite your stated reservations.

As regards anyone being "upset" by what you have said, as far as I'm concerned there's nothing to be upset about, though of course people sometimes say things on forums which go beyond mere disagreement - I am glad to note that has not happened thus far. I'm also glad to see that you have further contributed to the discussion.

Many of the things you said have resonance with me. You referred to the reluctance of young people to report any problem with their bodies, and the lack of knowledge about them. I think this was particularly the case in the years when universal school medicals were carried out in the way we have discussed.

It has to be remembered of course that back in the 60s and 70s there was pretty much no sex education, no internet from which to glean information (albeit not always accurate!) no discussion of such matters in the media (especially on television - such as today's 'Sex Education Show' and 'Embarrassing Bodies') and things were generally less open anyway.

You mentioned the medicals being an opportunity to discover - and deal with - problems which could otherwise be troublesome in later life. It seems to me that this is a key point. The notification of the medical I had prior to leaving school mentioned this aspect specifically. It made sense to me then and it makes sense to me now, but whilst I convinced myself that having a medical was a good idea, that didn't stop me from being very nervous about it and I certainly would not have volunteered to have it done.

I was interested to read your comment " And seeing an erection taking place is an impressive sight. Even if you've seen lots of them " I think you deserve great credit for being honest enough to say that. Though you would ultimately have seen thousands of boys with their genitals exposed for medical examination and inspection, it is not surprising to me that you felt that way.

Bearing in mind that we are all 'flesh and blood' and subject to understandable feelings and emotions, I would like to ask you to say something about how you felt when you first started doing this work. From day one you would of course be telling young boys to strip to their underpants and, when the rules were modified, you were required to witness them being intimately examined. We all know the feeling of 'first day nerves' when starting a new job, and of course you may well have had experience in the nursing field before you did this particular job, but how were those first times for you?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012, 06:13: am

Fiona, I had meant to ask on my earlier posting how any problems found at the medicals were dealt with. I'm thinking mainly of those which would have required a follow-up examination and/or treatment.

You said parents were not present, so I presume a letter would be sent to the pupil's home: the usual thing was for an appointment to be made to attend the school clinic where the initial diagnosis would be confirmed and things would be taken form there. If this was the case, were you present at any of the clinic examinations?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012, 07:36: am

I was never involved in that. I suppose in most cases it was done via the GP.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012, 07:46: am

I didn't have any problem when I first did this work. I was with a doctor who was very experienced. It is a bit embarrassing at first to see it happen, but only because you feel for the boy it's happening to. They can get very self concious but you get used to dealing with that. I'd seen lots of erections before I did that work, though in a different setting. I supposed what surprised me most was how quickly they can erect sometimes. It can be matter of a few seconds with little warning until you know what to expect. No one tells you about that, although my first doctor did tell me not to express surprise at anything I saw.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012, 07:30: am

I'm wondering if there is a bit fantasy creeping in - sorry!

No, I have never seen that happen. I have heard of it happening, so no doubt it can do. I think you'd have to be rather careless or inattentive to let that happen. In some ways it may be an urban myth. You would often hear about someone whom knows someone who knows someone who's had it happen etc. But you never actually hear about it first hand.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Raymond C.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 22, 2012, 10:15: am

Yeah, but in the long scheme of things I bet it has happened. I do know a woman who works as an NP and says she saw it happen when she was assisting in a physical but before she became an NP.

But you are right. Second hand info, so who knows.

More to the point, something like it happened to me personally. Not in a medical situation, though. When I was 16 I worked at a summer camp as a counselor. Between groups of kids, we stayed at the camp, and during one of those periods my girlfriend of the summer, a very sexy brunette with a killer ass, and I shared a cabin. I woke up in the morning with a full erection, after as I recall several very sexy dreams. Morning wood. I got up to go to the bathroom and my girl friend woke up as I walked by (separate and small bunks). She looked at my raging erection and smiled. I shot right then and there, without warning. She laughed and I was very surprised. Never happened like that with no touching whatsoever before or since. Wish it would but then I will never be 16 again, either.

So it can happen.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, November 23, 2012, 09:37: am

I completely agree with what you write"Smedley"
because it was exactly the same for me :

"You mentioned the medicals being an opportunity to discover - and deal with - problems which could otherwise be troublesome in later life. It seems to me that this is a key point. The notification of the medical I had prior to leaving school mentioned this aspect specifically. It made sense to me then and it makes sense to me now, but whilst I convinced myself that having a medical was a good idea, that didn't stop me from being very nervous about it and I certainly would not have volunteered to have it done".

when I was in high school, I hated to be summoned for a school physical and I did not understand that it was useful and of course I would have missed them if they had not been mandatory like draft physicals in a certain way, I would have certainly not be volonteer.

Now I know that they were necessary for check of health and useful for some boys, so it was normal to submit all the boys to these examinations and more thorough they were better it was.

It is just sometimes the military style in which they were performed when we had to undress in group or be examined without privacy which can be discussed but at that time no adult found that manner inappropriate.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, November 24, 2012, 11:42: am

I remember reading on a nurse's thread one time about this being a problem when giving bed baths to teenage boys. Similar to what you said comments were made about how quickly they erected even without any direct stimulation. There was a dicussion about covering up the genitals with a towel up to the point where they needed to be washed and whether the "tent" in the towel was more or less embarrassing than just being nude and getting an erection.

Most finally agreed an ejaculation during a bed bath was a distinct possibility if the patient was already erect before washing started given the fact that teenage boys have "hair triggers" and they probably had not had a release of some time if they were in the hospital.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 27, 2012, 10:16: am

to "Smedley" :

I am not sure to remember well, but it seems to me that in a former message, at the beguinning of the discussion when you have related your last school physical before leaving the school at 16 age, you have written that a very few guys were accompanied by one of their parents.
You were fortunately for you not accompanied but you said that a letter had been adressed to your parents at home to invite one of them to come with you. As like I presume amlmost all the boys of 16 age, you did not wanted at all to be accompanied by a parent and to prevent that you said that you had taken the first the letter in the box post of the house to hide it to your parents until the day after your physical.

is it true?

if it is, I am a little surprised for two reasons : first even if I would have been mortified to be accompanied by one of my parent, especially my mother, I would have not been able to take the first a letter adressed at home, it was always my mother who took first all the letters and there was no mean to avoid that.

secondly I was never punished brutally by my parents who did not use any corporal punishments but I would have not dare to hide a letter which was adressed to them, it was a question of confidence, they would have been very displeased if they had learned it even if they had no intention to come with me at a school physical and if they understood that I did not like to be accompanied and admitted that my modesty needed to be respected.

It was far in the past in the 60's and at that time, it was not easy and admitted to lie to his parents or to hide a letter which was for them.

I am really surprised that your parents were not angry against you when they learned that there was a letter that you had hiden.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchy
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 27, 2012, 11:38: am

To illustrate what I have said in a message above about the military style for some school or university physicals which was the main issue in my opinion, I want to give you a case of such an examination.

When I was undergraduate, I went to what is called in France a" a great school" and is a litle the same than your colleges in the United States, and it is different of the university because the admission is more difficult and the number of students much less numerous and the supervision of teachers more efficient.

So the first year, in the end of the seconfd half of the 60's, we had mandatory Pe lessons in the gym of the school and also swimming lessons in a swimming pool area outside the school and lessons of athletism also outside the school.
It was never mandatory at university but it was different in some great schools, not all.

And they wanted to classify the male students in groups of almost equal strengh at the beguinning of the year school. I presume that it was the same for girls but there was only a very few girls students.

In that purpose we were summoned to come at school for a sport physicals.
It took place in the basement of the school where there was a large gym, a locker room and the office of the PE teachers.

I was summoned to report at 9 in the morning, I was thinking that we would be examined alone one by one if we had to undress in trousers for the examination or in the gym very quickly if we had not to undress but I was completely wrong. It was much more serious.

I had a first surprise when I arrived in the locker room to notice that I was not alone to be summoned at that time, we were about 15 male students. Some were already there, others arrived after me and we were waiting. I did not know them since it was just after the beguinning of the year school.

Once we were all arrived, a PE teacher went out of the office, made a roll call and then instructed us to undress all together immediately, he said that we might remove all our clothes except our briefs including our socks and watches and all jewelleries. At that time, in France almost all young men were still wearing white tighty briefs. So it was embarrassing to undress in front of other students just in underwear.

I was completely surprised because it was not expected at all by me but I complied as did all the students and when we were all undressed in briefs, he told to the first one of the roll call to enter with him in the office where he would be examined.

I was the twelve to be examined, and as each examination lasted about ten minutes, I stayed for about two hours just in brief in the locker room.

I learned by a student who went out of the office that there was three Pe teachers in the office and a male doctor and a female nurse.

Once I entered, I was instructed to come in front of the three PE teachers and one of them weighted me, heighted me and did many measurements while the two others were spectators. I had also to do some movments to let them check my balance, to squat several times, to walk a little to let them check my posture and to bend over to let them check my spine from a little distance and then just in front of them.

I don't know if it was the same for all students but as I had a little lordose, they instructed me to remove my brief and to walk a few steps in the nude for the inspection of the spine and they left me naked during a time which seemed to me very long , may be a few minutes, to look at my back first standing like at attention and after bending over to touch my ankles and I could hear them talking about my back behind me. When I was standing, one of them came close to me and made his fingers slide along the spine until the butt crack afeter what he patted my back from the top to the low part and then he put his lands on my buttocks and he squeezed my buttocks. I was red face during all the examination.

It was very impressive to be in the nude in front of three Pe teachers even if it was only back, I must recognize that they did not try to see me frontally naked.

After that they discussed all together about a proposal for classification in a PE group since there was four groups. The weigh-in was certainly one of the most point taken in account.

But it was not finished. After the examination by the three Pe teachers, I was instructed to go on the right corner of the room whre there was a doctor and a nurse. The doctor asked to me a few questions, he checked my reflexes, my skin, my pulse, and very quickly he lifted the waist of my brief to have a look inside at my genitals and to palpate my balls and for the hernia test. The presence of the nurse was not very embarrassiong because it was very quick and she was behind me and could not see much except certainly half of my buttocks. The nurse was sitting behind a desk and was only here to fill the medical form which has been filled before by one of the PE teacher for their part of the examination.
After that last exam, the doctor told that he agreed with the proposal of the PE teachers and it was finished, I could get out and an other student entered in the office.

I have forgot to say that after the first one to be examined, there was always two students in the room office at the same time, one was examined by the three Pe teachers and the second one was examined by the doctor.
All was set up obviously not to loose too much time.

In a certain way, it was better because neither the doctor nor the nurse could see me when I was naked in front of the PE teachers because they were occupied to perform the examination of an other student and that latter could no more look at me since he was examined in a corner of the room office.

Of course, it was unpleasant and I did not like to be treated like that at school physicals at more than 18 age but it could have been worse.

Nevertheles what would not be possible today was to instruct to about 15 students who were male teenagers to strip until underwears and to wait undressed, almost naked, their turn to be examined during a so long time.
It was search for more efficiency to win time against respect of modesty and at that time it was obviously the first idea which was the winner.

The fact that the boys students had to undress all together for such a long time was so much something admitted according to military rules that no student dared to complain and that no adults thought that it was not good to treat a little like cattle the boy's students, even at more than 18 aged. The adults were not military men but they acted like if they were on many points during the procedure of the examination.

In my opinion, it is that which has changed a lot fortunately, it is a much better today for the respect of modesty with no more undressing in group and it is more important than the gender of the doctor!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Jean.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, November 27, 2012, 12:39: pm

Jean, this idea you have that I intercepted the mail is incorrect: indeed, you will see from the quote below that I was actually concerned that a letter could have been sent by post if I'd 'skipped' the appointment.

The notification for my leaver's medical was given to me by a teacher, as was the practice at that school. It was in a sealed envelope with "To the parents of ....." typed on the front. I have said previously that (as you and others will recognise) in those days these things were conducted in such as way as to give us - those who were to be examined - the impression that it was almost none of our business, we were just expected to report when and where we were told to, strip on command, and submit to whatever examination and inspection of our bodies as was deemed necessary.

I took the view that there I was, almost 16 and would be working for a living in a few weeks, and I was supposed to take this sealed envelope home to my parents like a good boy. I was having none of it. It WAS my business and I wanted to be the first to know the time and date of the medical - for I knew full well that was what was inside the envelope.

No parental consent was required (though that was the system in some areas) so I didn't have to get a form signed and take it back. I think you were recalling the question I was asked by 'EJ' on one of the old threads. I have copied and pasted his post and my reply on that subject below.

'EJ' WROTE:

"Smedley. When you went home after your medical did you tell your mother you had been examined? If so was she angry? Did you get asked questions about what happened? If you did not tell her I'm sure mothers of other boys in your year would have mentioned the medical examinations in conversations with her.
If you had told her beforehand would she have attended?
My mother would have been mad not to be at my medical. She attended them all, but thankfully i was never made to strip naked."

I REPLIED:

"No, I didn't tell my mother when I got home afterwards, but it did trip out a few weeks later. She wasn't angry at all, she was very good at recognising that I was growing up and was much nearer manhood than childhood. She only asked me if everything went OK, and once I told her I had every prospect of living to 105 she was quite satisfied!

As far as finding out from other mothers goes, it wouldn't have happened. I lived quite a distance from the school and my nearest pal was about 2 miles away, he would come to my house and I'd go to his, but our parents rarely met. In any case, we were only a couple of months away from leaving so I wouldn't have had to 'keep the lid on it' for long. So, unlike when I was at the local primary school and everyone knew everyone round there, the 'jungle drums' didn't operate.

She was at work during the day, and getting the time out wouldn't have been easy, but if she'd known about it and I had asked her to be there, I know she would have done what she could to do so: however, she would not have insisted. I just didn't tell her it was up and coming because I was so wound up about the prospect of it that I didn't even want to talk about it. As I said before, there was just no way I could have gone through with it with my mother in the room, even if I'd only been partially undressed.

The only thing that would have caused a commotion would have been if I hadn't attended at the appointed time and the school (or the school health service) had sent a letter to the house. Even though I was close to leaving school, like most parents of the day, mine got a bit narky if any of us upset 'the establishment' in any way."

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2012, 04:55: am

"Smedley" : thanks for your answer, this time it is clear for me.

I understand completely your refusal to be accompanied by your mother at a physical examination before leaving school at 16 age.

You said that your mother had not really time to accompany you and that if she had known that you had a physical that day, she would have respected your intention to be alone and on the reverse she would have come despite the difficulties for her to be available if you have said to her that you wanted her presence.

She was obviously a good and clever mother.

I think that mine would have done the same in such a case, she would have respected also my opinion about her presence.

But she would have certainly blamed me for having kept the letter given by the teacher at school if the letter was in a sealed envelop with " to the parents of" which meaned that it was not for me because she would have wanted to know the day and time of my physical to question me about the result just after.

So you were a little rash or disobedient(I don't find the good word) to have kept on you the letter given by the teacher and to have opened it since it was not for you!

And it shows that the school authorities were a little too much naive about the obedience when they gave the school boys a letter for their parents. I presume that you were not alone to act like that since you were all aged of 16 and no more kids.

If I were the teacher, I would have not given you this letter, I would have adressed it by post to your parents at their house.

In your case, it would have not changed anything but a letter written for the parents would have been read by the parents.

It was strange that the school authorities were so confident to you about that and treated you like an adult to whom confidence was possible and that at the same time you were treated during the physicals without much respect for your privacy and modesty such as for the weigh-in in the nude.

I presume that your physicals was in a cerain way inspired by military manners which was not abnormal since you were 16 aged and the age for draft physicals in most of the countries was fixed at 18.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave (to Fiona)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, November 29, 2012, 01:17: pm

Couple of follow-up questions.

"Retracting an erect penis was discouraged". Was this because it was harder to retract the foreskin hence causing pain or doing so might stimulate the boy to the point of ejaculation?" And if a retraction is needed to complete the exam do you wait for the rection subside or perform some other procedure.


"And seeing an erection taking place is an impressive sight. Even if you've seen lots of them." Are you referring to when during the exam the erection occurs, the speed in which it occurs, how it looks after it is erect or how long the erection lasts?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, December 01, 2012, 12:53: pm

It is any hint of stimulation that is discouraged. But of course sometimes it's unavoidable. Many doctors don't concern themselves about it at all, but a few won't retract a penis if it's fully erect. Many of them self retract to some extent anyway if it reaches that stage. The reasons for retracting are to see if there is any balinitus or yeast infections on or below the glans, and to see if there is any phimosis. Phimosis can be due to tight foreskin, or fusing between the glans and inner surface of the foreskin, which is the normal condition in young males. Many people confuse the two, which is one of the reasons much attention was paid to the genital examination by a doctor with expertise and experience. As the young male approaches adolescence the foreskin and glans become unfused, sometimes at much younger age, or it might be much later, which is one of the conditions that was diagnosed. If the penis erected, then one could usually observe by the way it moved whether any of those conditions existed, and if it didn't fully retract then some manual assistance would allow the shaft just below the glans to be seen, and which can be a source of problems. But they were never forced, always gentle.

I must have overstated it when I said impressive. But that was the word that came to mind when I was typing. I can't quite think of a more appropriate word right now. It's mainly the speed I suppose, and the way the shape changes as it grows. It doesn't often happen, but occasionally young males can erect extremely quickly, and that's what most surprised me when I began doing that work. Sometimes it seems as much a surprise to them, and they have no control over it at all. You do feel for them when it happens, because they can be very self concious about it. You can tell a lot from observing closely as the erection takes place. As I described above, the way the foreskin moves, or sometimes it might develop severe curvature which indicates something unusual about the structure within.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Vera
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, December 01, 2012, 05:19: pm

As a nurse who formerly did a lot of adolescent male physicals, I can also attest that the speed with which a teenager's penis can become erect can be extraordinarily quick. And many boys are stimulated when you look at the penis, so you may be willy-nilly (cute, eh?) the cause of the erection without even touching it.

I never looked or touched with the intention to stimulate, but an exam is an exam and it should be complete. And, also in the spirit of full disclosure, I should admit that on several occasions I found the erection both impressive and arousing. I had trouble with that last point for a while until I just acknowledged to myself without guilt that women are sexual beings, nurses or not, and can be stimulated by a male organ.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
john to vera
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, December 02, 2012, 10:14: am

Vera you say, "acknowledged to myself without guilt that women are sexual beings, nurses or not, and can be stimulated by a male organ."

I think this is a good and healthy thing to admit and that rather than pretending humans are not human, it would be better all around if people did admit this. There would be less guilt and difficulties if it was "part of life" rather than something everyone knows but has to pretend doesn't exist.

It seems to me that there is a narrow line between "never touching with the intention to simulate", and being aware that something done without the intent to stimulate is doing so anyway, and persevering with what must be done even though it's having that effect.

I say this because my GF of 3 years is a nurse and she has admitted to me that there are situations she derives sexual enjoyment from seeing or doing, particularly as pertain to early 20's or very late teens males who are on a "hair trigger" and can easily end up in a haze of embarrassment and arousal. She doesn't intentionally do anything to cause them any difficulty or discomfort, but there are sometimes "job perks" and physical reactions.

Were there any situations or procedures you tended to enjoy in particular?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
John_Modest
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, December 02, 2012, 11:32: am

"And, also in the spirit of full disclosure, I should admit that on several occasions I found the erection both impressive and arousing. I had trouble with that last point for a while until I just acknowledged to myself without guilt that women are sexual beings, nurses or not, and can be stimulated by a male organ." Vera
------------------------------------------------

When I was in the hospital having my second stent put in I had to lay without moving for 8 hours.

The nurse taking care of my room was a close friend of my wife and their family was friends with ours.

She had to show me how to pee while laying down. When I voiced my embarassment she gave me a 5 minute talk. Part of it was what Vera said.

John

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012, 04:51: pm

The first few times I saw it happen my feelings were that I shouldn't be seeing this. But as you get used to it you don't think about that any more, and in ward work the same thing happens though less frequently. When I first started we used to leave the room when the doctor was about to do the genital exam, but then we were expected to stay and I would normally stand at a discreet distance. Some doctors required the nurse to be close up and observe everything, and that was when one would begin to anticipate whether the boy would erect and if so how quickly. When you've seen lots of them you get a kind of sixth sense for the ones that are most likely to. From their general demeanour, whether they avoided eye contact or how comfortable they seemed. When there was a boy in for examination who seemed like he might erect strongly I must admit that was something that was difficult to resist watching if it was on display.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, December 19, 2012, 06:04: pm

I think the progression of your reactions are totally normal. You first felt the embarrassment of your patients and tried to act in a way to minimize their embarrassment.

But being that the sex drive is one of the strongest human urges and the male getting an erection is probably the most visual manifestation of that urge, your ongoing assessment of which males would get erect seems perfectly normal.

After you got over the feeling that you were doing some wrong by watching, I assume you eventually considered it to be (like Vera) one of benefits of your job.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, December 20, 2012, 04:58: am

on that point, I think like "Dave" that your behaviour was rather logical

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave to Vera
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, December 21, 2012, 08:52: am

You said "I never looked or touched with the intention to stimulate, but an exam is an exam and it should be complete."

To me that indicates that at times, when you saw an erection was occurring, as part of your exam you might have helped it along or helped prolonged it or done a more detailed exam. Nothing that might have compromised the integrity of the exam of course. But certainly there might be subtle things you could do to extend your involvement with a situation you find interesting or stimulating. Care to comment?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 05, 2013, 02:38: pm

I was matron at a private school many years ago. Most of the boys were boarders and they were all examined at set intervals by a female doctor who visited and kept detailed notes. We weren't coy about erections because it's absolutely normal. I often watched boys developing an erection during the examination, but I must say I never felt aroused by it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave (to Fiona)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, December 02, 2012, 11:37: am

I think it is interesting that the male doctors would be more likely to continue the examination despite the arousal.

Using a similar example, if one were perfoming an examination and it caused the patient obvious pain, the examination would be discontiunued or altered to relieve or minimize the pain.

But a male performing an exam which produced an erection might be less sensitive to the reaction and feeling of the patient and continue regardless.

A female might react differently. As Vera indicated, she might continue the exam "letting the chips fall where they may" while "enjoying the fruits of her labor". Or if the patient seems extremely embarrassed, she might get embarrassed also because of the patient's reaction.

Where something that has a sexual conotation is involved, no reaction is off the table regardless of how many times either the patient or health caregive have been in that situation.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Jean.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, December 09, 2012, 09:36: pm

Jean, further to your comments of November 20th.

Thank you for the kind remarks about my mother, she did indeed fit your description.

You spoke of the school authorities being naive in giving us boys the sealed envelopes to take to our parents, and you pointed to the apparent contrast between that action and the excessive level of undressing which was demanded at some of the examinations.

In considering these points, it is important to remember that at that time, whilst they were both responsible to the local council (and ultimately to central government) the School Health Service and the schools themselves were autonomous organisations. The schools' part in the medicals would have been to provide a room for the examining team to use, and to issue the notifications to the pupils' parents - they would have had no say in how the examinations were conducted, in terms of what was checked and how, or the level of undressing. Remember that the methods varied according to the whims of individual doctors; whilst I was expected to strip naked at the start, those I'd gleaned any details from who'd been examined before me (on different days with a different team) had been allowed to keep their underpants on for much of the exam.

I am fairly sure that an individual school's decision to send such notifications to parents owed nothing to their trust or otherwise in the pupils delivering them to the addressees, and everything to the idea of saving on the postage cost! I am also sure your assumption that I would not have been the only one to keep the news of the upcoming exam to myself is entirely correct. I imagine the teachers would have been well aware that some of us would 'forget' to hand them to our parents but, whilst that was something they would be unable to confirm, they would certainly know whether or not we attended the medical.

As we were close to leaving, we were often engaged on things outside of the school, so it was not always a case of being called out of class to go to the medical room, though some of the boys who were examined on earlier dates to me did get summoned in that way - having of course already been given their notification letters.

In any case, if someone who wasn't having to attend school on the day of their medical (or was just absent in the normal way due to illness, for example) hadn't reported for examination at the appointed time, the doctor would have informed the school secretary at the end of the session and that would have prompted a letter to be sent by post, either by the school or, more probably, by the SHS itself. When this occurred, the absentee would be instructed to attend the school clinic to be examined - something which, given the reputation those places had, anyone would have been anxious to avoid.

Finally, you speculated that the methods used at school medicals may have been inspired by those carried out by the military. You may well be right, though I don't think my being 16 has any bearing on this particular point as I had been instructed to fully undress at my primary school medical. Certainly, schools were much more disciplined places in those days, and I got the impression the doctors and nurses who carried out school medicals expected their instructions to be obeyed without explanation from them or questions or arguments from the pupils. My view on this was reinforced by the testimony of Sara (the former school nurse) who was in the discussion on an earlier thread.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Jean. (Correction of typo)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, December 09, 2012, 09:45: pm

Apologies for my typo on the first line - I should have written "28th November".

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, December 21, 2012, 04:11: am

"Smedley" :

About the school authorities and the fact that they were responsible towards local council or central government for having been sucessful in managing school physicals which were mandatory annually at my students time, they were with the school heath service rather free about the way they were set up, it was in fact depending on location facilities at school or outside in a mredical center, character of the doctors and so on .. so long as they were respecting all the check's exams necessary to be able to fill completely the medical form according to rules.

Of course, the level of undressing was not a general rule at least for all the examination because it could be mentioned for instance that the weigh-in might be made in the nude or on the reverse there could be no mention. That did not mean that all doctors were respecting the rule about undressing or there could be some local rules edited by local health authorities.

I agree that the methods varied according to the whims of individual doctors.

You were unlucky to be examined by a doctor and a nurse who required nudity for the examination at the start but I guess that it was not uncommon at that time.

Nevertheless I consider that in your case it would have been better if there would have been rules applied by all doctors to all students of your age for the examination of leaving students. It was not normal that as you said it could be different on different days with a different team when some boys were allowed to keep their underpants on for much of the exam.

About the notification of the day examination by a letter adressed by the post, I disagree with you because the school might adress a letter of notification for the results, so it was not a big deal to send two letters rather than only one.

Of course, the assumption that you had not been the only one to keep the news of the upcoming exam to yourself is entirely correct and I agree that the teachers would have been well aware that some of you would 'forget' to hand them to your parents but did nothing against that because they certainly did not want really a great presence of parents at the physicals.

I agree also with your next statement that "in any case, if someone who wasn't having to attend school on the day of their medical (or was just absent in the normal way due to illness, for example) hadn't reported for examination at the appointed time, the doctor would have informed the school secretary at the end of the session and that would have prompted a letter to be sent by post, either by the school or, more probably, by the SHS itself".

It happened always like that in France.

" When this occurred, the absentee would be instructed to attend the school clinic to be examined - something which, given the reputation those places had, anyone would have been anxious to avoid"

why ? was it so more embarrassing to be examined at a medical clinic except the fact that the parents were in that case always informed of the day for the examination and could more easily came if they wanted to be present?

"Finally, you speculated that the methods used at school medicals may have been inspired by those carried out by the military. You may well be right, though I don't think my being 16 has any bearing on this particular point as I had been instructed to fully undress at my primary school medical. Certainly, schools were much more disciplined places in those days, and I got the impression the doctors and nurses who carried out school medicals expected their instructions to be obeyed without explanation from them or questions or arguments from the pupils "

of course, you are right but nevertheless I think that some doctors, male or female, were sometimes inspired by military methods, especially for group examination or even for alone examinations when they were in a hurry.

every adult knew how the army managed the draft physicals, and that they were efficient to win time but not much respectful of modesty but it was completely edmitted by almost everybody, even the draftees never complained because it was like that for their fathers, so why would they have complained?

and at school physicals, it was a little the same, if you were not a "sissy" you were not supposed to complain because you were examined in the nude!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Jen.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, March 06, 2013, 09:56: am

Jen, you wrote "I was matron at a private school many years ago. Most of the boys were boarders and they were all examined at set intervals by a female doctor who visited and kept detailed notes."

Could you please give some more details about your time doing this job - such as in what years these examinations took place, the age of the boys involved and how the medicals were conducted?

Thanks.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, March 07, 2013, 11:55: am

I don't think it is right to give a lot of detail that might identify the location etc. I just wanted to say that we weren't voyeurs or becoming excited by it. Apart from being unprofessional, there were so many it was just normal. This was more than a few years ago. Decades.

The examinations were head to toe more or less in order. They came singly, and started off with head, sight, hearing, mouth throat. Then undressed above the waist for heart, lungs, blood pressure etc. Then they stripped off completely to be weighed and measured, and then the lower body examined and then finished.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, March 07, 2013, 12:53: pm

We understand your reluctance to disclose any information that might help identify you or the situation.

But can you compare or contrast what Fiona said especially in the areas of the boy's reaction to getting erect and whether the doctor's procedures were either made easier, more difficult, changed or eliminated completely as a result of the patient becoming erect.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013, 07:02: am

I haven't really read it all in detail. As far as I can tell the main difference was that the other accounts seemed to say that the boy would be undressed down to underpants from the start of the exam, and then hearing tests and so forth were done later. Our procedure was the other way around, and that's what we had been instructed to do. When the genital exam was done they didn't have underpants on anyway. If the boy became erect the doctor we had would examine him erect, and I would say that would be her preference. It is easier and you can see more clearly. Retracting the foreskin for example, you don't need to grasp it with both hands. Quite often they would become erect whilst being weighed. We didn't have electronic weighing machines then and we had to add weights and slide the little weight along the slider to get an accurate reading, and even a slightly stiffening penis would be quite noticeable. If that happened he would usually be examined more or less immediately, and then allowed to partially dress. Otherwise it would be left until last, and a lot of them would begin developing one as soon as they were taken to the place where they were examined. Usually the doctor carried out the genital exam on her own, and I waited out of view.

The boys seemed mostly okay with it. If it was their first time for a medical, which for new intake was usually in the first couple of weeks, they would sometimes be a bit shy. But mostly they knew what was coming anyway and you sometimes got the feeling they enjoyed the situation. But we ignored all that. Once a particular boy had been recorded as fully developed, the genital exam became less detailed.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013, 11:09: am

Obviously a female doctor was doing the exam since you referred to "her" several times. The thing I find interesting is that other than preforming the genital exam first and letting the boy partially dress no other changes were made to the exam procedure. Fiona indicated that at times the male doctor skipped the genital exam completely when the boy had an erection.

It may be that the male doctor was more sensitve to the boys feelings in not wanting to excite or embarrass him further by performing the genital exam. Certainly the female doctor had empathy for the boy doing that part of the exam first and letting him partially dress, but certainly if the boy became erect because of the preasance of female, her examination including touching, however quick, would certianly excite and/or embarrass him more.

Did the doctor ever indicate to you ayn changes in procedure if a boy was to become erect.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, March 09, 2013, 08:52: am

I don't think Fiona mentioned anything about male doctors carrying out school medical examinations which included a scrotal genital exam. We were not allowed to have any males present during these exams unless it was head and chest only. Except of course the boy being examined. That was a strict rule and as far as I have heard was universal in England and Wales. In fact we used to lock the door to make sure no one entered the room.

No change in procedure except that they were not left waiting any longer than necessary. We had to get them weighed first of course.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, March 09, 2013, 02:31: pm

My mistake. Guess I just assumed the males were the ones doing the examining.

Did I miss something here? Why were males specifically kept out of the room when male boys were being examined. Females I could understand. It was probably stimulating and/or embarrassing enough to have a female doing the exam. The presance of females not involved in the exam would only increase the embarassment. So why were males and not females excluded?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 10:31: am

Jen, Why did you have them strip off completely instead of asking them to keep their underpants on?

In my experience it was the normal practice that they were not exposed to view except during the genital examination.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 22, 2013, 09:01: am

It was the way it was done before I was appointed, and it was the doctors preference. Also it was something of the culture of the establishment. We still had corporal punishment in those days, which was quite a frequent occurrence. In the course of my duties I often saw naked boys and they got used to it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, March 07, 2013, 07:07: pm

Anyway, it is not with details about physicals that we would be able to identify a location, above all if they were performed decades ago

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical to Jen


Author:
Willy
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, March 07, 2013, 11:20: pm

Did you see girls examined to.Was the level of undress the same for girls or were only boys nude.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical


Author:
Smedley (UK) to Jen.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, March 09, 2013, 11:18: am

Jen, thank you for answering my questions from Wednesday. I fully understand and appreciate your wish to be discrete enough to avoid identifying either yourself or the establishment in question.

I'd like to ask a couple more things, but first perhaps I can clarify something mentioned by Dave:

" Fiona indicated that at times the male doctor skipped the genital exam completely when the boy had an erection."

and answered by you:

"I don't think Fiona mentioned anything about male doctors carrying out school medical examinations which included a scrotal genital exam."

In fact, Fiona wrote (October 7th):

"The examinations are always carried out by a female doctor and female nursing assistance for both girls and boys."

There has been quite a lot written on this thread and it is of course all too easy to get confused and to not be able to remember everything.

Following on from that, you said:

"We were not allowed to have any males present during these exams unless it was head and chest only. Except of course the boy being examined. That was a strict rule and as far as I have heard was universal in England and Wales"

From what I have gathered, the majority of medical examinations done in UK schools, and by this I mean state schools as accounts of boarding schools are few and far between (as they are obviously in the minority anyway - and many I have read have not seemed credible), were done by female doctors. Male doctors did carry out some, though, and I personally know of males (and a couple of females) who were examined by male doctors at school. So to be sure I understand you correctly, when you referred to not having males in the room, were you speaking of non-medical personnel?

I'd also like to ask you a couple more things, if I may.

1) What was the age range of the boys at the school?

2) You mentioned that when a boy was recorded as fully developed, the genital exam became less detailed. Could you please indicate what the difference was?

3) How often were examinations done, was it on an annual basis?

Since you referred to your time in this job as "decades ago", I am assuming it was in the sixties and/or perhaps the seventies. As those of us who were subjected to these examinations in those times will know, there was very little, if any, consideration given to the modesty of boys on such occasions. Methods did vary considerably (as has been discussed on this and other threads on the same subject) and your practice of doing such things as checking sight, ears, nose, etc, at the start of the medical was by far the more common one.

I would say that, in respect of consideration for the boys being examined, your ways of doing things is one of the better ones that I have encountered. Many boys were required to strip naked at the very outset of the examination (I was twice told to do this) and some of those who became erect were made to feel as though they had done something wrong. Though I didn't get erect, I can well imagine how much embarrassment such an experience would have added to the situation. Thankfully, it seems you and the doctors involved did what you could to alleviate matters. I think it was perfectly and logical sensible to carry on with the genital exam if a boy was erect: after all, the examination had to be done and, as you said, it did have advantages from the point of view of assessment.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013, 01:46: pm

We didn't have non medical staff present at any time.

The age range was twelve upwards, but I also worked at a school that was a younger age range, and the procedure was basically the same.

When they became fully developed it wasn't necessary to compare with the charts and models.

The exams were basically annual. I think in state schools they were less frequent. We had sports injuries to contend with as well.

As far as modesty is concerned, that's very difficult to achieve. It can make it worse if more attention is paid to such things. If a boy was clearly uncomfortable because he was developing an erection, one could always reassure verbally and we did that sometimes. That didn't make it go away though.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Keith
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013, 06:19: pm

I saw it mentioned more than once that examination of a penis when it is erect is better than when not. For whatever reason. So I am curious to know whether at any time you would have deliberately encouraged or otherwise caused one to occur.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013, 07:11: pm

One reason when an erect penis is preferable when being examined is when the boys are uncircumcised, which makes it easier for the foreskin to be retracted.
I have also seen descriptions, and also a vieo somewhere, of nurses or doctors actually retracting the foreskin forward and back several times continually to see if it is loose and easy to retract. This amounts to almost actual masturbation, and often produces an erection.
So it seems that uncircumcised boys have more of an embarrassing time during these exams. With a circumcised boy all it takes is a visual look and no fingering and handling necessary.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Rodger
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013, 10:29: pm

Thats why I regret being circed

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
David D.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 12, 2013, 06:12: am

You are right. My pediatrician was a woman, and a very attractive one at that. All through my early teen physicals she would test my foreskin for retraction. It had been tight when I was quite young. Every time she did this I got a full erection. During those years I thought of her often when I masturbated. I wound up marrying a woman who looked a lot like her! Fond memories of it all to this day.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 12, 2013, 09:32: pm

So it does have its advantages after all. Funny how early experiences, especially during puberty or just before, which were embarrassing and even humiliating at the time, reappear as erotic memories later on in life. This is the same for boys who were spanked bare by a non-parent, or bathed by a non-parent, and similar situations. Many of these situations even turn into fetishes later on as adults.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, March 13, 2013, 11:58: am

You are absolutely right. Once one discovers that being naked in front of females was such a turn-on (as I did), you keep trying to put yourself in situations (even when you are younger) where it will reoccur. With me, I always tried to get babysitters who were young and as close to my age as possible and always was trying to figure different way to get naked in front of them. The only problem is that once a situation becomes old hat, one is always looking for different ways to push the envelope and that is where I got into trouble.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013, 07:20: am

Occasionally yes. If a boy was beginning to develop an erection, and he became aware it had been noticed it would normally progress fully. If they were uncomfortable about it which many are, reassurance would draw attention to it. So in that sense it was. Pretending it hadn't been noticed, which is what was recommended, was ridiculous. As a rule once it had happened they were less shy about such things. So as I said before we were not coy about it.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013, 02:07: pm

I guess you had to play by ear as to how to react if at all. For some a reassuring word might be enough, but for others ignoring it would be better. You had to judge what worked in each situation. The one thing you did not want to happen the boy to get even more excited so that when touched he would ejaculate. Certainly a real possibility in teenage boys.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Jen
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, March 18, 2013, 08:35: am

Oh no, we didn't allow the situation to continue any longer than necessary. So that possibility is very remote. If a boy developed an erection he would then be examined more or less immediately. They weren't left waiting in that condition. That would have been asking for trouble.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 02:06: pm

What was the longest amount of time any boy was actually nude? You mentioned weighing them in the nude and then having to walk back to where they were examined? How far did they have to walk?

I would think that being weighted in the nude and the nurse having to fiddle with the scale and then walk back to the examination area would be more embarrassing than the examination itself especially if the boy had an erection.

Were any boys already erect when the took off their clothes? I guess you really had to be careful with those being that they were already excited?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Ben (to Jen)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013, 04:51: pm

Jen, how was the boys genital inspection done?
Were erections common or uncommon during the exams, and which age group tended to get them most?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013, 07:51: pm

I agree with "Ben " comments : it is funny how situations that we have hated when we were young can seem enjoyable or banal a long time after such as school physicals.

"Funny how early experiences, especially during puberty or just before, which were embarrassing and even humiliating at the time, reappear as erotic memories later on in life. This is the same for boys who were spanked bare by a non-parent, or bathed by a non-parent, and similar situations. Many of these situations even turn into fetishes later on as adults".

yes it is true in a certain way

As I was very modest, I have hated my school physicals or my military physicals in group and in the nude and now when I think to them, I regrtet this time, I laugh of my embarrassment and I think that it was stupid and I am pleased to think about it to remember and I would like to be submitted again to such a situation but may be it is beceause we were young and we are now adults becoming older and older, so it is logical that we are always thinking with pleasure to situations which occured during our youth.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, March 15, 2013, 07:55: pm

I think that "jen" is right when she said that it was useless to act during a physical examination like if a boy was not erected when he was, it seems also to me who ignore medecine that it is better for the nurse or the doctor to show that they have noticed it and to explain to the boy that it is normal and nothing to hide in a medical situation.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Tom
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 04:04: am

To Fiona: I simply cannot understand why a physician would not ask a boy to retract his own foreskin during an intimate exam. This would make the exam so much less humiliating and/or erotic.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Wayne
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 26, 2013, 08:18: am

I had annual physical exams starting at age 12. After checking me for a hernia (cough) the physician would proceed to retract my foreskin for inspection without asking. It was in a timely manner such that I did not develop an erection. Additionally, I was always somewhat anxious about the doctors examining my penis and foreskin which I think inhibited my ability to get an erection.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, April 08, 2013, 04:58: am

Because it's quicker and easier to do it yourself. Also you can feel if there is something unusual and there is a tactile element to that. It's the same as with any other part of the body.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Tom Lyons
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, March 27, 2013, 03:28: am

Wayne, your response is interesting. My question: Would you have been less anxious had the doctor asked you to retract your foreskin? I believe this would have been the sensitive approach. And I also believe that sensitivity is a form of respect that lessens anxiety. What do you think?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Wayne
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, March 30, 2013, 07:30: am

Hello Tom, Good question. I think that most of my anxiety was result of a concern that the doctor would recommend that my foreskin needed to be circumcised. My mother was concerned that I had a tight foreskin and had taken me to the doctor once to have my foreskin circumcised. Fortnately, it did not happen then but I always feared that I might eventually require the "snip". I'm still thinking about your question. Regards, Wayne.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, April 10, 2013, 01:33: pm

To "Tom" and "Fiona" : you are right both

it is a little less embarassing for a boy to retract himself his foreskin than when it is the doctor who does it
and it is the same if it is the doctor who is pulling down his underwear instead of asking to him to pull it down himself.

but it is certainly more efficient for a doctor to retract the foreskin because as Fiona said, he can more quiclky and easily show if the forsekin is tight by touching directly.

I think that the most important is that the doctor explains what he does.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, April 14, 2013, 06:30: am

What I should have said is that it's not just a visual examination. The doctor can feel as well as visually examine, and assess whether or not everything is fully functional. That's what I meant by tactile. Asking the individual to self retract doesn't provide as complete a picture, and youngsters are also known to be often slow or reluctant to comply with the request. Another important factor is that a doctor who routinely examines thousands of patients a year is well placed to carry out a quick assessment. They are specialists in this area, very familiar with the structures and the variations and have a wealth of knowledge and experience.

In the case of adults it is slightly different. It's possible to hold a conversation and ask them to do certain things themselves to aid the process. But even then in most procedures it is better if the patient is passive, and of course mandatory if a sterile area is required such as for example in catheterisation.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Roberto to Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, April 15, 2013, 08:57: pm

" mandatory if a sterile area is required such as for example in catheterisation."

How often is something like that necessary on younger patients? I always thought it was something to worry about when I was 70+. I'm 22. Is there something that might require it before then and if so I can chagne habit or lifestyle to prevent?

is it as bad as it sounds?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013, 04:43: am

That was just an example. There are lots of procedures that require a sterile field. The skin is covered in potentially harmful bacteria, especially around the groin area. So apart from simple visual inspections, the patient has to remain passive.

Catheterisation is more common in older patients, but it can be necessary at any age. Usually because of injuries or blockage of some kind, or necessity to drain the bladder continouously. Sterility is very important, and great care is required, otherwise infection can easily occur, and often does if the medical practitioner is careless. Usually it is a simple procedure, but a lot depends on the patient, and the person doing it of course.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Tom Lyons
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013, 02:18: am

Fiona: Please let me thank you for your response to my April 12 query which is apparently not going to be posted.

Your April 14 post would seem to make a powerful case for circumcision. Of course I knew about adhesions, but I did not know my uncut brethren were heir to penile pathologies that could only be identified courtesy specialized tactile sophistication. Granted circumcision should not be forced upon families. But should parents of new born boys be warned that failure to circumcise can be hazardous to penile health?

Fiona, your observations and insights from the past might be valuable for development of future treatment paradigms. That is why I asked in my April 12 query if some boys were reduced to tears by a genital exams. I also asked what happened if a boy resisted physically.

Pain and embarrassment issues are extremely important. People sometimes fail to seek medical care because of real or perceived mistreatment by medical personnel. To ensure against alienation, it is vital that sensitive, vulnerable boys be treated with compassion and respect. The importance of the emotional response to genital exams, especially by women, is highlighted by Dr. Joel Sherman in his blogs, Adolescent Boys and Genital Exams Reducing the Embarrassment and Sports Physicals Are They Needlessly Embarrassing? I beg you to give this issue serious consideration for the benefit of today's boys.

I would also like to hear more from Wayne and Jean the Frenchie. Tom

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, April 16, 2013, 05:00: am

Most of the posts I've read on here that are off topic I have ignored. But in this case I have to say that it's not clear what the relevance is to this thread.

Since you've raised the subject and it's been approved, I'd just like to make it clear that I regard routine circumcision as neither necessary nor desirable. Especially in infants. Very rarely there are cases in which surgery becomes necessary, but that is unusual. Otherwise if an individual wishes themselves to be circumcised, then they need to take that decision when they are old enough to be able to consider it for themselves. So please don't try to include me in whatever campaign you want to engage in, and which is nothing to do with the subject of this thread. I have posted on here in order to give an insight to people who have questions and concerns about the subject of the thread, from someone who has a experience of it. If there is anything else I wish to comment on, then I'll do so on the appropriate thread.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Tom Lyons
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013, 05:28: am

Fiona, please rest assured that I NEVER intended to dragoon you into a circumcision crusade. I view the circumcision controversy from the sidelines. Besides I have no skin in the game. My post was either a misread of or misguided reaction to your post of April the 14th. Thanks for the clarification.

I believe I have antagonized you. For that please accept my apologies. I do not like to offend an apparently kind person who has devoted significant time to the well being of others.

But my apology is strictly limited to the personal. I in no way rescind my concern for a vulnerable, modest boy who has to have his penis touched by one woman in the presence of another. I only concede that I address an issue which rests well beyond my experiential reach; that my concern may be invalid. Maybe I will be so informed.

To the forum editors: I might have misinterpreted the mandate of this forum. Hence my possible failure to realize that psychological issues may not be germane to a forum devoted to exam erections. If Fiona is correct, others have tendered tangential and irrelevant posts. A mission statement might be in order. I appreciate your consideration and your work. Tom

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave (to Fiona and/or Jen or anyone else)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013, 11:11: am

Please excuse my ignorance, but as one who was cicumcised at birth the issues regarding retraction of the foreskin are of interest to me.

Reading all these posts, I am making the assumption that the primary reason the boys get erections is that they are being touched whether it is by male or female health care professional. Certainly just being nude in front another person especially a female can cause an erection, but the actual exam appears to be the main cause. Is that correct?

That being said, it appears that there is more touching when a foreskin has to be retract and hence more stimulation to the penis. If the forskin is too tight, is it retracted more than once seeing if that will loosen up or is it only done once? Is it harder (no pun) to retract when the penis is erect? It is painful to retract a tight foreskin? And lastly-what are the medical options for a forshin that will not retract all way or is painful when retracted?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, April 17, 2013, 05:00: pm

I'll try to answer your questions, but there is a lot to cover. Boys often get an erection when they are exposed, or on occasion even earlier if they are anticipating what is going to happen. We ask them to undress to underpants and then carry out other tests first, weight, height, lungs and so forth and the genital exam would usually be left until last.

Retraction of the foreskin can also cause arousal, and that is because the nerve endings in the glans are nearer the surface than with a circumcised penis and typically it is more sensitive. The glans is a mucus membrane and should not be completely dry if there is a foreskin covering it. Erections in circumcised boys are less common - it's not always necessary to touch the penis in that case. If an individual is showing signs of erection prior to that part of the exam they will often erect when touched, so if possible the check is carried out quickly. The groin and testes are checked visually, sometimes also by touch, and then the foreskin is retracted to check if everything is normal there, or if something doesn't look quite right that may be done first. If everything is fine they are immediately asked to get dressed again. When the penis develops in childhood the foreskin is initially fused to the glans part of the way from the base (corona) and from birth gradually separates or becomes unfused over a period of several years. Sometimes this process is complete at quite a young age, but it can take until the teens to do so. That is unusual, but is one of the things the doctor is looking for. If it is forcibly retracted that can cause damage. The doctor also looks for signs of balanitis or inflammation, and whether the foreskin retracts freely. Contrary to popular belief, phimosis - tight foreskin - is not particularly common, and can be caused by swelling rather than the foreskin actually being unduly tight. Even when it does occur it can usually be treated fairly easily once identified. Circumcision is an option but usually a last resort. What is sometimes difficult to judge is whether the foreskin will become unduly tight when it's erect, but if the individual does develop an erection then that can of course be checked. Otherwise he is asked the appropriate questions, although I must say that some doctors are reluctant to rely on that because the answers are not always forthcoming or clear. Retraction of the foreskin when erect should in no way be painful. Usually they self retract slightly, exposing the tip of the glans, but there are variations. The reason these examinations take place is because boys don't often report difficulties, either because they are shy about doing so, or are unaware they are unusual because they don't have anything to compare with. Having said that I have seen a couple of cases of uncomfortable erections, which really makes you wonder how they have endured that long term without asking for help. As with other parts of the body size, structure etc varies widely and that's why there are doctors that are knowledgeable about these things to carry out the exams.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, April 18, 2013, 10:07: am

Wow-Thanks for the all the very interesting information. I guess I was most interested in your comments regarding the whether retracting the foreskin acutally caused most erections. You said that most (I assume that means over 50%) got erections when they were exposed or even in anticipation of the exams. Do you think that was caused by the exposure itself or the fact that a memeber of the opposite sex was present. And BTW-was the doctor doing the exam male or female? If female, did you notice that had any effect on the number of and/or the quality of erections (ie one that occurred with with a female doctor lasted longer). Thanks.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Fiona
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, May 03, 2013, 06:16: am

You've mis-understood, or maybe I didn't use clear enough wording.

It's normally a minority that actually do have erections. Sometimes less than 5% I would say, although on average it's more than that. But a greater proportion begin to display a slightly turgid penis, and often it will already be like that when it's uncovered. Handing a penis in that condition will often cause it to erect, and I would say yes most do if you allow enough time. The usual procedure was to allow them to cover up before that happened. Sometimes though they will become erect too quickly to be able to avoid it, or something has caused that part of the examination to take longer. As I said before, if the doctor feels there is something that could do with looking at in more detail, and if it would be an advantage if the patient was erect, then that was allowed to happen. It was not a common occurrence though. I have seen a doctor encourage an erection too, but that is a very rare event, and for a specific and compelling reason. I've done it myself on a couple of occasions after the doctor had showed me how she did it.

On the question of gender, the doctors were always female. I have seen examinations by male doctors on patients in a different setting i.e. not routine school exams, and erections are less common. Male doctors have told me it's quite rare when they are alone with the patient, so the presence of a female must make a difference. I have been asked to attend to patients prior to examination by a male doctor, and they quite often become erect also, but again this was in a different setting.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Dave (to Fiona)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, May 05, 2013, 10:33: am

I think we can all imagine what you mean by "encourage an erection". Certainly additional touching in certian places will do the job. If that is not the case and you would like to be more specific, I would appreciate it.

But given that males of that age have such a "hair trigger", isn'the the danger of encouraging an erection will go too far and the male ejaculates.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: tell them why?


Author:
curiousabouteverything
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, May 06, 2013, 09:36: pm

"I have seen a doctor encourage an erection too, but that is a very rare event, and for a specific and compelling reason."

When that happens, does the doctor tell the patient what and why she is doing that? Because otherwise many younger guys might think they've done something wrong/inappropriate even with assurance that it's "normal" or whatever and it seems kind of cruel to have them beating themselves up in their mind for something the dr was trying to do to start with.

I mean if the dr does that and the person doesn't know, it probably causes them a lot of extra embarrasment, doesn't it?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: tell them why?


Author:
Dave (to Fiona)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, May 07, 2013, 10:22: am

Always assumed that this was done without a patient's knowledge espeically with teenage boys. Since Fiona said a good numbers of boy were already "turgid", it wouldn't take much additional stimulation to get them full erect.

By adding the additional variable of telling them what you were going to do it would not only embarrass them more, but possibly either cause them to go limp or at the other extreme excite them so much that they might ejaculate.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Harry (to fiona, jen, verna, etc.)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2013, 03:52: pm

To those who have contributed their experience thank you, and I am curious what was the prevalence of circumcision?

Also, was there an awareness between circumcised and uncircumcised boys that they were "different" from one another?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Rhetta (to Fiona)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, June 17, 2013, 10:39: pm

Fiona -- in my experience I found 5% may be be a little low in terms of those who erected, though I'm sure you can attest that most boys are uncomfortable either way.

Harry -- I never found circumcision to be much of an issue. Whether or not a boy had a foreskin, it was completely normal to them because that's all they know. To me, each have their separate issues but it isn't a huge deal.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Ben
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Thursday, April 18, 2013, 04:23: pm

Fiona:

I have a question regarding a physical I had at overnight camp when I was 13. To be clear it was not a camp-wide mandatory physical, but I was called to the infirmary since it had been more than a year since I had had my last physical.

The procedure was the same as my doctor's office at home as a nurse had me undress to my underwear and I was weighed, measured, etc before the doctor performed the rest of the exam. However before she was finished, the nurse had me lay down on the exam table and had me lower my underwear so she could quickly cleanse my penis using a disinfectant wipe.

It didn't last more than a second and at the time I didn't think anything of it. However, I've never had that happen to me in the physicals I've had since and was wondering if you've ever heard of this technique and/or know why the nurse would have done this? Thanks.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Ivan
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2013, 01:48: am

At my year 14 physical the nurse did a similar procedure using a moist wipe to clean under my foreskin. Though I could have easily done it myself at my age, by having the nurse do it it happened so fast I did not have time to be embarrassed like I would if asked to do it myself.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Charles
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, April 19, 2013, 07:15: am

I never had a doctor retract my foreskin when I was erect or as far as I can recall even touch my penis as a boy, but I wish they had because I have phimosis. The prepuce will retract when I am flaccid, which is why my mother never spotted it, but not when I have an erection and I believe this is not uncommon. Therefore it is an advantage for a doctor to check for retractability when a boy is hard, embarrassing or not.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
willie T
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, April 22, 2013, 03:48: am

My friend's brother had a similar problem. When he was erect his foreskin would not retract. This came apparent when he was examined for a hernia. The nurse touched his flaccid penis which caused it to erect. When she tried to retract the foreskin it was tight and could not move past the glans. This was emarassing to the teenage boy because his sister was present. The conclusion was a circumcision for the boy which relieved the pain of not being able to have sex when his foreskin could not retract.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Tom Lyons
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Monday, April 22, 2013, 12:14: am

Fear or ignorance may explain the failure to check Charles(April 19, 2013)for erectile phimosis. The fear: A new awareness of child molestation has grown over the last few decades. False accusations and unjust convictions have been an invidious by product of this awareness. It is not hard to imagine a doctor's fear that a manually induced erection might be interpreted as molestation despite its diagnostic purpose.
Ignorance: Is it possible that our circumcision happy country leaves some doctors with less knowledge than Fiona about penile pathology in the uncircumcised? None of Charlse's doctors appear to have even ASKED Charles about erectile phimosis.
Despite my previous posts, I agree with Charles that medical care should not be hindered by embarrassment. But what about sensitivity? At thirteen Ben(April 18, 2013)was well qualified to personally apply the disinfectant wipe. Why couldn't the nurse have told Ben what to do? Then she could have turned her back of left the room. I certainly don't recall a physical in which a disinfectant wipe was applied.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Curtis
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, May 14, 2013, 03:57: pm

There has been much discussion about the way exams were carried out in the past, but I was wondering if there is anything that can speak to the way such exams are performed at present?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Svensson
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Saturday, June 15, 2013, 04:40: am

I came close to an erection during a medical exam once in my life time, 40 years ago, and it is something I recall quite well.

I have allways been scared at doctors, medical exams, and everything connected with medecine..I read that fear causes erection ("many hanged men died with an erection" they say) but I have never experienced such a thing.

The particular event I refer to took place in my last year of high school, somewhere near Paris, France, in the end of the sixties.
The doctor was a young woman around 30 and she was really pretty. She had long blond hair, blue eyes and an angellike face. She was also frendly to us, allways a smile on her face. That very day, she was wearing a miniskirt and she had left several boutons of her blouse open.

All the boys, teehagers between 17 and 19, were waiting in the waiting room and went one by one in the exam room and commented on the exam as they went out. We quickly learned that the doctor performed the usual exam, listened to heart and lungs and then would drop the guy's pants and check on his penis and testicles, and after that, she would ask the boy to turn over and then, surprise, surprise, she would part his buttocks and insert a thermometer to take his rectal temperature.

Most of the boys, as they told the story, insisted how sexy the doctor was, especially as she was sitting in front of the naked boy standing up for the genital exam, and claimed they got an erection at that stage.

I was waiting for my turn, getting more and more scared, especially at the idea of having my temperature taken in my butt.
Finallly, my turn came. The doctor was not alone in the room. Two elderly ladies weere present, the school nurse and the school psychologist. I was quite sure I would never be able to have an erection and would be ridiculous in front of those ladies. Even if I was in panic, I realised the doctor was quite sexy and she was quite nice to me. When she dropped my pants and examined my penis and testicles, I could fel her gentle touch, but I had no erection whatsoever; I was feeeling ashamed and I imagined the two old ladies, who did not miss anything of the "show", commenting my ridiculous babysize penis after the exam.

Then came the final part of the exam: the doctor asked me to turn over, I felt her hands parting firmly my buttocks and something cold and hard entering my rectum. "don't panic, said the doc, I just take your temperature". I felt humiliated with a thermometer in my ass like a baby and I felt like crying. But I did not want to give them those ladies that pleasure, so I decided to stand this ordeal, which was not so horrible after all, and I began to concentrate my mind on the doctors legs and boobs, even if she was behind me and I could not see her. And suddenly, I realised that the doctor had kept her hands on my bottocks and even that those hands were moving very slowly. She was carressing me and that feeling was very nice. I was still a virgin then, very shy with girls, and it was the first time anyone was carressing me like this and it felt so good. Even if I could still feel the thermometer in my ass, I wanted this situation never to stop. And, after a short time, I experienced a strange feeling in my belly. I dropped my eyes and I realised my penis was growing, getting harder and longer.

That was it: I had an erection. For the moment, the three ladies could not see it as I was turning my back to them. Then, quite strangly, I got further into panic. What would happen if they saw me like this. I was refusing what I had been wanting for a few minutes ago. But my penis kept growing and was now pointing up. I felt really bad about it, but could not stop it....

The unfriendly elderly psychologist came to my rescue, so to say. She made a silly comment on my person: "Ce garon a un joli petit cul" ( something like "this boy has a cute little ass"), nothing really naughty, but it gave me an emotionnal chock, I could not stop tears flowing out of my eyes, and my erection disappered at once. My penis was very quickly back to its babysize and my main concern then was that those women would notice that I was actually crying.

Just after that, he doctor took out her thermometer and announced that I was running a fairly high temperature (38,2 celcius =100.8 Fahrenheit) .I got even more frightened for a while, wandering whether they were going to send me to a hospital or something, but the exam was over and they just let me go.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
zone
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, June 16, 2013, 09:52: pm

Svensson why was the school psychologist in the room?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Svensson
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Friday, June 21, 2013, 01:35: pm

In the French lyce (high school) where I was during 7 years, the tradition was that the school nurse and the school psychologist were present during yearly medical exams. The girls had even their gym teacher present. The boys' gym teacher had allways declined the invitation

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
TC
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, June 23, 2013, 01:14: am

Svensson, hope you don't mind some questions. Were rectal temperatures normal for people of all ages in France at that time? How was your temperature normally taken at home and at your doctor's? How did other guys your age feel about having their temperature taken rectally?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Geo.
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, June 23, 2013, 09:29: am

While I agree that boys are/were treated without regard for their embarassment at physical exams, a review of Svenson's post makes it clear his was ficticous.

Were the boys "standing" for the genital exam, or did they "turn over?"

Also, "I had an erection. For the moment, the three ladies could not see it as I was turning my back to them."
???

Even works of fiction could be more consistant.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Svensson
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, June 23, 2013, 06:33: pm

Following the comments on my post.
This story is not a fiction, it happened to me in a French high school at the end of the 1960's.
It was not commun to take rectal temp at school physical, but it could happen. In my case, it took place only once in my last year in high school. My schoolmates were not as shocked as I was. They were excited as the doctor was nice and young.
At home, rectal temperature was common, as it is usually in France, when someone was sick.
I confirm that the doctor asked me to turn around after the genital exam to put a thermometer in my rectum, she seated, me standing. And according to my memory, when I started to develop an erection, neither the doctor, sitting just behind me, nor the two ladies sitting a few steps away, could see my penis growing.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
Tom Wallace Lyons
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, June 19, 2013, 01:40: am

I hope Svennson's June 15, 2013 entry inspires other men to describe the pain inflicted by intimate exams. Health care professionals need to know about this pain. My own 2013 posts(March 27, April 16, 17, 22)emphasize the importance of sensitive, compassionate treatment for boys. I stated in my April 17 post that my concern might be overblown because my exams were not like those described by Fiona and others.
Svennson's story proves that my concerns are on the dollar. Svennson provides an affirmative answer to my question to Fiona(April 16) about whether a boy was ever reduced to tears by an intimate exam. Hopefully more sensitive treatment paradigms will be developed if they are not already in place.
Thank you Svennson! Tom Wallace Lyons

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> Subject: Re: "Boys erection during physical" (Reposted)


Author:
jean the frenchie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Sunday, June 23, 2013, 04:28: pm

I must say that am very skeptical about the truth of the account of his school examination by "svensson" for several reasons

I am french and I was a high school student in France in the middle of the 60's.

We had an annual examination with a doctor, most of the time it was a women, because there was more female school doctors than male school doctors already at that time, it included a palpation of the testicles and an inspection of the penis and also a spine check generally performed in the nude but I have never heard of a rectal temperature at a school examination, and above all for high school students considered by all persons as too old to have a rectal temperature either at school examinations or at doctor's offices examination at that time. It is not credible in my opinion.

And I cannot believe that there was also present in the examination room a school psychlogist since she was not really concerned by a schhol examination by a doctor.
Of course, the school nurse could be present, even why not a second nurse as secretary or a young student nurse as assistant but not a psychologist. It happened to me one year to be examined in front of a young student nurse who made a training course.

I know that the respect of the modesty of high school students was not a great concern for adultsat that time but not in such a case where a women psychologist would have been present to see the intimate examination of boys.

I would have believed more easily that the male gym teacher was present because I know that it could happen at some schools, it was more often considered as normal to let him know if the students were in good health, and besides he was a man so he could see boys undressed. In mmy school, we undressed all together in a locker room in brief under his supervision but he did not enter in the examination room even if he could se us in briefs like it was also for gym lessons or swimming lessons since he supervised us in the locker room.

Anyway, it is different of a psychologist who had no reason to be here.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]


VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
Note: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:

Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Note: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2012 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.
Rectal Temperature, Normal 100.2 F or Less.
Visit the Rectal Temperature Message Board.