Circumcision: no medical organisation in the world recommends it.
It's amazing how commonly pro-circumcision research is biased and flawed.
For example, there is one study that showed foreskin could lead to increased urinary tract infections in the first year of life, but UTIs are very rare in boys and the reason the "first year" came up is because boys who are born prematurely are both more likely to develop UTIs and, because of their health issues, less likely to undergo a traumatic surgery like circumcision. The research on the subject is full of loopholes like these, because the researchers conducting this research almost always have an agenda. They go into the study hoping to find a reason, and this has been going on for hundreds of years. When circumcision was first introduced to Western culture, doctors were promoting it for masturbation prevention and to prevent... clubfoot.. bed wetting.. and numerous other bizarre assertions. For real.
But the proof is in the pudding... over 80 percent of the world NOT circumcised and there are no problems affecting them more than the circumcised population. In fact, there are higher rates of penile dysfunction in the U.S.A than in Europe, where almost no one is circumcised. That's a big study no one had to conduct... and it's pretty telling. Which is probably why it's pretty easy for medical organizations around the world to say "circumcision is unnecessary".
If your worried about having to do extra cleaning as a parent, rest assured, washing an baby's foreskin is simple. The foreskin is ATTACHED to the head of the penis until a boy reaches around 5, at the earliest, and often closer to 11 or 12.
At that age it is simple to teach them to pull the foreskin back in the shower and rinse it. Pulling back a foreskin and rinsing off with water is about 100x easier than any other hygiene activity -- brushing your teeth takes longer, shampooing your hair takes longer... clipping toenails takes longer. Not to mention girls have to wash their privates in the shower, too, and that's arguably harder than washing a penis too. Yet, who is suggesting trimming off infant labia? The labia and clitoral hood also develop smegma if improperly cleaned, so the comparison is apt.
The foreskin is incredibly sensitive. It has thousands and thousands of nerve endings. Many of these nerve endings are of a special type: fine touch. The rest of the penis is strangely absent of fine touch nerve endings -- the type of nerve endings that make your fingertips and lips so sensitive. So the foreskin really does provide a unique and valuable difference in sensation. That is very valuable considering the sensitivity of the penis is probably most people's favourite thing about it.
Speaking of sensitivity, the foreskin covers the head of the penis, keeping it soft and sensitive. A permanently exposed penis head develops keratinization, which essentially means it builds a callus over top of it to keep the constant friction it encounters from causing the owner countless hours of oversensitivty and discomfort. This same keritinization happens on the heel of your foot if you walk around barefoot. That's why over time it get's easier to walk around on hot cement, or gravel paths. But you don't want that for your penis.
The foreskin also has sexual function. It does the work for you, sliding back and forth, reducing abrasive friction and acting a lot like lubricant. Many refer to this as the foreskins "gliding mechanism" and it is nature's way of facilitating comfortable sex for all parties involved. The exposed head of the penis of a circumcised penis can actually act like a plunger, pulling lubricant OUT and causing it to dry up on the shaft of the penis. The foreskin can reduce this effect, and when it covers the head of the penis, it actually returns the lubricant to the tip of the penis where in can go back IN again. It's actually a genius design that keeps sex slippery longer.
But ultimately the reason not to circumcise is to give HIM the choice... its a decision you cant undo.