Circumcision, Ethics, and Medicine

“Like all professions, medicine has its own ethical code and principles of conduct. One rule of conduct is "First, do no harm." Removing a normal, healthy body part and causing unnecessary pain is doing harm. Some doctors who circumcise acknowledge the associated pain and then dismiss it by saying, "It only lasts for a minute," implying that it is acceptable to subject an infant to unnecessary pain as long as it is temporary. (In one study, the time required for the procedure ranged from six to forty minutes.(1)) However, there is strong evidence that the pain has lasting effects. Even if it did not, this careless attitude about inflicting pain violates the ethical principles of the medical profession. It also violates general moral principles to subject anyone, particularly a defenseless infant, to any unnecessary pain for any period of time. As recently reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, "Failure to provide adequate control of pain amounts to substandard and unethical medical practice."(2) Furthermore, circumcision without anesthesia is inconsistent with ethical guidelines that prohibit performing surgical procedures on laboratory animals without anesthesia.(3) Based on these standards and given that there is no effective and safe anesthetic that will eliminate circumcision pain, all circumcisions would be prohibited.

According to the Hippocratic oath, another important principle of medical practice is that the patient’s welfare shall be the doctor’s first consideration.(4) In the case of circumcision, doctors generally tend to ignore this rule, while parents falsely believe they are following it. One physician defended circumcision by saying that "within the community at large, at the present time, there is not a tremendous amount of support for saying to parents you shouldn’t do this." For this physician, regarding the issue of circumcision, community attitude seems to supersede the patient’s welfare. Isn’t it the medical profession’s responsibility to lead rather than follow regarding community health care standards?”

http://www.circumcision.org/ethics.htm

History of Circumcision

“The practice of male genital mutilation is far older than recorded history. Certainly, it is far older than the Biblical account of Abraham (Genesis 17). It seems to have originated in eastern Africa long before this time.”

http://www.cirp.org/library/history/

Royal Dutch Medical Association: Male Circumcision “Medically Unnecessary”

“Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG) to discourage non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors

Utrecht, 27 May 2010 – The official standpoint of KNMG and other related medical/scientific organisations is that non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors is a violation of children’s rights to autonomy and physical integrity. KNMG is urging a strong policy of deterrence.

The reason for the adoption of an official standpoint regarding this matter is the increasing emphasis on the protection of children’s rights. Contrary to popular belief, circumcision can also cause complications – bleeding, infection, urethral stricture and panic attacks are particularly common. Full or partial penile amputations have also been reported as a consequence of complications.”

http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/05/30/royal-dutch-medical-association-male-circumcision-medically-unnecessary/

Does Amputation Harm Babies?

Of course it does. Amputation of any healthy tissue is not only traumatic, but completely unnecessary. Naturally it will cause harm - on more levels than the parents who decide to cut their child even realize.

Does Circumcision Decrease Sexual Sensitivity? [Yes!]

“The effects of routine infant circumcision on penile sensation and sexual function are significant, one reason foreskin restoration is becoming more common.

That circumcision would reduce sexual sensation makes sense biologically. Stripping the glans of its protective foreskin effectively turns it from an internal to an external organ. Over time the originally moist, soft mucosa becomes pale as the skin builds up thicker layers to protect the delicate surface from abrasion against clothing. While circumcision results in initial hypersensitivity of the glans, over time the keratinisation of its surface makes the glans less sensitive.

Removing the foreskin also, not surprisingly, means that the circumcised man can no longer enjoy sensations from the specialised nerves amputated during the procedure. Nor can the foreskin function as intended during sex, providing gliding and rolling sensations a circumcised man necessarily lacks.

As circumcision has become the norm in America, the sexual effects of circumcision have been downplayed, if not outright dismissed. Advocates of circumcision point to a number of studies in which circumcised men reported being happy with the procedure or feeling no less sensitive after circumcision.

However, these studies are methodologically questionable.”

http://mens-sexual-health.suite101.com/article.cfm/does-circumcision-decrease-sexual-sensitivity

Chronology of the foreskin and circumcision

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=54

Circumcisions kill 20 boys in South Africa

“Twenty South African boys have died following botched circumcisions in the Eastern Cape Province.

"The deaths occurred over the past 12 days, with nine of them occurring over the past 24 hours," said a provincial health spokesperson.

Some 60 boys have been rescued from 11 initiation schools which have since been closed.

Circumcision is seen as a rite of passage into manhood in some South African communities.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/africa/10350471.stm

Infant circumcision is unethical paper says

“A new paper by David Shaw in Clinical Ethics this month argues that non-indicated circumcision performed by a physician is unethical. The paper states that an ethical doctor will object to conducting a clinically unnecessary operation on a child who cannot consent simply because of the parent’s desires or religious beliefs.”

http://www.icgi.org/2009/12/circumcision-unethical/

It’s time to protect boys as well as girls from the barbaric practice of circumcision

“Let the squeamish look away now: this blog post is about male and female circumcision, a subject that’s raising controversy again. Why is female circumcision abhorrent but male circumcision kosher?

I blame our cultural hypocrisy.”

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/cristinaodone/100043247/its-time-to-protect-boys-as-well-as-girls-from-the-barbaric-practice-of-circumcision/

Infant circumcision causes [more than] 100 deaths each year in US

“The study found that approximately 117 neonatal (first 28 days after birth) circumcision-related deaths occur annually in the United States, one out of every 77 male neonatal deaths. The study also identified reasons why accurate data on these deaths are not available, some of the obstacles to preventing these deaths, and some solutions to overcome them.

Previous studies estimated the death rate as low as two per year to as many as 230. The study collected data from hospital records and government sources to attempt to provide a more accurate magnitude of the problem.

To put this in perspective, about 44 neonatal boys die each year from suffocation, and 8 from auto accidents. About 115 neonatal boys die annually from SIDS, nearly the same as from circumcision.”

http://www.icgi.org/2010/04/infant-circumcision-causes-100-deaths-each-year-in-us/

Clarification on why MGM is comparable to FGM

The following video was posted by the YouTube member freedom0f5peech, who has an excellent assortment of informational videos about the subject of genital mutilation. This particular video was a response to another YouTube member who, like many people, is clearly not aware of the similarities between and misconceptions about female genital mutilation (FGM) and male genital mutilation (MGM). Due to a politically correct mindset in various countries, some people express massive anger about cutting females but blatantly refuse to accept that what is routinely done to baby boys is just as wrong as what happens to baby girls in some countries.

*Warning – the video contains various profanities as well as some images of human genitalia.

 

The case against circumcision

“To be intact, as nature intended, is best. The vast majority of males who are given the choice value their wholeness and keep their foreskins, for the same reason they keep their other organs of perception. Parents in Europe and non-Muslim Asia never have forced their boys to be circumcised. It would no more occur to them to cut off part of their boys' penises than it would to cut off part of their ears. Respecting a child's right to keep his genitals intact is normal and natural. It is conservative in the best sense of the word.

       A circumcised father who has mixed feelings about his intact newborn son may require gentle, compassionate psychological counseling to help him come to terms with his loss and to overcome his anxieties about normal male genitalia. In such cases, the mother should steadfastly protect her child, inviting her husband to share this protective role and helping him diffuse his negative feelings. Most parents want what is best for their baby. Wise parents listen to their hearts and trust their instinct to protect their baby from harm. The experience of the ages has shown that babies thrive best in a trusting atmosphere of love, gentleness, respect, acceptance, nurturing, and intimacy. Cutting off a baby's foreskin shatters this trust. Circumcision wounds and harms the baby and the person the baby will become. Parents who respect their son's wholeness are bequeathing to him his birthright-his body, perfect and beautiful in its entirety.”

http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/fleiss.html

Who’s looking after the boys?

“The universal declaration of human rights state that every man, woman and child should have equal rights without discrimination (United Nations, 1948). These rights should have meaning within our everyday lives and aim to protect all people from injustice.”

http://www.rcm.org.uk/midwives/features/whos-looking-after-the-boys/

Strawman Fallacy: FGM vs. MGM

 

Routine circumcision of normal male infants and boys

“Strictly speaking, it is not the opponents of routine male circumcision who need to make a case against the procedure, but its supporters who must prove its necessity: they need to explain why a natural part of the human body, and one common to all primates, is so dangerous that it must be amputated before a baby can talk, crawl or do anything much except scream.”

http://www.circinfo.org/debate.html

Foreskin or against it?

A humorous article written by a cut man. While very funny in places, it gets the point across by summarizing:

“In 100 years, I mused, will circumcision exist only in books that chronicle gruesome medical foibles? Will it be found in the chapter right after leeches?”

http://www.salon.com/aug97/mothers/circ970820.html

Pro/con chart

“A while back, I wrote an essay on the ethics of routine male circumcision. During my search for sources in writing this paper, I found very few pro-circumcision sources because so few doctors recommend the procedure today.

Despite that, many Americans are still very much for Routine Infant Circumcision. This is my page outlining both the pro and con arguments for the procedure, followed by a brief on the truth of the situation.”


http://www.homiegfunk.com/RIC2.htm?ref=BenimShopum.com

The deepest cut

“[L]ately, more parents than ever are deciding to keep their newborn sons intact—especially on the West Coast. The reasons range from changing recommendations by medical authorities to the growing trend of parents not wanting to blindly follow social norms.”

http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/content?oid=1419134

Circumcision and the wisdom of NORM

“In a society that puts so much belief on freedom of choice and individual liberty, should not boys be left to make their own decision when they are old enough to understand the full implications of what a circumcision involves?”

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/juliankossoff/5290667/Circumcision_and_the_wisdom_of_NORM/

Ethical Questions for the AAP Committee on Bioethics

http://www.circumcision.org/bioethics.htm

Dutch doctor’s group oppose circumcision

http://www.icgi.org/2010/05/dutch-doctors-group-oppose-circumcision/

Circumcision in boys: Time for doctors to reconsider

http://www.cirp.org/library/general/hofvander1/

Infant circumcision causes more than 100 deaths each year in the U.S.

http://www.icgi.org/2010/04/infant-circumcision-causes-100-deaths-each-year-in-us/

What’s Wrong With Circumcision?

http://www.norm-uk.org/circumcision_wrong.html

I’m a Doctor, a Jew, a Father & Grandfather: My position on Circumcision

http://www.drmomma.org/2009/08/im-doctor-jew-father-grandfather-my.html

Why circumcision should be abhorred

Why circumcision should be abhorred

Complications of Circumcision

http://www.circumstitions.com/Complic.html

20 Reasons I Did Not Circumcise My Son � Sagacious Mama

20 Reasons I Did Not Circumcise My Son � Sagacious Mama

Modern Circumcision: A Ritual of Ignorance, Abuse and Greed

Modern Circumcision: A Ritual of Ignorance, Abuse and Greed

Purpose of this blog

This blog will serve as a storehouse of information/links about the subject of circumcision and why it's not cool to cut babies.

We want to help people acquire wisdom about circumcision!