-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP – the science-based one) has recently published the results of its task force on circumcision. The AAP evaluated the recent evidence and determined that “the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it.” We have previously discussed the ruling of a German court that parents who circumcise their sons based on religious beliefs are committing child abuse.
The specifics benefits of circumcision include
- prevention of urinary tract infections,
- penile cancer, and
- transmission of some sexually transmitted infections, including HIV.
However, the AAP notes that the health benefits are not great enough to warrant routine circumcision.
The AAP notes that the benefits warrant reimbursement via medical insurance policies. We await the Christian conservatives’ outrage, claiming that circumcision, and it accompanying reduction in sexually transmitted diseases, will increase male promiscuity.
The AAP Technical Report recommends that “circumcision should be performed by trained and competent practitioners, by using sterile techniques and effective pain management.” The Task Force notes the problems with finding competent providers.
Researchers from Johns Hopkins University have found that “twenty years of falling circumcision rates have cost the country $2 billion in preventable medical costs.” Eighteen states have dropped their Medicaid coverage of the procedure.
Those who claim that the uncircumcised penis is natural and hence, better, commit the naturalistic fallacy. The argument that circumcision violates a “right to bodily integrity” would also apply to any number of surgeries to correct birth defects like fused limbs and the removal of vestigial tails.
While circumcision for health benefits has a rational basis, circumcision to demonstrate a commitment to an imaginary being is not rational.
H/T: David Bernstein (VC), Monya Baker (Nature), The Virginian-Pilot.
Desensitizing/sensitizing. There went that pro-circumcision argument. I am not, mom said I could do it myself, when I asked why the others were.
As for accomodation to custom, that is true. Why else do
we have such a difference between Europe and USA?
But just as in male circumcision, female processes of all varieties, if done under unhygenic conditions will lead to terrible consequences. Dirty hands will kill just as they used to do at childbirth.
If people want to hear of really bizarre practices, the aborigine tribes have scarification and slitting of the foreskin as a rite of passage of young teenage men.
Chatwin mentioned it in passing in his book “Songlines”.
Haven’t studied any of it. Just random pickings.
Prefer the Trobriand Island methods for rites for youths of both sexes. They share dorms together for at least two years, encouraging free sex. Read more if you are interested in anthropology.
I’m Jewish, I did not have my son circumcised, he understood that he could get it done himself when he was 18 if he wanted to, he didn’t want to, I don’t involve myself in any further questions about his position on the matter; surely if he wants me to know something he will tell me. But it is interesting how I came to the decision not to have him circumcized, since I had exactly eight (8) days to make the decision at the time. I weighed the irreversibility of the procedure against the real data (that he would have a lot more risk-time after age 18 than before, in terms of hygienic considerations AND vulnerability to disease) and decided, well Hell, may as well choose the easy way out.
That was the last time I chose the easy way out in making decisions raising him and I think we did all right in the long run.
Removing the foreskin, besides so-called hygenic reasons, desensitizes the meatus, making intercourse with premature ejaculation less likely, etc.
……
actually… If I remember correctly, I saw a study where this was an OPPOSITE finding…..
Circumcised males were more likely to have premature ejaculation issues….
Well, well, well.
First nature’s guide. The collection of smegma under the clitoral hood and the foreskin are usually accompanied after a while by irritation or itching. The child reacts and manifupoates the area, often dislodging the smegma.
Nicking a clitoral hood on a young baby can be compared in terms of remaining trauma memories to those of birth circumcisions. Removing the foreskin, besides so-called hygenic reasons, desensitizes the meatus, making intercourse with premature ejaculation less likely, etc.
Excision is ascribed, as is suturing shut a vulva with an opening left for urination/menstruation, to muslims beliefs in reducing the woman’s unnatural lusts, and assuring virginity at marriage, chiefly in Somalia. Some literally have to be cut open some months before marriage so as to permit intercourse. We have many Somali refugees here, and the Swedes have forbidden it by law, so they send their girls home to get it done, it is alleged.
The ritual of nicking of rhe clitoral hood for ritual purifying is news to me.
I will inquire of a Somali the next oppoutunity I get.
Idealist….
I too, am always shocked by FGM….. HOWEVER, I leaned that it is NOT always as drastic as what you describe….
I do have to wonder tho, would we as Americans, be just as shocked at Male circumcision,as we are Female Genital Mutilation, had we not grown up in a country where this was the norm????
We are VERY shocked at what they do to women in some of these Tribes via Female Genital Mutilation…. and RIGHTFULLY so….. BUT, is this just because we are not accustomed to this?????
Same question visa versa…. Are we OK with male circumcision because we are accustomed to this as a society.???
What if we had NEVER seen a circumcised male.???
then we saw graphic photos of a baby having his foreskin removed????
Would we be just as shocked???
If anyone has a reference to support groups for adult male victims of circumcision perhaps could they please post the reference here. I did a very brief check. I did see web sites by people taking a stand on the basis of principle against circumcision.
I did not see any support groups for males who considered themselves to be victims – but I would guess there are some – somewhere – maybe.
It seems to me there are two concerns regarding mutilation from male circumcision, (1) those who regard the practice, on principle, to be mutilation and (2) the issue of accidents or mal-practice.
Clearly the possibility for mutilation is a concern for parents. But stories of hundreds of damaged boys may not be particularly relevant when evaluating the common practice here.
Does anyone know of the rate of serious problems arising from the actual procedure of male circumcision as practiced here in the US or other western nations.
My impression was that serious complications were relatively rare.
The one that I am aware of that made the popular press involved the tragic evens of a boy who was accidentally mutilated and raised as a girls. He eventually wrote a book regarding his experiences, the attempt to teach him to live as female, his realization that there were problems, and finally his life as a male.
The worst forms of female genital cutting are unquestionably worse than the usual form of western male circumcision, but the worst forms of male circumcision are also worse than the lesser forms of female cutting. Over 100 males died of circumcision in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa in 2010, and there were at least two penile amputations.
Compare that with this:
http://aandes.blogspot.com/2010/04/circumcision.html
Why would the procedure in that most recent link be illegal in most western countries, yet this is legal:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6584757516627632617
http://www.noharmm.org/circumfemale.htm
Circumcision of the Female
C.F. McDonald, M.D. – Milwaukee, Wisconsin
GP, Vol. XVIII No. 3, p. 98-99, September, 1958
(“If the male needs circumcision for cleanliness and hygiene, why not the female?”)
More recently, the AAP’s Bioethics committee changed its policy on female cutting in 2010 saying “It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual [clitoral] nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm.”
They were forced to retract this about six weeks later:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/722840
Dr Diekema, the chair of the committee said “We’re talking about something far less extensive than the removal of foreskin in a male”.
Thanks for the suggestions. Here goes:
@Christie:
The foreskin is homologous to the clitoral hood, but has more nerve endings than the external clitoris. Even a pinprick on a girl’s genitals is illegal though. Why don’t boys get the same protection?
The people that cut girls compare male and female circumcision all the time. So did the doctors that used to promote female cutting in the USA:
http://www.noharmm.org/CircintheFemale.htm
Circumcision in the Female: Its Necessity and How to Perform It
Benjamin E. Dawson, A.M., M.D. – Kansas City, Missouri
President, Eclectic Medical University
American Journal of Clinical Medicine, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 520-523, June 1915
http://www.noharmm.org/femcirctech.htm
Female Circumcision: Indications and a New Technique
W.G. Rathmann, M.D. GP, vol. XX, no. 3, pp 115-120 , September, 1959
ml66uk
1, September 1, 2012 at 12:42 pm
I have a post from 12:10pm which is “awaiting moderation”, but that may help to explain why some people believe there is a real comparison between female genital cutting and male circumcision. The less common male circumcision is (or the more common female cutting is), the more likely people in a country are to compare the two.
My post from 10:40 answers some of your points.
TRY reposting it….
This time tho, only allow 2 links in your post….
This helped me when this happened to me….
just try removing links that you may have in your post…..
ml66uk,
Comments with more than two links are sent into moderation–where they usually remain. Try posting the information again in two or more comments.
justagurlinseattle “there are A LOT of men that feel mutilated and violated by circumcision”
Well wait a minute. You seem to be trying to build a clear equivalence between circumcision and procedures performed on women.
——————————————
NO…. BUt at the same time…. Just google… Men Mutilated by Circumcision….
There is web site after website on this subject….. MEN from the USA….
a lot of circumcised men feel very violated and disfigured by this…..
and as with rape…. who are we to say, what degree is worse.????
PLUS….. there are men who are actually mutilated via circumcision…. I mean the penis is damaged beyond repair…..
I have a post from 12:10pm which is “awaiting moderation”, but that may help to explain why some people believe there is a real comparison between female genital cutting and male circumcision. The less common male circumcision is (or the more common female cutting is), the more likely people in a country are to compare the two.
My post from 10:40 answers some of your points.
As I said…. ANY form of cutting… EVEN a little cut is NOT allowed…..
NOT all forms of Female Circumcision are DRASTIC…..
THO, we have come to this conclusion due to it NOT being a societal NORM…… so we dismiss it as being drastic….. EVEN tho, we are willing to cut an entire part off of a baby boy, because it is a societal norm….
we consider cutting a female at all… even a NICK…. is considered MUTILATION…..
————————————————————————
http://www.mndaily.com/2010/09/20/cut-divides
Members of the Somali community in the Twin Cities disagree on whether to support the mild form of circumcision some refer to as a “clitoral nick,” where a woman’s clitoris is poked and allowed to bleed, a practice that’s believed to render her “clean.”
While some, like Ahmed, believe they should be able to practice the long-standing tradition, others are equally passionate about leaving it behind.
On par with ear piercing
Widespread discussion around the topic resurfaced in May of this year when the American Academy of Pediatrics Bioethics Committee reviewed a 1998 policy which banned any female circumcision. The committee recommended that the AAP approve what it called a “ritual nick,” arguing it’s on par with ear piercing and “much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting,” or circumcision.
Douglas Diekema, chairman of the AAP’s Bioethics Committee at the time, has long believed that pediatricians should be able to perform a nick as an alternative to a more dangerous procedure performed in a nonmedical setting.
The thing is, this is about parental ego.
My kid will have a better penis if …
It is all about “the better penis.”
The trophy penis.
Just so you know.
Saw a long scientific program on our science channel.
It gave the results of a study of how women’s sexual nerves are distributed.
It can be summarized, with individual differences, such that women’s clitoris in fact extend along the labia to the anus, and in some cases are in the anal periphery as well.
Some women reach orgasms doing fellatio. Sex is indeed a personal experience. Some women are so frank as to say while dancing: “Excuse me, I have to go do myself”. A minority admittedly.
So comparing the foreskin to the clitoris is not a correct one in terms of sources of sexual pleasure.
But then it was circumcision we were talking about.
I can take care of my own hygiene.
And my once girlfriend. a nurse on the thorax surgical ward occasionally took care of other patient needs when bathing them in the ward bed.
Gurl’s arguments strike me as being a lot more rational than yours Christie, and she hasn’t resorted to name calling.
Please read my post from 12:10pm when it gets approved.
Actually…. I did NOT say it was the same….
…actually you did. You directly compared them.
My point is… you can NOT cut a female… NOT even a little…..
NOR do I think anybody should……
…again, removal the clitoris is not cutting “a little”.
At first I thought you might just be brainwashed/uneducated. From your response it is obvious you are delusional so you enjoy yourself “gurl”
Actually…. I did NOT say it was the same….
My point is… you can NOT cut a female… NOT even a little…..
NOR do I think anybody should……
THO, you can cut a part of a boys PENIS off….. and nobody blinks an eye…. WEll… in the USA anyway…..
It does NOT seem to be really fair….
there are A LOT of men that feel mutilated and violated by circumcision….
EDUCATE YOURSELF!!!!!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2011/dec/06/1
Infant male circumcision is genital mutilation
Men should have the right to choose circumcision, not have the choice forced upon them. Infant circumcision without consent or immediate medical justification is an unjustified violation of basic human rights, that shares more in common with ancient coming-of-age rituals than responsible medical practice
justagurlinseattle “there are A LOT of men that feel mutilated and violated by circumcision”
Well wait a minute. You seem to be trying to build a clear equivalence between circumcision and procedures performed on women.
If there really were that kind of equivalence then I do not believe we would be having the debate.
I am no expert, but based on what I have heard, the procedures performed on women are clearly damaging and follow the women into adulthood and all through their lives.
In contrast, when males are circumcised at an early age they literally have no memory of it or any associated pain. And as has been reported here there are medical benefits.
Finally, I have never heard of any men who felt mutilated or violated by circumcision. I did not actually check and keep count, but I assure you over the years I have know quite a few men who were circumcised. I am prepared to assert, admittedly without data from a survey, that feelings of mutilation or violation are simply not an issue with men who are circumcised.
None of that says that circumcision should be performed. But I think it is clear that it is reasonable to distinguish what is done to little boys and what is done to girls.
What is done to girls seems to be damaging under any circumstance.
What is done to boys simple does not fall in the same range.
Creating a false equivalence between the two does not help us understand the real issues that are involved.
David,
interesting topic! I think parents have a responsibility to consider circumcision if the doctors they trust recommend it for their child. Beyond that, all I can say is Ouch!
justagurlinseattle, incredibly uneducated people such as yourself is why the debate on circumcision never goes anywhere.
If you really equate the remove of a bit of foreskin with the removal of the clitoris than you have no business having a discussion with adults. If you truly think that the foreskin is equivalent to the clitoris than it is quite obvious that you really are a “gurl” and not a girl or woman.
Please educate yourself in basic anatomy before continuing this debate