Cervical Cancer Vaccine: Argumentative Analysis

This controversial issue, I believe, is a lot like last week’s issue pertaining to whether or not boys and girls should be obligated to get the Cervical Cancer Vaccine. There are both benefits and negatives of getting the vaccine, whereas this week’s topic demonstrates the benefits and negatives of a routine male circumcision. It is hard to say one way or another, and I think if I were a male, it would be easier to answer. I still do not believe there is a valid reason for routine male circumcision. It says, in an article by Angus Nicoll, “The case for routine male circumcision has rested most firmly on the observation rates of infant urinary tract infection and adult penile cancer are lower in circumcised males, however when weighed against
the irreducible complication rates and costs of the procedure, these are thought insufficient grounds to recommend routine circumcision” (Nicoll, 1997).
This is important because it represents some of the benefits people believe to be true because of receiving the circumcision, but they do not think about the other aspects. It was stated here the beliefs were/are insufficient. Like the Cervical Cancer Vaccine had its issues with religious reasons, male circumcision has its issues with one’s own culture or beliefs, especially with the Chinese. It says, “Our study showed most of the Chinese participants considered RMC to be a foreign topic and were generally averse to the idea of male circumcision, a practice which conflicts with their cultural and social norms” (Jia, 2014, p. 132). No matter what the issue, there are always going to be people who have valid reasons to get out of something or have beliefs conflicting with the law and are therefore allowed to refrain. Even with the so-called benefits, each person should have their choice on whether or not they want to go through with routine male circumcisions. After all, from an article by American Academy of Pediatrics, it states most of the time, circumcision starts out as
a newborn. However, I also read, not being circumcised as a newborn can have harmful effects later on in life as an adolescent. It explains, “Parents who are considering deferring circumcision should be explicitly informed that circumcision performed later in life has increased risks and costs” (American Academy, 2012). However, I still do not believe it should be a procedure when a child does not know what is even going on. I know it could be in a child’s best interest, but it is the right the child should have. Not only should it be a choice, but also with every circumcision, there is a chance of harm. “The risks of the operation of circumcision include damage from the surgery with a poor cosmetic result or actual damage to the penis” (Hargreave, 2010, p. 630). In any circumstance, a procedure always has a risk of something negative. It also states from Hargreave, sometimes even with the circumcision, it could promote sexuality and make occurrence of HIV higher (Hargreave, 2010, p. 630). All of these factors go to show that in any type of routine circumcision, there should be a choice.
There should also be a choice because of the harmful effects one could go through during the procedure, and because of the harmful effects overweighing the benefits. It also goes along with vaccinations and risks of harm, rather than good. Remembering religion, social, and cultural beliefs provide an impact is important as well. Learning about male circumcision has given me an insight to what it is, and why I believe the way I do about it. However, as I said earlier, maybe I would have reasoned differently if I were a male and had thought about going through with the procedure regarding routine circumcisions. Even with the benefits of this issue, I can agree, there, for me, is not a valid reason to perform routine male circumcisions. There are so many things in this world happening with every move we make. Researching before deciding on something worth changing a life should be done first, before making a big decision because of what one has heard, rather than
learned.