Institution
Course/Number
Tutor’s Name
Date
In Response to Increasing Rates of Heterosexually Transmitted HIV, Australia Should Encourage Circumcision in Infant Males HIV is believed to be widely spread by heterosexuality. HIV/AIDS article on Australia’s medical journal categorized male circumcision (removal of the prepuce or foreskin) among the potential ways of eradicating heterosexual transmitted HIV.[1] Other exerts concur with infants circumcision citing its medical benefits in preventing transmission heterosexual HIV. In this review, evidence showing the effectiveness of infant’s circumcision in controlling heterosexual transmitted HIV will be established. Wodak was of the idea that, Australia should introduce policies encouraging infant male circumcision to counter the high rates of transmission of heterosexual HIV. The foreskin consists of a loosely fold skin cover with the outer and the inner layer linings enclosed with sensitive mucous membrane. This provides a moist environment where infections can survive longer He concluded that, the foreskin cells were vulnerable to infections. Therefore, he recommended circumcision as an essential approach to health and safe sex.[2] Removing the foreskin hardens the glan and it can not harbour infections any more. Hopkins, Tobian and Gray highlighted the benefits of infant’s circumcision, and the consequences associated with its delay.[3] In infants, circumcision involves a minimal surgery. This assures less complications and lower cost of operation. Urinary track infections accelerate transmission of heterosexual HIV. A huge risk of urinary track infections is reduced by as much as 90 percent.[4] Since infants are not sexually active, circumcision does not alter their sex life in the future. Sexual satisfaction is enhanced due to improved hygiene. Delaying circumcision hinders many parents decision on the long term health of their children especially on vaccination issues. In contrast
Bibliography: 1. "Circumcision of Infant Males Prevents Heterosexual HIV Transmission, Australia," Medical Journal of Australia. Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 2010.<.http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/201746.php> (Retrieved on 22 March.2012). 2. Baker, F. The circumcision debate NewsLifeMedia Pty Ltd 2012 <http://www.bodyandsoul.com.au/health+healing/news+features/the+circumcision+debate, 17091> (Retrieved on 14 March 2012). 5. Denniston, G. C. Understanding Circumcision: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to a Multi-Dimensional Problem. New York [u.a.: Kluwer Acad./Plenum Publ, 2001. 6.Denniston, G. C., Hodges, F. M., & Milos, M. F. Genital autonomy: Protecting personal choice, Dordrecht: Springe, 2010. 7. Matteol, R. L, The Munchausen Complex: Socialization of Violence and Abuse Dog Ear Publishing, 2011 ----------------------- [5] George C Denniston, Understanding Circumcision: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to a Multi-Dimensional Problem. New York [u.a.: Kluwer Acad./Plenum Publ, 2001, p. 245. [6]George C Denniston, Frederick Mansfield Hodges and Marilyn Fayre Milos. Genital autonomy: Protecting personal choice, Dordrecht: Springe, 2010, (p. 78). [7] Richard L Matteol The Munchausen Complex: Socialization of Violence and Abuse Dog Ear Publishing, 2011, (p. 99).