Infant Circumcision: Is It Really Necessary?
Infant Circumcision: Is it Really Necessary?
“The standard of care for infections is antibiotics, not amputation”, says Eileen Marie Wayne, MD. Beginning in the twentieth century, neonatal circumcision has grown to become one of the most frequently performed surgeries in the United States (Galloher 1). The operation has become so commonplace that physicians and parents hardly consider it surgery at all. The procedure is often done with little thought, as though it is simply a routine of childbirth, such as cutting the umbilical cord. Despite this, the United States stands alone in their corner. The viewpoint of circumcision in the rest of the world is that of either a religious ritual or an infrequent medical intervention to treat specific diseases. Apart from religious ceremonies, the rest of the world believes that circumcision should not be done unless it is medically necessary. How did a ritual surgery, seemingly older than civilization itself, become firmly preserved in standard American medical practice? Beyond that, how has an operation whose benefits have never been convincingly verified, managed to survive to this day? The reasons for a medically unnecessary circumcision are to “decrease sexual pleasure and fulfillment, to repress sexuality, religious purification, moral hygiene, power and control, dominance and submission, cosmetics, conformity, denial, and profit” (Wayne). Yet, the United States chooses to blatantly ignore patient consent in regard to neonatal circumcision. Thanks to advancements in the medical field and better access to sexual education it is now known that this is no longer a necessary preventative surgical procedure and it should no longer be routine, especially among infants who cannot speak for themselves. Circumcision itself dates back thousands of years. So far in fact, that it’s exact origin is not entirely known. However, we do know that circumcision has a long religious and ritualistic history. The first known documentation
“The standard of care for infections is antibiotics, not amputation”, says Eileen Marie Wayne, MD. Beginning in the twentieth century, neonatal circumcision has grown to become one of the most frequently performed surgeries in the United States (Galloher 1). The operation has become so commonplace that physicians and parents hardly consider it surgery at all. The procedure is often done with little thought, as though it is simply a routine of childbirth, such as cutting the umbilical cord. Despite this, the United States stands alone in their corner. The viewpoint of circumcision in the rest of the world is that of either a religious ritual or an infrequent medical intervention to treat specific diseases. Apart from religious ceremonies, the rest of the world believes that circumcision should not be done unless it is medically necessary. How did a ritual surgery, seemingly older than civilization itself, become firmly preserved in standard American medical practice? Beyond that, how has an operation whose benefits have never been convincingly verified, managed to survive to this day? The reasons for a medically unnecessary circumcision are to “decrease sexual pleasure and fulfillment, to repress sexuality, religious purification, moral hygiene, power and control, dominance and submission, cosmetics, conformity, denial, and profit” (Wayne). Yet, the United States chooses to blatantly ignore patient consent in regard to neonatal circumcision. Thanks to advancements in the medical field and better access to sexual education it is now known that this is no longer a necessary preventative surgical procedure and it should no longer be routine, especially among infants who cannot speak for themselves. Circumcision itself dates back thousands of years. So far in fact, that it’s exact origin is not entirely known. However, we do know that circumcision has a long religious and ritualistic history. The first known documentation
Cited: American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). “Circumcision Policy Statement.” Pediatrics 103.3 (1999): 686-693 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). “Circumcision Policy Statement.” Pediatrics 130.3 (2012): 585-586 Cagno, Colleen K. and Paul R. Gordon. “Neonatal Circumcision.” New England Journal of Medicine 367.2 (2012): 1-3 Gollaher, David L. Circumcision: A History of the World’s Most Controversial Surgery. New York: Basic Books, 2000 Herodotus. The History of Herodotus. The Internet Classics Archive. Web. 15 Nov. 2012. The Holy Bible: King James Version. Iowa Falls: World Bible Publishers, 2001. Print. Leibowitz, Arleen A., Katherine Desmond, and Thomas Belin. “Determinants and Policy Implications of Male Circumcision in the United States.” The American Journal of Public Health 99.1 (2009): 138-145 “Penile Cancer.” National Cancer Institute. National Institutes of Health, 2012. Web. 16 Nov. (2012): 19. Academic Search Premiere. Web. 16 Nov. 2012. Schultheiss, Christine Bioethics Journal 6.2 (2010): 21-24. Academic Search Premiere. Web. 4 Nov. 2012. Stewart, Chelsea. Personal Interview. 5 Nov. 2012. Tyson, Peter “U.S. Breast Cancer Statistics.” BreastCancer.org, 3 Oct. 2012. Web. 16 Nov. 2012. Van Howe, Robert S. “Cost-Effective Treatment of Phimosis.” Pediatrics 102.4 (1998): 1-4. Web. 5 Dec. 2012. Wang, Marvin L., Eric A. Macklin, Erin Tracy, Hiyam Nadel, and Elizabeth A. Catlin. “Updated Parental Viewpoints on Male Neonatal Circumcision in the United States.” Clinical Pediatrics 49.2 (2010): 130-136 Circumcision in Male Neonates, Infants, and Children: a Systematic Review.” BMC Urology 10.2 (2010): 1-13. U.S. National Library of Medicine. Web. 16 Nov. 2012. Wilson, Christopher G. “Male Genital Mutilation: An Adaptation to Sexual Conflict.” Evolution and Human Behavior 29 (2007): 149-164