Adoption For The Infant With The Father, And Grandparents On An Interpersonal Level Essay

Male circumcision has long been a debate with decisions based on cultural, ethnic, religious and social preference of the parent. There are both benefits and risks associated with the procedure of male circumcision. The procedure involves the removal of some or, the entire foreskin around the penis. Neonatal circumcision is rising among English speaking countries and it is known now that more than 80% of the male population has been circumcised. (CDC, 2006) This number is rising however; studies show that there is insufficient evidence to recommend neonatal circumcision as a routine decision. (AAP, 2006). Many debates of this procedure relate to the benefits versus the risk and medical costs that the procedure entails. This paper

According to a published report in the August 16th 2010 edition of the New York Time’s parents are choosing less and less to circumcise their new born sons. The article states instances of circumcision have declined “to just 32.5 percent in 2009 from 56 percent in 2006. The numbers are based on calculations by SDI Health, a company in Plymouth Meeting, Pa. that analyzes health care data”. Why are so many deciding to not have the elective procedure even though the rate of complication is extraordinarily low? What about the arguments for hygiene, sexual satisfaction, psychological and social concerns and, lest we dismiss, religious views?

The topic of the infant male circumcision is a controversial subject in the United States. This procedure involves a non-reversible surgical procedure that removes the prepuce, commonly called the foreskin, thus exposing the glans of the penis (Blank, et al., 2012). Currently this is considered a cosmetic procedure per surgical standards, and is performed upon the request of the parents of the newborn. The decision to have a circumcision performed is usually based upon personal, cultural, and religious factors. However, the overall view of the impact of the procedure on the newborn infant varies in our country, and has led to two conflicting camps of ideology. The pro-circumcision movement focuses on the potential health benefits gained of a circumcision, and feels it is a necessary procedure. The anti-circumcision movement claims there are no health benefits and that the procedure violates the fundamental human rights of the infant (Collier, 2012). Following extensive research, I have found that there is evidence-based proof that circumcision improves the overall health of the male newborn, with prolonged health benefits into adulthood. Circumcisions provide the health benefits of decreased rates of urinary tract infections(UTIs), reduced transmission of sexually transmitted disease, prevention of phimosis, and improved penile hygiene (Blank, et al., 2012, Marx & Lawton, 2008, Morris, Bailis, & Wiswell, 2014).

In the story written by Frances A. Althaus’s “Female Circumcision: Rite of Passage or Violation of Rights? She explores female circumcision within African Culture and the health complications after the ritual is completed. Female circumcision is the practice of partial or total removal of the female external vaginal area and is still practiced in several countries today , dut was ruled as illegal in America in 1997. Females did not have the option to chose if they wanted to have the procedure performed, mothers often made that decision for them. The practice is to transition a girl into womanhood and to ensure that virginity is not lost before marriage, prevention of infidelity and

Resolution: The government should increase the support for male circumcision in Medicare and other health care programs to reduce the cost for parents and to improve the health outcomes for the infant.

In the USA, newborn male circumcision is a very common procedure, three-quarters of American men are circumcised. Though the rate of infant circumcision has always been high in the USA, the number varies depending on the State, “Circumcision rates vary wildly across the country - from more than 80% of newborns in states including Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin and Kentucky, to around 20% on the West coast, according to some calculations” (Hebblethwaite, C.,2012, August 21). However, in other countries, such as The UK, rates dropped after the National Health Service (NHS) rules that circumcisions was not medically necessary, so it would not be covered. In 1948 one-third of UK men were circumcised and now about 9% of men are. On the other hand, countries

Once upon a time in a land not so far away, a bouncing baby boy was born. His mother and father fawned over his features, from his bald little head to his tiny wrinkled feet. After speaking on the perfection of the entirety his existence, they pass the baby boy off to a nurse who brings him to a table where he is tied down and mutilated against his will with little to no anesthesia. The doctor performing the operation will say, “he will not even know it is happening,” while the baby screams his head off. After having a perfectly natural piece of his genitalia removed, he will be returned to the arms of his parents. This is the reality for 58% (BabyCenter) of the 2 million or so (NICHD) boys born in the United States every year. Circumcision is an unnecessary procedure that violates the rights of boys.

Female circumcision in the Global South is a controversial regarding this topic. People are continuingly debating about it how harmful the practice. People who are against the practice claimed that the practice is very harmful for these young girls and women. This practice is not only physically harmful, but also psychologically affect them. So anti-female circumcision is doing everything in their power to stop the practice in the Global South. Program such as the TOSTAN is encouraging young girl to say no the practice. On the other hand, there are people who defending the female circumcision. They claim that the practice has not harm. And they are denying the fact that this practice decreases sexual pleasure in these young women and female.

There are several strengths to this study. This is the largest randomized, controlled, clinical trial comparing neonatal pain between Gomco and Mogen clamps. Furthermore, by having all the circumcisions be performed by a single provider group, the authors were able to control for provider confounders. Both procedure protocols were solely based on the most recent recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics. However, as the study was exclusive to healthy and term infants, the results can only be generalized to this population, not to premature infants or older males. Another limitation is that these observations are regarding short-term outcomes of the procedures, not long-term outcomes of Gomco and Mogen clamp circumcisions. Furthermore, the research nurses who scored the pain were not blinded to the treatment

Circumcision is a procedure where the foreskin of the male penis is removed, most commonly in newborns. Some studies have found there are some potential benefits to having newborn males circumcised as laid out in the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Circumcision Policy Statement released in 1999. A few potential benefits include the reduced risk of UTI, HIV and other STDs, and some penile cancers. In fact, more recently, the AAP has released a newer statement in 2012 saying these benefits now outweigh the risks and can justify access to the procedure should families choose to do so. However, there are many other studies that show the risks of having newborn males circumcised. These include reduced penile sensitivity, later in life erectile disfunction, unimaginable pain, and ethical issues. Due to this sensitive topic, parents of newborn males should be given correct and unbiased information about the risks and benefits of circumcising their child. A physician should never recommend the procedure, but instead provide only the facts.

Female circumcision is a harmful practice that remains a public health problem to women both psychologically and physically. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), of the 125 million females who have undergone the process of genital mutilation, about 20 million of them are Nigerian females between 15-49 years (Oguntoyinbo, 2015). Nigeria has the highest incidence of FGM in the world with a prevalence of 30% and makes up a quarter of all circumcised females in the world. It ranges from about 2% in the Nation’s capital to 56.9 percent in the Southwest region. Thirty-three percent of these women are circumcised before the age of 11 years. In the year 2012, statistics showed that of the estimated 272,571 Nigerian-born female immigrants in the United States, about 39, 253 were affected or at risk for FGM ( Farage, Miller, Tzeghai, Azuka, & Sobel, 2015).

Infant male circumcision is only still practiced in a few countries, America is unfortunately still one of these countries. With the many reasons that circumcision still exists, I’m still unconvinced of its value in our society. With its dwindling popularity I don’t see it lasting very much longer. Genital mutilation is assault. No one should have their private parts altered without their own consent. We have banned genital mutilation on girl infants, why not on boys?

There are common ordeals and situations that can trouble a family emotionally, physically, and psychologically. Adoption is one situation a family must encounter when a child is born without a proper system of support to sustain life after birth. The causes for a family to make a heartfelt decision to place a child for adoption can have dramatic effects on the birth parents, adoptive parents, and child (Adoptee), even if the decision is meant for the best.

Adopting a child is an experience that promises to bring great joy as it changes a couple or individual’s life forever. But what happens if the mother of that child wants to endorse their child? Those are the issues that many adopting parents and birth-right mothers are facing today. Many biological mothers want their child back. There are many concerns for adopting parents to know- that there is the possibly that the birth mother may file for the child. As a birth mother or the adopting parent one must realize consequences that could lay ahead.

As an example, we can imagine a 14-year-old girl and her parents who move from Sierra Leone to the United States. In Sierra Leone, the practice of female circumcision is customary, and after talking it over with her mother, the girl expresses a wish to be circumcised. A social service agency