Circumcision, Abortion, And The Procedure Of Genital Cutting

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

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

Thesis: Female Genital Circumcision is a cultural procedure that is performed on young girls for a variety of reasons. Members of this culture chose to continue these traditions because they believe they will gain sociological, health and marriage benefits for their daughters, ensuring these young girls a better future is mandatory.

On the issue of male circumcision Hanna Rosin presents arguments that support the procedure while Michael Idov argues against the act. Rosin begins her argument by describing her own experiences when her sons were circumcised and the anger she felt when hearing them howl in pain. However, she follows this up with an acknowledgment that the feeling quickly dissipated once her sons were completely healed. Rosin then goes on to describe many of the benefits of circumcision, focusing in on the health aspect. Specifically, her argument hinges on studies that correlate a higher rate of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) to men that are uncircumcised. Michael Idov also utilizes the health angle to support his argument and even

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.

The World Health Organization, also known by the acronym WHO, has defined female genital mutilation as “procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.” FGM (acronym for female genital mutilation) is highly prevalent in Africa and the Middle East. An estimated 200 million and counting have been victims of this practice (UNICEF New York, 2016). In the past 20 years the tradition of female circumcision has received a lot of attention from the public and mass media and has been at the center or controversial debate (Kalev, 2004). Why? Because female circumcision is extremely detrimental to a female’s health as it causes long-term and short-term health complications and psychological damage to the victim. This research paper will discuss these topics and reassure the reader that female genital mutilation has and serves no benefits and is ultimately a violation of human rights.

Female circumcisions is a tradition practiced worldwide that involves all procedures involving partial or total removal of the female external genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical purposes, most often the purpose is to decrease female sexual arousal. Female circumcision can be generally classified under four types. The first is clitoridectomy, which is the partial or complete removal of the female clitoris and its prepuce. The second is excision, which includes the partial or complete removal of the clitoris and labia minora, in this type the labia majora is not always removed. The third type is infibulation, which is the most drastic of the four forms of female circumcision. Infibulation consist of narrowing

The practice of female circumcision is happening in areas across the globe such as Africa, Asia and the Middle East. The United states and Serval others counties look at this as a vicious act of genital mutilation and an outright human rights violation (Clay, 2017, p.g.22). The practice of female circumcision has gone on for years as a cultural rite of passage in some countries. Other countries see it as a religious belief and others see it as a way to make their daughter more desirable for a husband The author reports that even through in the United States that many women more than half a million are still at risk of having their genital cut from the CDC reports in 2012 (Clay, 2017,

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), female genital mutilation consist of a non-medical procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs (Lauren V, 2011).Typically girls from two weeks old, through fourteen years old, are affected by this procedure. The mutilations are conducted under non-sterile conditions; by using razors, knifes, scissors etc.; and without any anesthesia.

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.

On the two stories from the reading 25 and 26, we can find two sides connections, as I find a different situation between male circumcision and female genital cutting. These two topics show a different relation just on the fact that male circumcision is a procedure for a safety matter in or a protection against STDs and HIV, but referring to (Darby, 273) I quote this line “Laumann found that circumcised men had more STDs, and the United States reports an HIV incidence six-time grater than Japan”. This line clarifies that that circumcision is not a safe practice to avoid any STDs but this actions that families make to their kids at a younger age is just for the matter of safety knowing that is not going to protect them from any type of sexually

Women who perform the circumcisions to continue tradition outside of Africa are known as “excisers”. People who practice it think its barbaric so they choose to hide what they do. Reports from the United Nations, and other public health groups say wealthy immigrants have paid Western physicians in Europe and the United States to circumcise their daughters.While most experts agree U.S. courts would likely consider female circumcision child abuse, no one has tested that law. Opponents say explicit legislation banning the practice is long overdue. There is little research on the incidence of female circumcision in the United States and just a few informal surveys of circumcised women living there. Some doctors in the United states have started to “deinfibulate” which undoes the procedure of FC/GM to expose the tissues under the scars. With this procedure women will be able to have natural births and be able to urinate and mensturate with out pain

Female Genital Mutilation, shortened to FGM in most medical texts, is “collective name given to several different traditional practices that involve the cutting of female genitals.” FGM is a common cultural practice in many parts of the world, especially Africa and Asia that was established hundreds of years ago. There are many different types of FGM, ranging from clitoridectomy, to cutting and infibulations (Skaine 7). Even though these procedures are accepted in the areas they are practiced, FGM has become a human rights discussion resurfacing in recent years because the procedures serve no purpose. Female Genital Mutilation is an unethical practice that should be outlawed throughout the entire world.

Female circumcision is also known as female genital mutilation, it is illegal in the United States of America and many other countries. There are two main ways that is preformed. The first