Why Is Circumcision Wrong

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

Today, the surgery is normally performed as an out patent procedure, within the first week of a healthy birth. It is performed with or without local anesthesia (rarely with a general anesthesia with infants due to complications), by an OB/GYN, Urologist, Family Physician, or Pediatrician. There are multiple options on how to have the elective surgery performed and no matter which method is used it could take as little as 12 minutes or as much as 20 minutes. Generally, there is little discomfort after the first 24 hours and very little after care to be performed. One just keeps the area clean with water and monitors for any tell-tell signs of infection until the tip of the penis is healed. Most circumcised men never complain of a lack of sensation, residual pain, or hold memory of the

Circumcision is considered "normal" in America, but what if it isn't as normal as we think? Did you know that most of the world does not participate in this practice? Here are some reasons why, if you have a baby boy, you should reconsider getting him circumcised.

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

Table 4 summarizes the CRIES score associated with and duration of each circumcision technique. Both groups were observed to have the same CRIES score. However, Mogen clamp was found to be significantly faster than Gomco.

Before today, I had not put a lot of thought into the issue of male circumcision; I did already know that male circumcision was important to some religions because I myself was religious and have seen it mentioned in the Bible. However, I assumed that most male infants in the United States were circumcised for one reason or another; I also did not know males would get circumcised after infancy too, like in the video. Today, through reading the article about the position of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Centers for Disease Control's (CDC) fact sheet, I would agree that male circumcision is beneficial for infant males.

Because there is no conclusive evidence regarding the overall benefits versus risks of circumcision, more and more Jewish mothers are opting out of a procedure that inflicts pain on their child. In addition to the pain of circumcision, many mothers are concerned about the emotional effect circumcision will have later in life. Should a boy grow up and decide he does not want to be Jewish, having been circumcised may cause emotional discomfort or even body dysmorphia. Dana Edell, a Jewish mother who opted out of circumcising her son, said in an interview, “I knew that I wanted to raise my child Jewish and in a Jewish home. And yet I’m also a feminist and activist, and believe very strongly in the right to your own body” (Greenberg, 2017).

Male circumcision is done by removing the foreskin around the head of the penis and is usually done 1-2 days after birth. According to the Centers for Disease Control, “Male circumcision reduces the risk that a man will acquire HIV from an infected female partner, and also lowers the risk of other STDs, penile cancer, and infant urinary tract infection. For female partners, male circumcision reduces the risk of cervical cancer, genital ulceration, bacterial vaginosis, trichomoniasis, and HPV. Although male circumcision has risks including pain, bleeding, and infection, more serious complications are rare”(1). Another risk includes, decrease in sensitivity. In other words, there are both benefits and risks to male circumcision. The cause of male circumcision is health benefits and religious reasons.

The aim of this paper is the presentation of advantages and disadvantages associated with male circumcision based on peer reviewed articles and recommendations of WHO. The ethical and religious aspects of circumcision will not be discussed in this paper.

There is a 1-4% chance that something could go wrong due to circumcision. Pain and distress is common to infants undergoing the procedure, but safe and effective pain control is usually offered to all infants as swelling and bruising is common after the operation. If too much or too little foreskin is removed, it can present problems or scar tissue to develop. Buried penis can also occur from this problem which requires surgical treatment. Some men say the end of the penis becomes less sensitive when the foreskin is removed, however most circumcised males do not believe this is true. Even though the incidence of a serious complication from circumcision is extremely low, meningitis and septicemia may result in

America is the only country in the Western world that routinely circumcises newborn boys. Eighty-five percent of the world’s men are uncircumcised. “The practice violates all seven principles of the American Medical Association’s code of ethics,” charges George Denniston, M.D., a Seattle physician and founder of Doctors Opposing Circumcision. “By definition it’s not even surgery. Surgery is removal of diseased tissue, or a repair of some kind.” “Nonsense,” says Edgar Schoen, M.D., director of perinatal screening at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in California, and an outspoken proponent of circumcision. “There are numerous medical reasons for it.” This pro and con argument has been raging in the medical community for almost three decades. Meanwhile, the circumcisions continue.

Introduction In our society today, they’re arguments surrounding the similarities and differences between male vs. female circumcision. In some instances people generalize circumcision to stem from a cultural, religious or medical base. Occasionally people view female circumcision as abuse and unruly; male circumcision is viewed as a rite of passage. Often people would suggest how female circumcision is worst than males due to females having more health issues behind the procedure than males.

Some who are considering in undergoing the circumcision procedure may wonder if sex for them is any different, but for the most part, it has been reported that there are no differences. One may feel the same level of stimulation and arousal.

Routine baby boy circumcision is one of the most common surgical procedures done every year in the U.S.A. . There is assumed that circumcision has medical and health benefits for the baby thought out life such as, decreases risk of urinary tract infections, reduces the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, protects against penile cancer and cervical cancer, prevents infection and phimosis, and also helps to keep the penis cleaner.

Routine circumcision in both males and females is used to suppress sexual pleasure. There are no "medical benefits" that outweigh the risks. The reduction in HIV has only been confirmed in 3 studies and condom usage is more beneficial because there are more STIs than just HIV. In many cases when FGM is performed it is done with the removal of everything that can cause sexual pleasure but the same can be done in males. It is just not commonplace to remove the head of penis or the entire penis so we think "not so bad." Would anyone be ok with removal of prepuce (foreskin) of females just because. How about we just make it routine to remove one ovary from females because it could cut down on ovarian cancer? Of course not because the supposed "medical