Loading

wait a moment

Circumcision controversy with Intaction

Bizarre history of american circumcision : 1901: In the American Practitioner and News, Dr. Earnest G. Marks MD wrote, “An advantage of circumcision is the lessened liability to masturbation. A foreskin leads the child to touch it to produce pleasurable sensations from the extremely sensitive foreskin leading to masturbation” 1914: Dr. Abraham Wolbarst wrote Universal Circumcision as a Sanitary Measure, in the Journal of the American Medical Association, “It is a well known fact that the foreskin is a frequent factor in masturbation, not alone in children but in adults as well…Circumcision has become recognized as a most effective remedy.”

The American Academy of Pediatrics doesn’t recommend routine circumcision of all newborns (though they do say that it’s medically necessary in some specific instances). When sorting through circumcision facts and myths, realize circumcision is not guaranteed to prevent any disease. Behavior and hygiene are always more important to health than circumcision. This American doctor group do not recommend circumcision, and all international medical societies do not recommend circumcision. Circumcision is extremely painful to the baby. This is definitely a disadvantage of circumcision. A study in Canada in 1997 set out to determine what anesthesia worked best in the prevention of pain, but the study was stopped midway through because they felt that the babies who were receiving no anesthesia (the control group) were in so much pain that it was unethical for the study to continue. Even in the United States where circumcision is most common, only 45% of doctors use anesthesia at all. There is no mandatory anesthesia or pain relief policy enforced in hospitals for this procedure. This is an important item to consider when discussing circumcision facts and myths.

Circumcision Overview: Circumcision is a surgical removal of the natural foreskin from the penis. The foreskin covers the head of the glans penis. This removal of the foreskin is one of the most common surgeries done to baby boys – in America. This hospital operation is typically done within one or two days after birth. Left undisturbed, that foreskin will grow into 15 square inches in the adult male. Therefore the decision to circumcise a baby is a serious consideration for parents to make. The procedure rates have been dropping in America. Most medical groups have stated there is no clear cut benefit, and the surgery is very painful to a baby. For many of the Jewish or Muslim faith, cutting and removal of the foreskin is an ancient religious act of faith, sacrifice, or covenant. See extra info about circumcision.

As psychologists, we are deeply concerned by the recently announced U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) guidelines promoting circumcision for American males. We are concerned about circumcision’s psychological damage that can arise from the traumatic pain of this unnecessary procedure. It is not well established that traumatic pain to infants causes psychological harm and emotional damage. The CDC guidelines are based on a sharply criticized 2012 policy statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics. The 2012 statement was condemned by a large group of physicians, medical organizations, and ethicists from European, Scandinavian, and Commonwealth countries as “culturally biased” and “different from [the conclusions] reached by physicians in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada and Australia” (Frisch et al., 2013).

Intaction was founded in 2010 out of the strong concern that the American “fee for service” medical and insurance business, its trade associations, PACS, and lobbyists, “the medical industry complex,” were intent on escalating their promotion of infant circumcision. Hospitals, insurance companies, and doctors profit from circumcisions. However Americans were starting to challenge the conventional wisdom of circumcising their sons. Seventeen states dropped Medicaid coverage for infant circumcision, deeming it unnecessary and cosmetic. The medical industry complex and its surrogates responded by launching a counterattack to prevent this threat to their income streams and maintain the status quo they built over many decades. (The most conspicuous evidence of this effort culminated in the 2012 AAP Circumcision Policy Statement – which blatantly stated three times, “Financing Newborn Male recommendation: newborn male circumcision warrant(s) third-party (insurance) reimbursement of the procedure.”) Find even more details on https://intaction.org/.