Health

Circumcision prevalence by Intaction

Does circumcision cause erectile dysfunction? : Find out how a baby born today can still be harmed from America’s past of prudish morality, racism, gullibility, scare tactics, and greed that reaches back over 100 years ! It’s the history of circumcision in America ! 1886: Dr. J.H. Kellogg, the inventor of corn flakes, advocated for circumcision to remove the sensitive foreskin from boys as a remedy for masturbation. He sadistically claimed by not using anesthesia the operation would make a good punishment for boys who masturbate.

Living in America in the beginning of the 21st century, it’s easy to see how this notion got ingrained in the cultural consciousness: it’s common , and it’s common, so it must be common everywhere, always. Right? Wrong! Most of the world doesn’t practice circumcision. In fact, most of the world has never practiced circumcision. The truth is that the United States is the only country that circumcises the majority of babies, and we’ve only done it for a few generations. And on top of that, we’re doing it less and less: fewer than 60% of male babies in the US are circumcised these days.

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 even more info about circumcision.

If the CDC guidance is followed, medical providers will be communicating a psychologically damaging message to boys with intact genitals—that their penises are somehow “bad” or inferior. The negative effects of such communications have been studied with regard to intersex children and have been found to be frightening, shaming, and embarrassing to the child (Rusch et al., 2000). This is a particularly cruel message to send to adolescents, many of whom are already experiencing concerns regarding body image. The circumcision of children has myriad negative psychological consequences that the CDC has failed to consider. This is being called circumcision’s psychological damage or harm. Removing healthy tissue in the absence of any medical need harms the patient and is a breach of medical providers’ ethical duty to the child. We believe that all people have a right to bodily autonomy and self-determination and deeply respect this fundamental tenet of international human rights law (UNESCO 2005). As children cannot advocate for themselves, they need adults to understand the complexities of their emotional experiences and provide them special protection. We oppose the CDC’s circumcision recommendation and encourage all parents to do the same in order to protect their children from physical and psychological harm.

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.”) Discover more details on https://intaction.org/.