Should Boys be Circumcised?

Recommend (3) Comments (0)

Circumcision is indeed a simple surgery, but the primitive way in which it is carried out, the small size of the penis, the cutting of blood vessels and nerves, and the young age of the victims have the potential of making it a perilous operation. While many men in the word are still circumcised, In the US, the numbers are dropping, from 85% in the 1980s to 56% in 2005. More and more boys are remaining intact as parents learn about the harm of circumcision and the ease of caring for an intact son.

Parents have the legal right to consent to a therapeutic circumcision for the treatment of existing disease, but no law or court decision gives parents the right to consent to a non-therapeutic circumcision that, in the absence of a clear and present medical indication, is an act of battery. In fact, a Chicago judge ruled that a boy should be protected from circumcision until he reaches the age of majority, at which time he can decide for himself. Circumcision is a culture-bound assault on a male child, while the same, or even less severe, procedure on a girl is a federal offense in the United States.

Circumcisions, indeed, have been carried out for thousands of years, but that is no reason to carry an anachronistic blood ritual into the 21st century. Harmful results, the law, human rights, and medical ethics must be taken into account when considering non-therapeutic genital cutting for non-consenting minors.

The circumcision rate in the U.S. and Australia was much higher in the past than it is today. Genital integrity is winning more and more converts because its advantages are becoming more widely known. As the older generation of males passes into history, the percentage of adult males who enjoy genital integrity will increase.

Although Morris claims a “lifetime of benefits” for male circumcision, in reality, circumcision imposes a lifetime of emotional and sexual deficits and handicaps.

Recommend (0) Comments (2)

Milos, a former nurse, and her fringe group NOCIRC, are doing enormous harm to public health and individual well-being with their lies, deceit, emotive statements, and other hysterical nonsense. The science in support of circumcision is now rock solid. There is no downside to circumcision, apart from having to have a minor, very safe operation, using a local anesthetic. Her claims of harms have all been debunked by good research. Very large studies by credible researchers in the USA and Australia have shown that it is the uncircumcised who suffer greater sexual problems, including erectile dysfunction over the age of 50. Men of any age with phimosis (tight foreskin) experience difficult and painful erections and some cannot have sexual intercourse.

The rate of circumcision is rising in Australia and the USA. The population has enough sense to read and hear about the enormous benefits in the news media and respond, in the best interests of their sons, by having them circumcised - infancy being the most convenient and cheapest time, with best cosmetic outcome.

Circumcision for HIV prevention is now endorsed by the World Health Organization. WHO have estimated the millions of lives saved and net financial benefit, and support a push by many governments and organizations to roll out circumcision in high-risk populations.

The benefit to women from circumcised male partners is now legend - greatly reduced risk of cervical cancer, genital herpes and chlamydia (the latter being a cause of infertility, ectopic pregnancy and pelvic inflammatory disease).

The only psychological problems are in the minds of the members of NOCIRC!

The time if nigh for them to desist and fall into line with the strong scientific messages.

For more about the anti-circ movement see the evidence below.

Brian Morris, PhD DSc
Professor of Molecular Medical Sciences
The University of Sydney