Quick links to products available in the Campaign for Genital Integrity . . .
Why Does Infant Circumcision Persist
in North America?
The American medical establishment has
consistently failed over the past 100 years
to prove conclusively and unequivocally that infant circumcision carries
any significant advantage over the intact state for the vast majority of males.
There is no absolute medical indication for routine circumcision of newborns.
Circumcision is a custom in our society.
The cultural, social and historical imperatives surrounding
routine neonatal circumcision
seem to be in control for both physicians and parents.
We in the United States are culturally acclimated to regard the foreskin
The American medical establishment has never researched
the long-term physical, sexual, emotional or psychological consequences
to males of infant circumcision, a surgery to which those males did not consent.
Brown, Mark S. MD, & Cheryl A. Brown, RN, MS, "Circumcision Decision: Prominence of Social Concerns"
The circumcision decision in the United States is emerging as a cultural ritual
rather than the result of medical misunderstanding among parents.
It is more an emotional than a rational decision.
We conclude there is no medical indication for or against
The decision may most reasonably be made on nonmedical factors such as parent preference.
Lawler, Frank H., MD, et al., "Circumcision: A Decision Analysis of Its Medical Value"
Family Medicine vol. 23, no. 8 (1991): pp. 587-593
Circumcision has essentially no effect on either dollar
costs or health.
For this reason, personal factors other than health and dollars
could justly be brought into the decision process.
These factors may not be of interest to third-party payers.
Ganiats, Theodore G., MD, et al., "Routine Neonatal Circumcision: A Cost-Utility Analysis"
Medical Decision Making vol. 11, no. 4 (October - December 1991): pp. 282-289.
If health insurance coverage for routine circumcision
were to be terminated,
...parents would then be forced to make a conscious decision about circumcision
which takes into account the lack of any medical indication for this procedure.
Lindeke L. et al., "Neonatal Circumcision: A Social and Medical Dilemma"
Maternal-Child Nursing Journal, vol. 15 (1985): pp. 991-992.
Omitting circumcision in the neonatal period should not be considered medical neglect.
Other factors will affect the parents' decisions,
including esthetics, religion, cultural attitudes, social pressures and tradition.
The authors conclude that many mothers in this
population choose circumcision
because of inadequate medical information or strong social motives.
Each day in the U.S.,over 3,330 male newborns (60%)
have their foreskin forcibly amputated without anesthesia;
annually over 1.25 million babies, costing over $200 million.
To save a boy later locker room
embarrassment seems unrealistic.
He can always be circumcised later. At any rate, it will be his choice
and he will know why he chooses it.
Preston, Noel E., MC, "Whither the Foreskin? A Consideration of Routine Neonatal Circumcision"
Journal of The American Medical Association vol. 213, no. 11 (September 14, 1970): pp. 1853-1858.
The operation frequently features illogical bases
for patient selection,
neglect of the requirement to obtain informed consent, disregard for pain,
dubious objectives, and unknown cost-effectiveness.
Until the benefits of the procedure can be proved worth the risk and cost,
medical resources should probably be allocated
to health measures of demonstrated value.
Grimes, David A., MD, "Routine Circumcision of the Newborn Infant: A Reappraisal"
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 130, no. 1 (January 15, 1978): pp. 125-129.
demonstrated otherwise, prophylactic neonatal circumcision should be regarded
as cosmetic surgery, paid for directly by parents wishing it,
and public health care dollars should be expended
on preventive and therapeutic measures of more certain health or economic benefit.
Cadman, David, MD, et al., "Newborn Circumcision: An Economic Perspective"
Canadian Medical Association Journal vol. 131 (December 1, 1984): pp. 1353-1355.
to provide information to parents have not had much impact on the frequency
of circumcision. Many third-party payers have begun to refuse payment for the procedure,
and there are indications that this action will diminish the number of circumcisions.
Rockney, Randy, MD, "Newborn Circumcision"
American Family Physician vol. 38, no. 4 (October 1988): pp. 151-155.
Top of Page | Home | Updates | FAQ | Research | Education | Advocacy | Litigation | Search | Ideas | For Media | Videos | Bookstore | FactFinder
Your Rights | Attorneys for the Rights of the Child | Video Excerpt | Dads | FGC Experts | Position Statement | Harm Form | Class Action
Last updated: 28 February, 2012
© 1998-2002 NOHARMM. All rights reserved. Questions, or problems using this site? Webmaster