Bill proposed in the USA to effectively ban infant male circumcision. Thoughts?

**SugarBlossom** · 08-02-2006 20:18

That is FANTASTIC news!!

About time....Australia is bound to copy - YAY!!

**veve** · 08-02-2006 20:18

Originally Posted by samsmum04

Oh Veve, the first time he hurts himself you will cry its awful !!

I know (sob) - I fully intend to wrap him in bubblewrap when he starts to walk

aardvark - I think you are right re: legislation- I am surprised it hasn't happened YET!!!

xx

**Odessa** · 08-02-2006 20:25

Would this bill prevent those few circumcisions that are necessary incase of extreme recurring infection? I'll post one of John C's educational posts for reference:

"Thought I might retrieve the figures for balanoposthitis (inflammation of foreskin and/or glans) for children to give some indication of incidence. The stats are for a principal diagnosis of balanoposthitis among boys aged 1-4 years nationwide and are from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

In 1998-99 there were 358 cases, falling to 306 in 2000-01 and 250 in 2003-04.

Note that this age group experiences peak incidence, with the 2004 figures for boys <1y being 13 cases, 5-9y being 173 cases, and 10-14y being 54 cases.

The circumcision rate and cohort size for 1-4yo boys did not significantly change in those periods, with an average of around 420,000 intact boys. So while infection deemed serious enough to warrant admission (and circumcision) certainly occurs the incidence is very low.

Even more importantly, it has been falling (quite dramatically) in all age groups. The likely explanation for this is that doctors are becoming more familiar with current medical practice guidelines and therefore are able to deal effectively with any problems at the level of primary care. "

Would making circumcision illegal prevent the treatment of these boys and men who require it for medical reasons? (Note: not as pre-emptive treatment, but as a final resort for those few males who actually require the procedure?)

**xkwzit** · 08-02-2006 20:42

Hi All

My two cents

I'm guessing that this bill (OK I fess up - I have NOT read it

) is about "routine" circumcision, not about kids with recurring problems where it might be recommended by a doc as treatment.

I'm interested to see if it given an "anti-semetic" spin in an effort to bring it undone.

It's very interesting though and I don't think it a bad thing, but as this is the third year in a row it has been submitted, I wouldn't hold my breath ...

Cheers

**draught** · 08-02-2006 20:46

Originally Posted by Little Buddah Baby

About time....Australia is bound to copy - YAY!!

Don't get your hopes up too much - we very rarely copy much in the way of American legislative initiatives. Which is not a bad thing given their approach to gun laws!

**Barry** · 19-02-2006 15:19

Originally Posted by coopsntilly

ohhhh, you are a brave girl queenie, starting this thread

needless to say, i am thrilled that this bill may be passed, and i hope it happens in Australia too

Problem is if/when it is banned people will still have the desire to circumcised their children. However instead of it being done in a sterile medical institution with set procedures however modern or ritualistic they may be, it will be done in an unsterile backyard garage or backroom of a GP where all the instrumentation may not be available. So in turn whilst circumcision may be cut off from the less determined parents, the rate of surgical failures will go through the roof.

I feel it's far better to educate people on the risks, benefits and drawbacks then let them make their own decisions. Like abortion or homosexuality the legislative body should not be directing people how to live their lives at this level.

**WeThree** · 19-02-2006 15:34

Hi Barry, do you really think that people will be that desperate to have their children circumcised, for non medical reasons ,that they will resort to such drastic measures?

**the_queen** · 19-02-2006 15:40

Originally Posted by Barry

Problem is if/when it is banned people will still have the desire to circumcised their children.

True, Barry: so what is needed is not only a legislative ban, but also some kind of community education to teach people why routine infant circumcision is not necessary. Doctors and other health care providers (as well as parents) also need to be educated about caring for an intact penis. Premature foreskin retraction is not only unnecessary, but can actually do a lot of damage, including causing infections which can result in circumcision being required for authentic medical reasons.

**Barry** · 19-02-2006 15:42

Originally Posted by coopsntilly

Hi Barry, do you really think that people will be that desperate to have their children circumcised, for non medical reasons ,that they will resort to such drastic measures?

I believe that there will be some people out there who'll be that dedicated to either their family traditions, personal beliefs or religious beliefs that they will seek out an off-the-books doctor or backyard operator to do it, yes.

Whilst not entirely identical, the same thing occured when abortions weren't legal.

**cosmic** · 19-02-2006 15:46

Barry, I don't think that's a strong enough argument to prevent a bill like this one being passed. There are already plenty of parents who are of the mind that they will circumcise and decide not to once they realise it is difficult to find a doctor. I think many of those people would not bother should it be made totally illegal.

And if parents were still so determined that they would risk exposing their son to surgery in an unsterile environment, then so they should be charged with a criminal offence. To have thousands of boys unnecessarily circumcised in order to protect those few is not logical in my opinion.