2008 Doctors Opposing
Circumcision
"We recommend that the genital integrity of
boys be preserved. Parental request for non-therapeutic
circumcision of a son appears to exceed the powers granted to
parents by law. We further recommend that doctors refuse to
perform non-therapeutic circumcision at parental
request."
2006 British Medical
Association
“The BMA does not believe that
parental preference alone constitutes sufficient grounds for
performing a surgical procedure on a child unable to express his
own view. Parental preference must be weighed in terms of the
child's interests. . . . The BMA considers that the evidence
concerning health benefit from non-therapeutic circumcision is
insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it.
. . . Some doctors may wish to not perform circumcisions for
reasons of conscience. Doctors are under no obligation to comply
with a request to circumcise a
child.”
2002 Royal
Australasian College of Physicians
“After extensive review of the literature
the RACP reaffirms that there is no medical indication for
routine male circumcision. The possibility that routine
circumcision may contravene human rights has been raised because
circumcision is performed on a minor and is without proven
medical benefit. . . . Review of the literature in relation to
risks and benefits shows there is no evidence of benefit
outweighing harm for circumcision as a routine
procedure.”
2002 Canadian Paediatric Society (reaffirmed 1996
position)
“Circumcision of newborns should not be routinely
performed.”
2000 American Medical Association
“The AMA supports
the general principles of the 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement of
the American Academy of Pediatrics.”
1999 American Academy of Pediatrics
“Existing scientific
evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male
circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend
routine neonatal circumcision.”
1996 Australian College of Paediatrics
“The
Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons has informed the
College that ‘neonatal male circumcision has no medical
indication. It is a traumatic procedure performed without
anaesthesia to remove a normal functional and protective prepuce
[foreskin].’ ”
1996 Australasian Association of
Paediatric Surgeons
“We do not support the removal of a
normal part of the body, unless there are definite indications
to justify the complications and risks which may arise. In
particular, we are opposed to male children being subjected to a
procedure, which had they been old enough to consider the
advantages and disadvantages, may well have opted to reject the
operation and retain their prepuce [foreskin]....The 1989 United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that ‘State
parties should take all effective and appropriate measures with
a view to abolishing traditional practices prejudicial to the
health of children.’ ”
No national
medical organization in the world
recommends
routine circumcision of male
infants.
|
