Even as the circumcision rate for newborn baby boys in the United States reaches its lowest level in decades, the American Academy of Pediatrics reported Monday that the health benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks. It’s the first time that the influential medical group has updated its circumcision policy since 1999. The academy said that medical insurers should cover the procedure.
A review of medical literature published Monday in the journal "Pediatrics" finds that circumcision may protect heterosexual men against HIV infection. The policy shift comes as circumcision becomes a charged political topic from the Bay Area to Germany, where a court ruled in June that circumcision is illegal. Jewish groups are asking the German government to pass legislation that protects the practice.
The academy's position does not endorse circumcision, but suggests that it should be an option available to parents, according to an article in the New York Times.
According to a federal study of circumcisions performed in community hospitals published in February, there were 1.2 million hospital circumcisions in 2009. California counts one of the lowest circumcision rates in the country with 22 percent.
Last year, Berkeley's Peace and Justice Commission passed a resolution condemning a comic book character created by an anti-circumcision group called Foreskin Man that many deemed to be anti-Semitic.
What do you think? Should circumcision should be banned, or should parents be allowed to have the choice, as the American Academy of Pediatrics suggests?
What makes this discussion even more scintillating is the fact that faithful Jews, some Christians, and some Muslims are all suffering through this oh-so-public scrutiny of their traditions. They're neither accustomed to this sort of critique, nor are they particularly good defending themselves ... especially when they know in their heart of hearts, that circumcising newborns - especially without anesthesia - is fundamentally barbaric.
What's unfortunate here is that these researchers are taking data collected mostly in Africa and applying those findings to Americans where the risks are enormously different. In the end, if this topic weren't fundamentally steeped in religious tradition this would be a no-brainer and we'd all see circumcision of newborns as a barbaric practice.