Reply #49: It isn't good for the 'goose or the gander'... [View All]

[Sapphire Blue]

Edited for clarification

... and, as information, education, and awareness of the brutality of this procedure (male infant circumcision) grows, it is becoming a less common & accepted procedure in this country. Decades ago, male infant circumcision was the standard. Not so anymore...

In 1971, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) reported that there are no valid medical indications for circumcision in the neonatal period.2 After that the nationwide incidence of neonatal circumcision continued the slow decline that started in 1965, although Wallerstein (1985) reported spot samples of 77 to 98 percent.

<snip>

The nationwide circumcision rate had been fluctuating in the low 60 percent range for some years, but a decline in the percentage of boys circumcised started in 2002 and continued into 2003. From 2002 to 2003 declines occured in all four census regions. Non-circumcision has been the norm in the Western Region for more than a decade. The Southern Region now is approaching parity. Data for 2004 is not yet available.

http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/

(Note: when my youngest grandson was born in 1996, his pediatrician stated that the current (at that time) circumcision rate among his infant male patients was less than 50%. None of my daughter's friends elected to have their sons circumcised, with the exception of one parent... a father... who prevailed against the wishes of the mother.)