15,772
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Non-US statements
The [http://www.cua.org/en Canadian Urological Association] (2018) issued a 24-page guideline on the care of the normal foreskin and neonatal circumcision. The statement is very comprehensive and covers treatment of various diseases and deformities as well as discussing non-therapeutic circumcision of boys in Canada. Our comments are restricted to the discussion of non-therapeutic circumcision.
While the discussion of the medical evidence is very good, the authors were unaware of the methodological and statistical errors in the three African RCTs, <ref name="boyle-hill2011" /> so they gave the RCTs excessive and undeserved weight. Although the authors recognized the loss of sensation caused by circumcision, they seemed to lack understanding of the full range of [[Sexual_effects_of_circumcision| sexual injury ]] caused by circumcision. They apparently had no knowledge of the [[Psychological issues of male circumcision| psychological impact ]] as that is not discussed at all.
The authors show no understanding that an infant is a person with [[human rights]], that non-therapeutic circumcision violate those rights, or that the practice may be unethical or unlawful under the ''right to security of the person'' granted by Article Seven of the [http://www.efc.ca/pages/law/charter/charter.text.html Canadian Charter or Rights and Freedoms].
The [https://www.bma.org.uk/ British Medical Association] 28-page statement (2019) focuses on legal and ethical advice to its fellows to help keep them out of trouble in a legal and regulatory environment that is increasingly unfriendly to practitioners of non-therapeutic male circumcision. It has little to say about the medical aspects of non-therapeutic circumcision.
* {{REFweb