17,157
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Late twentieth century: Add Denniston text and citation.
|DOI=
|accessdate=2021-10-10
}}</ref>
Professor [[George C. Denniston]], M.D., M.P.H., explained some functions of the foreskin, said circumcision was unnecessary and harmful because of the deprivation of functions and should not be performed.<ref name-"denniston1992">
{{REFjournal
|last=Denniston
|first=George C.
|init=
|author-link=George C. Denniston
|etal=no
|title=Unnecessary Circumcision
|trans-title=
|language=
|journal=Female Patient
|location=
|date=1992-07
|volume=17
|issue=
|article=
|page=
|pages=13-4
|url=
|archived=
|quote=
|pubmedID=
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|accessdate=
}}</ref>
|DOI=10.1542/peds.2012-1989
|accessdate=2021-10-10
}}</ref> The 1999 circumcision statement advocated analgesia for pain relief of the extreme circumcision [pain], admitted that the [[foreskin]] contains [[Ridged band| nerves]], softened the claims made for [[UTI]] prevention, recognized the effectiveness of breastfeeding at reducing UTI in infants and declared non-therapeutic infant circumcision to be an ''elective'' surgical procedure. Other than that, it shared the much the same faults as the 1989 statement.
Rhinehart (1999) was a practicing psychiatrist who described his patients later-life problems stemming from their neonatal circumcision.<ref name="rhinehart1999">{{REFjournal