Difference between revisions of "Circumcised doctors"

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Location: Add reference.)
(→‎Examples: Revise name.)
 
(77 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
'''Circumcised doctors''' are male doctors who were circumcised as infants, so they lack any personal knowledge and experience of a normal male body part – the [[foreskin]] or a complete, functional [[penis]].
+
'''Circumcised doctors''' are male doctors who were [[circumcised]] as infants, so they lack any personal knowledge and experience of a normal male body part — the [[foreskin]] of a normal, complete, functional [[penis]]. Circumcised doctors, as compared with [[intact]], [[foreskinned]] doctors, tend to be highly [[Bias| biased]] in favor of non-therapeutic infant [[circumcision]].<ref name="hill2017">{{REFjournal
 +
|last=Hill
 +
|first=George
 +
|init=G
 +
|author-link=George Hill
 +
|title=The case against circumcision
 +
|journal=Journal of Men's Health and Gender
 +
|date=2007
 +
|volume=4
 +
|issue=3
 +
|pages=318-323
 +
|url=https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=04ace5046cc27f01b8fbe4aa359c059778983912
 +
|quote=
 +
|format=PDF
 +
|accessdate=2023-10-01
 +
}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
[[Circumcised]] doctors are more likely to give poor advice on the care of [[intact]] boys. According to Bigelow (1995)
 +
<blockquote>
 +
America is not a generally a safe place for a [[foreskin]] regardless of the [[intact]] male's age. Most American doctors are neither trained or skilled in the less radical treatment procedures used in other countries. Av a result, they often recommend [[circumcision]] in situations that could be treated by less severe measures.<ref>{{REFbook
 +
|last=Bigelow, Ph.D
 +
|first=Jim
 +
|init=
 +
|author-link=Jim Bigelow
 +
|year=1995
 +
|title=The Joy of Uncircumcising
 +
|url=
 +
|work=
 +
|editor=
 +
|edition=Second Edition
 +
|volume=
 +
|chapter=The circumcised American penis
 +
|scope=
 +
|page=27
 +
|pages=
 +
|location=Aptos
 +
|publisher=Hourglass
 +
|ISBN=0-934061-22-X
 +
|quote=
 +
|accessdate=2023-08-15
 +
|note=
 +
}}</ref>
 +
</blockquote>
 +
 
 +
==Location==
 +
[[Circumcised]] doctors tend to be concentrated in such nations as Turkey and other Islamic nations, [[Israel]], the [[United States of America]] and to a lesser extent, other English-speaking nations.
 +
 
 +
American [[medical trade association| medical trade associations]], such as
 +
 
 +
* the [[American Academy of Family Physicians]]
 +
* the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]]
 +
* the [[American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists| American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists]]
 +
* the [[American Urological Association]]
 +
 
 +
are heavily populated with [[circumcised]] doctors, so their pronouncements on male [[circumcision]], as compared with those of other nations, tend to be [[Bias| biased]] in favor of male [[circumcision]].<ref name="goldman2005">{{REFjournal
 +
|last=Goldman
 +
|first=Ronald
 +
|init=R
 +
|author-link=Ronald Goldman
 +
|etal=no
 +
|title=Circumcision policy: a psychosocial perspective
 +
|trans-title=
 +
|language=
 +
|journal=Paediatrics & Child Health (Ottawa)
 +
|location=
 +
|date=2005-11
 +
|volume=9
 +
|issue=9
 +
|pages=630-633
 +
|url=https://academic.oup.com/pch/article/9/9/630/2648566?login=true
 +
|quote=
 +
|pubmedID=19675851
 +
|pubmedCID=2724127
 +
|DOI=10.1093/pch/9.9.630
 +
|accessdate=2020-03-16
 +
}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
==Examples==
 +
There are hundreds of thousands of [[circumcised]] doctors, many of them of Jewish heritage. Some notable examples of [[circumcised]] doctors are:
 +
* [[Robert C. Bailey]]
 +
* [[Benjamin E. Dawson]]
 +
* [[Aaron J. Fink]]
 +
* [[Andrew Freedman]]
 +
* [[Hershel Goldman]]
 +
* [[David Golovsky]]
 +
* [[Ronald H. Gray]]
 +
* [[Alan F. Guttmacher]]
 +
* [[James Heilman]]
 +
* [[Murray Katz]]
 +
* [[John N. Krieger]]
 +
* [[M. J. Moses]]
 +
* [[Stephen Moses]]
 +
* [[Mehmet Cengiz Öz]]
 +
* [[Neil Pollock]]
 +
* [[Abraham Ravich]]
 +
* [[Terry Russell]]
 +
* [[Edgar J. Schoen]]
 +
* [[Aaron Tobian]]
 +
* [[Peter Wein]]
 +
* [[Gerald N. Weiss]]
 +
* [[Thomas E. Wiswell]]
 +
* [[Alex D. Wodak]]
 +
* [[Abraham L. Wolbarst]]
  
 
== Scientific references ==
 
== Scientific references ==
−
* [[Gregory J. Boyle|Boyle]], [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] ''et al.'' (1999) report that circumcision is traumatic, so one may expect that circumcised doctors experienced trauma and that their behavior is impacted.<ref name="goldman1999">{{REFjournal
+
 
 +
* [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] (1999)<ref name="goldman1999">{{REFjournal
 
  |last=Goldman
 
  |last=Goldman
 
  |first=Ronald
 
  |first=Ronald
−
  |author-link=
+
|init=R
 +
  |author-link=Ronald Goldman
 
  |etal=no
 
  |etal=no
 
  |title=The psychological impact of circumcision
 
  |title=The psychological impact of circumcision
 
  |trans-title=
 
  |trans-title=
 
  |language=
 
  |language=
−
  |journal=BJU Int&nbsp;
+
  |journal=BJU Int
 
  |location=
 
  |location=
 
  |date=1999-01-01
 
  |date=1999-01-01
 
  |volume=
 
  |volume=
−
  |issue=83 Suppl 1nbsp;
+
  |issue=83 Suppl 1
−
  |pages=&nbsp;93-103
+
  |pages=93-103
 
  |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1093.x
 
  |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1093.x
 
  |quote=
 
  |quote=
Line 22: Line 126:
 
  |DOI=10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1093.x
 
  |DOI=10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1093.x
 
  |accessdate=2020-03-15
 
  |accessdate=2020-03-15
−
}}</ref> <ref>{{REFjournal
+
}}</ref> & [[Gregory J. Boyle|Boyle]] et al. (2002)<ref>{{BoyleGJ GoldmanR SvobodaJS FernandezE 2002}}</ref> report that [[circumcision]] is traumatic, so one may expect that [[circumcised]] doctors experienced [[trauma]] and that their behavior is impacted.
−
  |last=Boyle
+
 
−
  |first=Gregory J.
+
* Stein et al. (1982) sent out questionnaires regarding [[circumcision]] practice to medical doctors in San Diego, California. The questionnnaire included questions about personal [[circumcision]] status. The authors reported:
−
  |author-link=Gregory J. Boyle
+
<blockquote>
−
  |last2=Goldman
+
Older and [[circumcised]] physicians were more likely than either younger or uncircumcised physicians to maintain a positive attitude about routine neonatal circumcision. Although the number of female physicians in this study was limited, they were less likely than male physicians to favor circumcision.<ref name="stein1982">{{REFjournal
−
  |first2=Ronald
+
  |last=Stein
−
  |author2-link=Ronald Goldman
+
  |first=
−
  |last3=Svoboda
+
|init=MT
−
  |first3=J. Steven
+
  |author-link=
−
  |author3-link=J. Steven Svoboda
+
  |last2=Marx
−
  |last4=Fernandez
+
  |first2=
−
  |first4=Ephrem
+
|init2=M
 +
  |author2-link=
 +
  |last3=Taggert
 +
  |first3=
 +
|init3=SL
 +
  |author3-link=
 +
  |last4=Bass
 +
  |first4=
 +
|init4=RA
 
  |author4-link=
 
  |author4-link=
 
  |etal=no
 
  |etal=no
−
  |title=Male circumcision: pain, trauma and psychosexual sequelae
+
  |title=Routine neonatal circumcision: the gap between contemporary policy and practice
 
  |trans-title=
 
  |trans-title=
 
  |language=
 
  |language=
−
  |journal=J Health Psychol
+
  |journal=J Fam Pract
 
  |location=
 
  |location=
−
  |date=2002
+
  |date=1982
−
  |volume=7
+
  |volume=15
−
  |issue=3
+
  |issue=1
−
  |pages=329-43
+
|article=
−
  |url=http://www.cirp.org/library/psych/boyle6/
+
|page=
 +
  |pages=47-53
 +
  |url=https://cdn.mdedge.com/files/s3fs-public/jfp-archived-issues/1982-volume_14-15/JFP_1982-07_v15_i1_routine-neonatal-circumcision-the-gap-be.pdf
 +
|archived=
 
  |quote=
 
  |quote=
−
  |pubmedID=22114254
+
  |pubmedID=7086383
 
  |pubmedCID=
 
  |pubmedCID=
−
  |DOI=10.1177/135910530200700310
+
  |DOI=
−
  |accessdate=2020-03-16
+
  |accessdate=2021-10-23
 
}}</ref>
 
}}</ref>
−
 
+
</blockquote>
−
* LeBourdais (1995) reports the [[circumcision]] status of the physician is a factor among others in determining if a baby is to be circumcised.<ref name="lebourdais1995">{{REFjournal
+
* LeBourdais (1995) reported the [[circumcision]] status of the physician is a factor, among others, in determining if a baby is to be [[circumcised]].<ref name="lebourdais1995">{{REFjournal
 
  |last=LeBourdais
 
  |last=LeBourdais
 
  |first=Eleanor
 
  |first=Eleanor
 +
|init=E
 
  |author-link=
 
  |author-link=
 
  |etal=no
 
  |etal=no
Line 64: Line 180:
 
  |volume=152
 
  |volume=152
 
  |issue=11
 
  |issue=11
−
  |pages=1873-6
+
  |pages=1873-1876
 
  |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1337997/pdf/cmaj00071-0145.pdf
 
  |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1337997/pdf/cmaj00071-0145.pdf
 
  |pubmedCID=1337997
 
  |pubmedCID=1337997
Line 70: Line 186:
 
}}</ref>
 
}}</ref>
  
−
* [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] (1999) reports circumcised doctors will write papers to support non-therapeutic circumcision:
+
* [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] (1999) reported [[circumcised]] doctors will write papers to support non-therapeutic circumcision:
−
{{Citation
+
<blockquote>
−
|Text=One reason that flawed studies are published is that science is affected by cultural values. A principal method of preserving cultural values is to disguise them as truths that are based on scientific research. This 'research' can then be used to support questionable and harmful cultural values such as circumcision. This explains the claimed medical 'benefits' of circumcision.
+
One reason that flawed studies are published is that science is affected by cultural values. A principal method of preserving cultural values is to disguise them as truths that are based on scientific research. This 'research' can then be used to support questionable and harmful cultural values such as circumcision. This explains the claimed medical 'benefits' of circumcision.<ref name="goldman1999"/></blockquote>
−
  |Author=[[Ronald Goldman]]
+
   
−
|ref=<ref name="goldman1999"/>
+
* [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] (2005) stated, "On the other hand, there are various factors that may contribute to or suggest a bias in favour of circumcision. A survey of randomly selected primary care physicians showed that [[circumcision]] was more often supported by doctors who were older, male and [[circumcised]]."<ref name="goldman2005" />
−
}}
 
  
−
==Location==
+
* Andries J. Muller (2010) conducted a survey of Saskatchewan medical doctors in specialties that perform non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision. He reported "the circumcision status of, especially, the male respondents played a huge role in whether they were in support of circumcision, or not." The circumcision status of their sons was a secondary factor.<ref>{{REFjournal
−
Circumcised doctors tend to be concentrated in such nations as Turkey and other Islamic nations, Israel, the United States of America and to a lesser extent, other English-speaking nations.
+
|last=Muller
 +
|init=AJ
 +
|author-link=
 +
|url=https://www.arclaw.org/wp-content/uploads/Muller-Cut-or-not-cut-JMH-2010.pdf
 +
|title=To cut or not to cut? Personal factors influence primary care physicians’ position on elective newborn circumcision
 +
|journal=Journal of Men's Health
 +
|date=2010-10
 +
|volume=7
 +
|issue=3
 +
|pages=227-32
 +
|accessdate=2021-10-23
 +
}}</ref>
  
−
American medical trade associations, such as
+
* Boyle & Hill (2012) commented:
−
 
+
<blockquote>Tobian and Gray are products of circumcising cultures. Their article exhibits Freudian defences of denial and rationalisation. The authors seem blinded by their own circumcision-generated emotional needs. The readers of such articles must be aware of the culture-of-orgin and circumcision status of the authors, in order to properly evaluate assertions about MC.<ref name="boyle2012">{{REFjournal
−
* the American Academy of Family Physicians
+
  |last=Boyle
−
* the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]]
+
  |first=Gregory J.
−
* the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
+
|init=
−
* the American Urological Association
+
  |author-link=Gregory J. Boyle
−
 
+
|last2=Hill
−
are heavily populated with circumcised doctors, so their pronouncements on male circumcision, as compared with those of other nations, tend to be biased in favor of male circumcision.<ref name="goldman2005">{{REFjournal
+
|first2=George
−
  |last=Goldman
+
|init2=
−
  |first=Ronald
+
|author2-link=George Hill
−
  |author-link=Ronald Goldman
 
 
  |etal=no
 
  |etal=no
−
  |title=Circumcision policy: a psychosocial perspective
+
  |title=Circumcision-generated emotions bias medical literature
 
  |trans-title=
 
  |trans-title=
 
  |language=
 
  |language=
−
  |journal=Paedatrics & Child Health (Ottawa)
+
  |journal=BJU Int
 
  |location=
 
  |location=
−
  |date=2005-11
+
  |date=2012-02-07
−
  |volume=9
+
  |volume=109
−
  |issue=9
+
  |issue=4
−
  |pages=630-3.
+
|article=
−
  |url=https://www.circumcision.org/wp-content/docs/CircumcisionPolicy_A_Psychosocial_Perspective.pdf
+
|page=E11
 +
  |pages=
 +
|url=https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10917.x
 +
|archived=
 +
|quote=
 +
|pubmedID=22313504
 +
|pubmedCID=
 +
|DOI=10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.10917.x
 +
|accessdate=2021-10-25
 +
}}</ref></blockquote>
 +
 
 +
* [[George Hill|Hill]] (2012) wrote:
 +
<blockquote>
 +
Medical doctors in [[Australia]], [[Canada]], and the [[United States]] practiced [[circumcision]] in the twentieth century, so these nations have a heavy proportion of [[circumcised]] men, some of whom become medical doctors. These [[circumcised]] male doctors share the same [[bias]] in favor of male circumcision as do other circumcised males. Male doctors who were [[circumcised]] as infants are more likely to recommend [[circumcision]] of infants to parents.<ref>{{REFweb
 +
  |url=http://www.drmomma.org/2009/07/circumcision-human-behavior.html
 +
|archived=
 +
|title=Circumcision and Human Behavior: The emotional and behavioral effects of circumcision
 +
|trans-title=
 +
|language=English
 +
|last=Hill
 +
|first=George
 +
|author-link=George Hill
 +
|publisher=Peaceful Parenting
 +
|website=http://www.drmomma.org/
 +
|date=2012-05-27
 +
|accessdate=2020-05-24
 +
|format=
 
  |quote=
 
  |quote=
−
|pubmedID=19675851
 
−
|pubmedCID=2724127
 
−
|DOI=10.1093/pch/9.9.630
 
−
|accessdate=2020-03-16
 
 
}}</ref>
 
}}</ref>
 +
</blockquote>
  
−
==Examples==
+
==Identifying a suitable doctor for an intact male==
−
Some leading examples of circumcised doctors are:
+
[[Your Whole Baby]] has long been aware of the issues with American [[circumcised]] doctors, so the organization has created a list of doctors who are reported to be "foreskin friendly" to which parents of [[intact]] boys may refer. The list is only for the [[United States]].
−
* [[Abraham L. Wolbarst]]
+
 
−
* [[Edgar J. Schoen]]
+
Please see:
−
* [[Murray Katz]]
+
* [https://www.yourwholebaby.org/doctors-list Intact friendly doctors list]
−
* [[Neil Pollock]]
 
−
* [[Terry Russell]]
 
  
 
{{SEEALSO}}
 
{{SEEALSO}}
 
* [[Adamant father syndrome]]
 
* [[Adamant father syndrome]]
 
* [[Bias]]
 
* [[Bias]]
 +
* [[Forced foreskin retraction]]
 +
* [[Care of intact, foreskinned boys]]
 +
* [[Issues with American urologists and the practice of male circumcision]]
 +
* [[Psychological issues of male circumcision]]
 +
* [[Regret doctor]]
 +
* [[Trauma]]
 +
 +
{{LINKS}}
 +
* {{REFweb
 +
|url=http://www.pearltrees.com/thesearemypearls/doctors-promoting-circumcision/id6164717#item73102503
 +
|title=Doctors' Circumcision Recommendations Influenced By Personal Factors, Study Finds
 +
|last=Friedman
 +
|first=Jonathan
 +
|author-link=Jonathan Friedman
 +
|publisher=IntactNews
 +
|date=2011-10-16
 +
|accessdate=2020-03-19
 +
}}
  
 
{{REF}}
 
{{REF}}
Line 125: Line 289:
 
[[Category:Circumcision]]
 
[[Category:Circumcision]]
 
[[Category:Physicians]]
 
[[Category:Physicians]]
 +
[[Category:Psychology]]
 +
 +
[[de:Beschnittene Ärzte]]

Latest revision as of 22:33, 20 November 2024

Circumcised doctors are male doctors who were circumcised as infants, so they lack any personal knowledge and experience of a normal male body part — the foreskin of a normal, complete, functional penis. Circumcised doctors, as compared with intact, foreskinned doctors, tend to be highly biased in favor of non-therapeutic infant circumcision.[1]

Circumcised doctors are more likely to give poor advice on the care of intact boys. According to Bigelow (1995)

America is not a generally a safe place for a foreskin regardless of the intact male's age. Most American doctors are neither trained or skilled in the less radical treatment procedures used in other countries. Av a result, they often recommend circumcision in situations that could be treated by less severe measures.[2]

Location

Circumcised doctors tend to be concentrated in such nations as Turkey and other Islamic nations, Israel, the United States of America and to a lesser extent, other English-speaking nations.

American medical trade associations, such as

are heavily populated with circumcised doctors, so their pronouncements on male circumcision, as compared with those of other nations, tend to be biased in favor of male circumcision.[3]

Examples

There are hundreds of thousands of circumcised doctors, many of them of Jewish heritage. Some notable examples of circumcised doctors are:

Scientific references

  • Stein et al. (1982) sent out questionnaires regarding circumcision practice to medical doctors in San Diego, California. The questionnnaire included questions about personal circumcision status. The authors reported:

Older and circumcised physicians were more likely than either younger or uncircumcised physicians to maintain a positive attitude about routine neonatal circumcision. Although the number of female physicians in this study was limited, they were less likely than male physicians to favor circumcision.[6]

  • LeBourdais (1995) reported the circumcision status of the physician is a factor, among others, in determining if a baby is to be circumcised.[7]
  • Goldman (1999) reported circumcised doctors will write papers to support non-therapeutic circumcision:

One reason that flawed studies are published is that science is affected by cultural values. A principal method of preserving cultural values is to disguise them as truths that are based on scientific research. This 'research' can then be used to support questionable and harmful cultural values such as circumcision. This explains the claimed medical 'benefits' of circumcision.[4]

  • Goldman (2005) stated, "On the other hand, there are various factors that may contribute to or suggest a bias in favour of circumcision. A survey of randomly selected primary care physicians showed that circumcision was more often supported by doctors who were older, male and circumcised."[3]
  • Andries J. Muller (2010) conducted a survey of Saskatchewan medical doctors in specialties that perform non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision. He reported "the circumcision status of, especially, the male respondents played a huge role in whether they were in support of circumcision, or not." The circumcision status of their sons was a secondary factor.[8]
  • Boyle & Hill (2012) commented:

Tobian and Gray are products of circumcising cultures. Their article exhibits Freudian defences of denial and rationalisation. The authors seem blinded by their own circumcision-generated emotional needs. The readers of such articles must be aware of the culture-of-orgin and circumcision status of the authors, in order to properly evaluate assertions about MC.[9]

Medical doctors in Australia, Canada, and the United States practiced circumcision in the twentieth century, so these nations have a heavy proportion of circumcised men, some of whom become medical doctors. These circumcised male doctors share the same bias in favor of male circumcision as do other circumcised males. Male doctors who were circumcised as infants are more likely to recommend circumcision of infants to parents.[10]

Identifying a suitable doctor for an intact male

Your Whole Baby has long been aware of the issues with American circumcised doctors, so the organization has created a list of doctors who are reported to be "foreskin friendly" to which parents of intact boys may refer. The list is only for the United States.

Please see:

See also

External links

References

  1. ↑ REFjournal Hill G. The case against circumcision PDF. Journal of Men's Health and Gender. 2007; 4(3): 318-323. Retrieved 1 October 2023.
  2. ↑ REFbook Bigelow, Ph.D, Jim (1995): The circumcised American penis, in: The Joy of Uncircumcising. Edition: Second Edition. Aptos: Hourglass. P. 27. ISBN 0-934061-22-X. Retrieved 15 August 2023.
  3. ↑ a b REFjournal Goldman R. Circumcision policy: a psychosocial perspective. Paediatrics & Child Health (Ottawa). November 2005; 9(9): 630-633. PMID. PMC. DOI. Retrieved 16 March 2020.
  4. ↑ a b REFjournal Goldman R. The psychological impact of circumcision. BJU Int. 1 January 1999; (83 Suppl 1): 93-103. DOI. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  5. ↑ REFjournal Boyle GJ, Goldman R, Svoboda JS, Fernandez E. Male Circumcision: Pain, Trauma and Psychosexual Sequelae. Journal of Health Psychology. 2002; 7(3): 329-43. DOI. Retrieved 29 September 2019.
  6. ↑ REFjournal Stein MT, Marx M, Taggert SL, Bass RA. Routine neonatal circumcision: the gap between contemporary policy and practice. J Fam Pract. 1982; 15(1): 47-53. PMID. Retrieved 23 October 2021.
  7. ↑ REFjournal LeBourdais E. Circumcision no longer a "routine" surgical procedure. Can Med Assoc J. 1 June 1995; 152(11): 1873-1876. PMC. Retrieved 15 March 2020.
  8. ↑ REFjournal Muller AJ. To cut or not to cut? Personal factors influence primary care physicians’ position on elective newborn circumcision. Journal of Men's Health. October 2010; 7(3): 227-32. Retrieved 23 October 2021.
  9. ↑ REFjournal Boyle, Gregory J., Hill, George. Circumcision-generated emotions bias medical literature. BJU Int. 7 February 2012; 109(4): E11. PMID. DOI. Retrieved 25 October 2021.
  10. ↑ REFweb Hill, George (27 May 2012). Circumcision and Human Behavior: The emotional and behavioral effects of circumcision, http://www.drmomma.org/, Peaceful Parenting. Retrieved 24 May 2020.
Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Circumcised_doctors&oldid=39908"