Circumcised doctors: Difference between revisions

'''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]].

 

Circumcised doctors are more likely to give poor advice on the care of intact boys.

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

* 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 biased in favor of male circumcision.<ref name="goldman2004">{{REFjournal

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

}}</ref> & [[Gregory J. Boyle|Boyle]] et al. (2002)<ref>{{REFjournal

|date=2002

}}</ref> report that circumcision is traumatic, so one may expect that circumcised doctors experienced trauma and that their behavior is impacted.  

* 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.<ref name="stein1982">{{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

* [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] (1999) reported circumcised doctors will write papers to support non-therapeutic circumcision:

* [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] (2004) 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="goldman2004" />

  |date=2012

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