Position statements on infant circumcision: Difference between revisions

Netherlands: Add sub-section.
Canada: Add sub-sections.
Line 240: Line 240:


== Canada ==
== Canada ==
 
===College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia===
{{Citation
{{Citation
  |Text=Current understanding of the benefits, risks and potential harm of this procedure no longer supports this practice for prophylactic health benefit. Routine infant male circumcision performed on a healthy infant is now considered a non-therapeutic and medically unnecessary intervention.
  |Text=Current understanding of the benefits, risks and potential harm of this procedure no longer supports this practice for prophylactic health benefit. Routine infant male circumcision performed on a healthy infant is now considered a non-therapeutic and medically unnecessary intervention.
Line 246: Line 246:
  |Source=
  |Source=
}}
}}
===Canadian Paediatric Society===


The [https://www.cps.ca/ Canadian Paediatric Society] (1996) stated:
The [https://www.cps.ca/ Canadian Paediatric Society] (1996) stated:
Line 265: Line 267:
  |accessdate=2020-06-25
  |accessdate=2020-06-25
}}</ref></blockquote>
}}</ref></blockquote>
===Canadian Urological Association===


The [http://www.cua.org/en Canadian Urological Association] issued its statement on circumcision in February 2018.
The [http://www.cua.org/en Canadian Urological Association] issued its statement on circumcision in February 2018.