Australia: Difference between revisions

Line 22: Line 22:
The indigenous people of Australia, the [[Aborigines]], have variously practiced [[subincision]] and [[circumcision]] since before the first contact with Europeans.
The indigenous people of Australia, the [[Aborigines]], have variously practiced [[subincision]] and [[circumcision]] since before the first contact with Europeans.


The incidence of non-therapeutic neonatal [[circumcision]] in Australia approached that of the United States in the 1930s through 1960s.  
The incidence of non-therapeutic neonatal [[circumcision]] in Australia approached that of the [[United States]] in the 1930s through 1960s.  


[[Douglas Gairdner]]'s famous, classic 1949 paper, ''The Fate of the Foreskin: A Study of Circumcision'',<ref name="gairdner1949">{{GairdnerDM 1949}}</ref> seems to have had no effect in Australia. However, criticism of the practice of non-therapeutic circumcision accelerated in 1967.
[[Douglas Gairdner]]'s famous, classic 1949 paper, ''The Fate of the Foreskin: A Study of Circumcision'',<ref name="gairdner1949">{{GairdnerDM 1949}}</ref> seems to have had no effect in Australia. However, criticism of the practice of non-therapeutic circumcision accelerated in 1967.


Morgan (1967) criticised non-therapeutic circumcision in a letter published in the ''Medical Journal of Australia''.<ref>{{REFjournal
Morgan (1967) criticised non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] in a letter published in the ''Medical Journal of Australia''.<ref>{{REFjournal
  |last=Morgan
  |last=Morgan
  |init=WKC
  |init=WKC
Line 66: Line 66:
}}</ref>
}}</ref>


The ''Australian Paediatric Journal'' issue of June 1970, published three articles critical of non-therapeutic infant circumcision.<ref name="leitch1970">{{REFjournal
The ''Australian Paediatric Journal'' issue of June 1970, published three articles critical of non-therapeutic infant [[circumcision]].<ref name="leitch1970">{{REFjournal
  |last=Leitch
  |last=Leitch
  |init=IO
  |init=IO