United States of America: Difference between revisions
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) →Prevalence of circumcision: Revise sub-section. |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) Revise text and Wikify. |
||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
The United States is unique in having a | The United States is unique in having a [[circumcision industry]] that aggressively promotes the practice of medically-unnecessary, non-therapeutic, harmful infant [[circumcision]]. The decline of the unnecessary practice has been slowed by continual encouragement and promotion of circumcision by the [[circumcision industry]]. However, the practice of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] of boys is now in decline. | ||
Despite the financially self-serving promotional efforts of the circumcision industry, the incidence of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] of infant boys was reported to have continued its slow decline to 52.1 percent in 2016.<ref name="jacobson2021">{{REFjournal | Despite the financially self-serving promotional efforts of the [[circumcision industry]], the incidence of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] of infant boys was reported to have continued its slow decline to 52.1 percent in 2016.<ref name="jacobson2021">{{REFjournal | ||
|last=Jacobson | |last=Jacobson | ||
|first=Deborah L. | |first=Deborah L. | ||
| Line 194: | Line 194: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
By the end of the nineteenth century, America had at least one prominent physician and surgeon on the east coast promoting circumcision and another prominent physician and surgeon on the west coast promoting circumcision. There was no real medical science with which to dispute and discredit their false claims. Non-therapeutic circumcision of males was now well-established in the United States. | By the end of the nineteenth century, America had at least one prominent physician and surgeon on the east coast promoting circumcision and another prominent physician and surgeon on the west coast promoting circumcision. There was no real medical science with which to dispute and discredit their false claims. Non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] of males was now well-established in the United States. | ||
===Early twentieth century=== | ===Early twentieth century=== | ||
| Line 247: | Line 247: | ||
|url=https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/453164 | |url=https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/453164 | ||
|accessdate=2021-10-04 | |accessdate=2021-10-04 | ||
}}</ref> Wolbarst's paper appeared shortly before the start of World War I. It is thought that Wolbarst's false claims inspired some military commanders to require men under their command to be circumcised so as to reduce venereal disease (VD). | }}</ref> Wolbarst's paper appeared shortly before the start of World War I. It is thought that Wolbarst's false claims inspired some military commanders to require men under their command to be [[circumcised]] so as to reduce venereal disease (VD). | ||
M. S. Reuben (1916) (1917) reported additional cases of tuberculosis after ritual circumcision.<ref name="reuben1916">{{REFjournal | M. S. Reuben (1916) (1917) reported additional cases of tuberculosis after ritual circumcision.<ref name="reuben1916">{{REFjournal | ||
| Line 412: | Line 412: | ||
[[Abraham Ravich]] (1942) falsely claimed that circumcision prevents [[prostate cancer]].<ref name="ravich1942">{{Ravich1942}}</ref> | [[Abraham Ravich]] (1942) falsely claimed that circumcision prevents [[prostate cancer]].<ref name="ravich1942">{{Ravich1942}}</ref> | ||
'''Post-war era.''' In the post-war era after WWII, the popularity of non-therapeutic circumcision increased, driven by medical promotion by doctors seeking a nice [[Financial incentive| surgical fee]] as an alleged preventive of penile cancer and by the [Adamant father syndrome| adamant request of circumcised men home from the war who became fathers]]. | '''Post-war era.''' In the post-war era after WWII, the popularity of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] increased, driven by medical promotion by doctors seeking a nice [[Financial incentive| surgical fee]] as an alleged preventive of penile cancer and by the [Adamant father syndrome| adamant request of circumcised men home from the war who became fathers]]. | ||
Non-therapeutic, medically-unnecessary [[circumcision]] of boys had become a "routine" surgical operation that usually was performed automatically on newborn boys even without consent from anyone. | Non-therapeutic, medically-unnecessary [[circumcision]] of boys had become a "routine" surgical operation that usually was performed automatically on newborn boys even without consent from anyone. | ||
| Line 435: | Line 435: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
The publication of a landmark article by [[Douglas Gairdner]] (1949) in the [[United Kingdom]] showing that infant circumcision is non-therapeutic, unnecessary, causes deaths, and which called for preservation of the [[foreskin]]<ref name="gairdner1949">{{GairdnerDM 1949}}</ref> was totally ignored by the circumcision industry in the United States. | The publication of a landmark article by [[Douglas Gairdner]] (1949) in the [[United Kingdom]] showing that infant circumcision is non-therapeutic, unnecessary, causes deaths, and which called for preservation of the [[foreskin]]<ref name="gairdner1949">{{GairdnerDM 1949}}</ref> was totally ignored by the [[circumcision industry]] in the United States. | ||
===Late twentieth century=== | ===Late twentieth century=== | ||
| Line 578: | Line 578: | ||
The statement falsely claimed facilitation of hygiene, prevention of [[phimosis]], and prevention of [[penile cancer]] as reasons that parents may elect non-therapeutic infant circumcision.<ref name="aap1975" /> | The statement falsely claimed facilitation of hygiene, prevention of [[phimosis]], and prevention of [[penile cancer]] as reasons that parents may elect non-therapeutic infant circumcision.<ref name="aap1975" /> | ||
The statement expressed no concern for the [[pain]] and [[trauma]] of circumcision, nor did it provide information on the functions and value of the [[foreskin]] nor did it recognize the child as a person with domestic and international rights to self-determination and physical integrity. The statement carefully avoided recommending [[circumcision]] and placed the responsibility for the certain [[amputation]] injury on the parents rather than on the attending physician.<ref name="aap1975" /> | The statement expressed no concern for the [[pain]] and [[trauma]] of circumcision, nor did it provide information on the functions and value of the [[foreskin]] nor did it recognize the child as a person with domestic and international rights to self-determination and [[physical integrity]]. The statement carefully avoided recommending [[circumcision]] and placed the responsibility for the certain [[amputation]] injury on the parents rather than on the attending physician.<ref name="aap1975" /> | ||
The 1975 statement served as the AAP's position statement until 1989. | The 1975 statement served as the AAP's position statement until 1989. | ||
| Line 786: | Line 786: | ||
}}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
Anand & Hickey (1987) published a paper in the ''New England Journal of Medicine'' that conclusively proved that newborn infants are capable of feeling [[pain]]. After publication of this landmark paper, no doubt about pain sensation in infants remained. The article stated: | Anand & Hickey (1987) published a paper in the ''New England Journal of Medicine'' that conclusively proved that newborn infants are capable of feeling [[pain]]. After publication of this landmark paper, no doubt about the existence of pain sensation in infants remained. The article stated: | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
<i>Numerous lines of evidence suggest that even in the human [[fetus]], pain pathways as well as cortical and subcortical centers necessary for pain perception are well developed late in gestation, and the neurochemical systems now known to be associated with pain transmission and modulation are intact and functional. Physiologic responses to painful stimuli have been well documented in neonates of various gestational ages and are reflected in hormonal, metabolic, and cardiorespiratory changes similar to but greater than those observed in adult subjects. Other responses in newborn infants are suggestive of integrated emotional and behavioral responses to pain and are retained in memory long enough to modify subsequent behavior patterns.</i><ref name="anand1987">{{REFjournal | <i>Numerous lines of evidence suggest that even in the human [[fetus]], pain pathways as well as cortical and subcortical centers necessary for pain perception are well developed late in gestation, and the neurochemical systems now known to be associated with pain transmission and modulation are intact and functional. Physiologic responses to painful stimuli have been well documented in neonates of various gestational ages and are reflected in hormonal, metabolic, and cardiorespiratory changes similar to but greater than those observed in adult subjects. Other responses in newborn infants are suggestive of integrated emotional and behavioral responses to pain and are retained in memory long enough to modify subsequent behavior patterns.</i><ref name="anand1987">{{REFjournal | ||
| Line 1,588: | Line 1,588: | ||
'''Incidence of circumcision''' is the percentage of newborn boys who currently are being [[circumcised]]. | '''Incidence of circumcision''' is the percentage of newborn boys who currently are being [[circumcised]]. | ||
====Long-term declining trend==== | ====Long-term declining trend==== | ||
The incidence of non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision hit its peak at 85-90 percent in 1980. It has been slowly declining ever since. | The incidence of non-therapeutic neonatal [[circumcision]] hit its peak at 85-90 percent in 1980. It has been slowly declining ever since. | ||
Peter Moore (2015) reported that the incidence of circumcision was 55 percent.<ref name="moore2015"/> | Peter Moore (2015) reported that the incidence of circumcision was 55 percent.<ref name="moore2015"/> | ||
| Line 1,617: | Line 1,617: | ||
==American [[genital integrity]] organizations== | ==American [[genital integrity]] organizations== | ||
The United States of America now have | The United States of America now have numerous [[genital integrity]] ([[intactivist]]) organizations working to promote and encourage the protection of the [[physical integrity]] of American boys. | ||
{{SEEALSO}} | {{SEEALSO}} | ||