Australia: Difference between revisions

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m Add URL
Add Belmaine
Line 8: Line 8:
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 paper, ''The Fate of the Foreskin: A Study of Circumcision'',<ref name="gairdner1949">{{REFjournal
[[Douglas Gairdner]],s famous, classic 1949 paper, ''The Fate of the Foreskin: A Study of Circumcision'',<ref name="gairdner1949">{{REFjournal
  |last=Gairdner
  |last=Gairdner
  |first=Douglas M.
  |first=Douglas M.
Line 85: Line 85:
  |DOI=
  |DOI=
  |accessdate=2019-10-27
  |accessdate=2019-10-27
}}</ref>
==Position statements of medical societies==
After considering the three papers published in the  ''Australian Paediatric Journal'', the Australian Paediatric Society adopted a resolution on April 24, 1971 that the circumcision of male infants should not be performed as a routine measure.  That resolution subsequently was reported in a letter published in the ''Medical Journal of Australia'' on May 22, 1971.<ref name="belmaine1971">{{REFjournal
|last=Belmaine
|first=SP
|author-link=
|title=Circumcision
|journal=Medical Journal of Australia
|date=1971-05-22
|volume=1
|issue=
|pages=1148
|url=http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/apa1971/
|accessdate=2019-19-28
}}</ref>
}}</ref>



Revision as of 12:21, 28 October 2019

Construction Site

This article is work in progress and not yet part of the free encyclopedia IntactiWiki.

 

A report on circumcision in Australia.

Australia, like other English-speaking countries, once had a rather high rate of non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision of male infants, however Australia now has a very low rate of non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision.

History

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,[1] seems to have had no effect in Australia.

The Australian Paediatric Journal issue of June 1970, published three articles critical of non-therapeutic infant circumcision.[2][3][4]

Position statements of medical societies

After considering the three papers published in the Australian Paediatric Journal, the Australian Paediatric Society adopted a resolution on April 24, 1971 that the circumcision of male infants should not be performed as a routine measure. That resolution subsequently was reported in a letter published in the Medical Journal of Australia on May 22, 1971.[5]

References

  1. REFjournal Gairdner, Douglas M.. The fate of the foreskin: a study of circumcision. British Medical Journal. 1949; 2(4642): 1433-1437. PMID. PMC. DOI. Retrieved 28 October 2019.
  2. REFjournal Leitch, I.O., et al. Circumcision: the continuing enigma. Aust Paediatr J. 1 March 1970; 6(1): 59-65. PMID. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  3. REFjournal Birrell, R.G.. Circumcision. Aust Paediatr J. 1 June 1960; 6(2): 66-7. PMID. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  4. REFjournal Smith, E.D.. Another view of circumcision. Aust Paediatr J. 1 June 1970; 6(2): 67-9. PMID. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  5. REFjournal Belmaine, SP. Circumcision. Medical Journal of Australia. 22 May 1971; 1: 1148. Retrieved Error: Invalid time..