Australia: Difference between revisions

Line 149:

The incidence of non-therapeutic child circumcision in Australia started to decline after the publication of the Belmaine (1971) letter. By 1978, only 50 percent of newborn boys were being circumcised.

The [[Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons]] issued a statement on non-therapeutic circumcsion of children in 1996. The statement pointed out the [[human rights]] violations and said in part:

We do not support the removal of a normal part of the body, unless there are definite indications to justify the complications and risks which may arise. In particular, we are opposed to male children being subjected to a procedure, which had they been old enough to consider the advantages and disadvantages, may well have opted to reject the operation and retain their prepuce.<ref name=leditschke1996>{{REFdocument

|title=Guidelines for Circumcision

|trans-title=

|language=

|url=http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aaps/

|contribution=

|quote=

|trans-quote=

|quote-lang=

|last=Leditschke

|first=J. Fred

|author-link=

|publisher=Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons

|format=

|date=1996

|accessdate=2019-11-27

}}</ref>

</blockquote>

The incidence of circumcision continued to decline, so that by 1996, when the Australian College of Paediatrics issued a statement, it reported that the incidence of "routine" (i.e. non-therapeutic) circumcision was estimated at ten percent of newborn boys.<ref name-"acp1996>{{REFweb

@@ Line 149: / Line 149: @@
 The incidence of non-therapeutic child circumcision in Australia started to decline after the publication of the Belmaine (1971) letter.  By 1978, only 50 percent of newborn boys were being circumcised.
+The [[Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons]] issued a statement on non-therapeutic circumcsion of children in 1996.  The statement pointed out the [[human rights]] violations and said in part:
+<blockquote>
+We do not support the removal of a normal part of the body, unless there are definite indications to justify the complications and risks which may arise. In particular, we are opposed to male children being subjected to a procedure, which had they been old enough to consider the advantages and disadvantages, may well have opted to reject the operation and retain their prepuce.<ref name=leditschke1996>{{REFdocument
+ |title=Guidelines for Circumcision
+ |trans-title=
+ |language=
+ |url=http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aaps/
+ |contribution=
+ |quote=
+ |trans-quote=
+ |quote-lang=
+ |last=Leditschke
+ |first=J. Fred
+ |author-link=
+ |publisher=Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons
+ |format=
+ |date=1996
+ |accessdate=2019-11-27
+}}</ref>
+</blockquote>
 The incidence of circumcision continued to decline, so that by 1996, when the Australian College of Paediatrics issued a statement, it reported that the incidence of "routine" (i.e. non-therapeutic) circumcision was estimated at ten percent of newborn boys.<ref name-"acp1996>{{REFweb