IntactiWiki

American Academy of Family Physicians: Difference between revisions

← Older editNewer edit →
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs)
Bureaucrats
22,151 edits
mNo edit summary
Add categories.
Line 24: Line 24:
}}</ref>
}}</ref>


The AAFP then joined with the [[American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists| American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists]] (ACOG) and the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] in 2008 to produce a pro-circumcision policy statement that would promote [[circumcision]] and [[third-party payment]] for non-therapeutic circumcision of children. Lesley Atwood, {{MD}}, was assigned to represent AAFP in the development of the pro-circumcision statement.
The AAFP then joined with the [[American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists| American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists]] (ACOG) and the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] (AAP) in 2008 to produce a pro-circumcision policy statement that would promote [[circumcision]] and [[third-party payment]] for non-therapeutic circumcision of children. Lesley Atwood, {{MD}}, was assigned to represent the AAFP in the development of the pro-circumcision statement.


The statement was finally published by the AAP in 2012, but attracted overwhelming criticism from many sources.
The statement was finally published by the [[AAP]] in 2012, but attracted overwhelming criticism from many sources.


==Criticism of the AAP statement==   
==Criticism of the AAP statement==   
Line 155: Line 155:
}}</ref> The use of the word ''potential'' is likely to be very misleading to the public and especially to parents of infants boys, who are being asked to sacrifice the erogenous [[foreskin]] part of their infant boy's [[penis]], for claimed, unproved speculative allegation of benefit.
}}</ref> The use of the word ''potential'' is likely to be very misleading to the public and especially to parents of infants boys, who are being asked to sacrifice the erogenous [[foreskin]] part of their infant boy's [[penis]], for claimed, unproved speculative allegation of benefit.


The major benefit claimed is prevention of urinary tract infection (UTI), however UTI is easily and satisfactorily treated with antibiotics, in the unlikely event it should occur.<ref name="mccracken1989">{{REFjournal
The major benefit claimed is prevention of [[urinary tract infection]] (UTI), however UTI is easily and satisfactorily treated with antibiotics, in the unlikely event it should occur.<ref name="mccracken1989">{{REFjournal
  |last=McCracken Jr
  |last=McCracken Jr
  |first=George
  |first=George
Line 177: Line 177:
  |DOI=10.1097/00006454-198908000-00041
  |DOI=10.1097/00006454-198908000-00041
  |accessdate=2020-04-18
  |accessdate=2020-04-18
}}</ref> The AAFP fails to inform parents of this conservative and satisfactory treatment. Singh-Grewal et al. (2005) report 111 circumcisions would be necessary to prevent one UTI. Circumcision is recommended only in cases of recurrent UTI. the authors point out that the rate of complications of circumcision exceeds the rate of prevention of UTI, so there is no net benefit from neonatal non-therapeutic circumcision.<ref>{{REFjournal
}}</ref> The AAFP fails to inform parents of this conservative and satisfactory treatment. Singh-Grewal et al. (2005) report 111 circumcisions would be necessary to prevent one UTI. [[Circumcision]] is recommended only in cases of recurrent UTI. the authors point out that the rate of complications of circumcision exceeds the rate of prevention of UTI, so there is no net benefit from neonatal non-therapeutic circumcision.<ref>{{REFjournal
  |last=Singh-Grewal
  |last=Singh-Grewal
  |first=Davinder
  |first=Davinder
Line 213: Line 213:
The AAFP does not tell the public that [[fatalities]] and [[Documented severe complications of circumcision| tragic outcomes]] occur rarely.
The AAFP does not tell the public that [[fatalities]] and [[Documented severe complications of circumcision| tragic outcomes]] occur rarely.


The AAFP does not recognize the infant boy as a human person with [[human rights]]. The AAFP does not discuss the conflict of interest between the infant boy's rights to his bodily integrity, his [[foreskin]], his [[human rights]], and his well-being; and the family physician's interest in maximizing his income.
The AAFP does not recognize the infant boy as a human person with [[human rights]]. The AAFP does not discuss the conflict of interest between the infant boy's rights to his [[physical integrity| bodily integrity]], his [[foreskin]], his [[human rights]], and his well-being; and the family physician's interest in maximizing his income.


{{SEEALSO}}
{{SEEALSO}}
Line 224: Line 224:
{{REF}}
{{REF}}


[[Category:USA]]
 
[[Category:Circumcision]]
[[Category:Male circumcision]]
[[Category:Physicians]]
[[Category:Physicians]]
[[Category:Medical society]]
[[Category:Medical society]]
[[Category:Promoter]]
[[Category:Promoter]]
[[Category:USA]]
Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/American_Academy_of_Family_Physicians"