22,335
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
renamed REFs
The 1975 policy was considered outmoded so a new "task force on circumcision" with circumcision promoter [[Edgar J. Schoen]] as chairman was formed. It is believed that five of the six members of the task force, or 83 percent, were Jewish.
This statement claimed for the first time that "potential medical benefits exist.<ref name="aap1999_p388_391aap1989">{{REFjournal
|last=Schoen
|first=Edgar J.
}}</ref> therefore the use of the word ''potential'' means the medical benefits discussed do not actually exist. The use of the word ''potential'' may be misleading to parents.
This statement acknowledged that infants feel [[pain]] but minimized the effects of pain and declined to recommend the use of analgesia or anesthesia for foreskin amputation.<ref name="aap1999_p388_391aap1989"/>
Based on methodologically flawed studies by circumcision promoter [[Thomas E. Wiswell]], the statement falsely claimed a reduction in the incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) could be obtained by non-therapeutic infant circumcision.<ref name="aap1999_p388_391aap1989"/>
The statement does not recognize baby boys as human beings with rights that should be respected.<ref name="aap1999_p388_391aap1989"/>
Although the 1989 statement speaks favorably about non-therapeutic circumcision of infant boys, a careful reading shows that it does not actually recommend circumcision,<ref name="aap1999_p388_391aap1989"/> perhaps for avoidance of legal liability.
The statement was not well received. Professor Ronald Poland, a member of the task force, published a dissent in the ''New England Journal of Medicine''.<ref name="poland1990">{{REFjournal