Difference between revisions of "American Academy of Family Physicians"

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
(Add text.)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
Leawood, KS 66211-268
 
Leawood, KS 66211-268
  
−
Family physicians is one of three medical specialties who substantially profit from carrying out medically-uncessary, non therapeutic child circumcisions, so it should be no surprise that they promote non-therapeutic child [[circumcision]] with a very positive policy statement. The AAFP joined with the 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. The statement was finally published by the AAP in 2012, but it expired in 2017 and has not been reaffirmed.
+
Family physicians is one of three medical specialties who substantially profit from carrying out medically-uncessary, non-therapeutic child circumcisions, so it should be no surprise that they promote non-therapeutic child [[circumcision]] with a very positive policy statement.  
 +
 
 +
The corrupt [[World Health Organization]] (WHO) published a statement in 2007, based on now discredited African randomized controlled trials, that falsely claimed that male circumcision would prevent or reduce infection with HIV.<ref name="who2007">{{REFweb
 +
|quote=
 +
|url=http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/
 +
|title=Male circumcision for HIV prevention
 +
|last=
 +
|first=
 +
|publisher=World Health Organization
 +
|work=
 +
|date=2007
 +
|accessdate=2020-04-16
 +
}}</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 statement was finally published by the AAP in 2012, but attracted overwhelming criticism from many sources.
 +
 
 +
==Criticism of the AAP statement== 
 +
 
 +
p>After the release of the position statement, a debate appeared in the journal ''Pediatrics'' and the ''Journal of Medical Ethics'' between the AAP and an ad-hoc group of Western doctors, ethicists and lawyers, who questioned the evidence and ethics of the AAP position statement, and accused the AAP of "cultural bias".
 +
 
 +
* {{REFjournal
 +
|last=Svoboda
 +
|first=J. Steven
 +
|author-link=J. Steven Svoboda
 +
|last2=Van Howe
 +
|first2=Robert S.
 +
|author2-link=Robert S. Van Howe
 +
|etal=no
 +
|title=Out of step: fatal flaws in the latest AAP policy report on neonatal circumcision
 +
|trans-title=
 +
|language=
 +
|journal=J Med Eth
 +
|location=Published online first
 +
|date=2013-03-13
 +
|volume=39
 +
|issue=7
 +
|pages=434-41
 +
|url=https://arclaw.org.customers.tigertech.net/wp-content/uploads/Svoboda-Van-Howe-Out-of-Step-Fatal-Flaws-in-AAP...-JME-2013.pdf
 +
|archived=
 +
|quote=
 +
|pubmedID=23508208
 +
|pubmedCID=
 +
|DOI=10.1136/medethics-2013-101346
 +
|accessdate=2020-04-16
 +
}}
 +
 
 +
* {{REFdocument
 +
|title=Commentary on American Academy of Pediatrics 2012 Circumcision Policy Statemeni
 +
|url=https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/commentary-on-american-academy-of-pediatrics-2012-circumcision-policy-statement.pdf
 +
|contribution=
 +
|last=
 +
|first=
 +
|publisher=Doctors Opposing Circumcision
 +
|format=PDF
 +
|date=2013-04-01
 +
|accessdate=2020-04-16
 +
}}
 +
 
 +
* In 2013, international physicians protested against American Academy of Pediatrics’ policy on infant male circumcision. This protest was organized by [[Morten Frisch]] and led to an article in ''Pediatics''<ref name="frisch2013">{{REFjournal
 +
|last=Frisch
 +
|first=Morten
 +
|author-link=Morten Frisch
 +
|last2=Aigrain
 +
|first2=Yves
 +
|author2-link=
 +
|last3=Barauskas
 +
|first3=Vidmontas
 +
|author3-link=
 +
|etal=yes
 +
|title=Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision
 +
|journal=Pediatrics
 +
|location=
 +
|date=2013-04-01
 +
|volume=131
 +
|issue=4
 +
|pages=
 +
|url=https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/131/4/796.long
 +
|quote=
 +
|pubmedID=23509170
 +
|pubmedCID=
 +
|DOI=10.1542/peds.2012-2896
 +
|accessdate=2020-04-04
 +
}}</ref>, signed by an international group of 38 physicians from 16 European countries.
 +
 
 +
The AAP received further criticism from activist groups that oppose [[circumcision]]."<ref>{{URLwikipedia|American_Academy_of_Pediatrics|American Academy of Pediatrics|2020-03-31}}</ref></p>
 +
 
 +
* {{REFjournal
 +
|last=Darby
 +
|first=Robert
 +
|author-link=Robert Darby
 +
|etal=no
 +
|title=Risks, Benefits, Complications and Harms: Neglected Factors in the Current Debate on Non-Therapeutic Circumcision
 +
|trans-title=
 +
|language=
 +
|journal=Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal
 +
|location=
 +
|date=2015-04
 +
|volume=25
 +
|issue=1
 +
|pages=1-34
 +
|url=https://kiej.georgetown.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/03_25.1darby.pdf
 +
|archived=
 +
|quote=
 +
|pubmedID=25843118
 +
|pubmedCID=
 +
|DOI=10.1353/ken.2015.0004
 +
|accessdate=2020-04-16
 +
}}
 +
 
 +
Under AAP, a statement expires after five years unless it is reaffirmed, but the AAP did not reaffirm its flawed 2012 statement, so it expired in 2017.
 +
 
 +
==2012 AAFP circumcision position statement==
 +
 
 +
The AAFP issued a circumcision position statement in 2012 that was based on the 2012 AAP position statement.<ref>{{REFweb
 +
|url=https://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/neonatal-circumcision.html
 +
|title=Neonatal Circumcision
 +
|last=
 +
|first=
 +
|accessdate=2019-12-10</ref>
 +
 
 +
The statement claims that non-therapeutic infant male circumcision has "''potential'' benefits". ''Potential'' means to exist in possibility but not in actuality,<ref>{{REFweb
 +
|url=https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/potential
 +
|archived=
 +
|title=Potential
 +
|trans-title=
 +
|language=
 +
|last=
 +
|first=
 +
|author-link=
 +
|publisher=Farley
 +
|website=Medical Dictionary
 +
|date=
 +
|accessdate=2020-04-18
 +
|format=
 +
|quote=Capable of doing or being, although not yet in course of doing or being; possible, but not actual.
 +
}}</ref>
  
 
{{LINKS}}
 
{{LINKS}}

Revision as of 12:14, 18 April 2020

The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) is the medical trade association that defends and promotes the business interests of family physicians in the United States.

The AAFP headquarters address is:

American Academy of Family Physicians

11400 Tomahawk Creek Parkway

Leawood, KS 66211-268

Family physicians is one of three medical specialties who substantially profit from carrying out medically-uncessary, non-therapeutic child circumcisions, so it should be no surprise that they promote non-therapeutic child circumcision with a very positive policy statement.

The corrupt World Health Organization (WHO) published a statement in 2007, based on now discredited African randomized controlled trials, that falsely claimed that male circumcision would prevent or reduce infection with HIV.[1]

The AAFP then joined with the 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 statement was finally published by the AAP in 2012, but attracted overwhelming criticism from many sources.

Criticism of the AAP statement

p>After the release of the position statement, a debate appeared in the journal Pediatrics and the Journal of Medical Ethics between the AAP and an ad-hoc group of Western doctors, ethicists and lawyers, who questioned the evidence and ethics of the AAP position statement, and accused the AAP of "cultural bias".

  • In 2013, international physicians protested against American Academy of Pediatrics’ policy on infant male circumcision. This protest was organized by Morten Frisch and led to an article in Pediatics[2], signed by an international group of 38 physicians from 16 European countries.

The AAP received further criticism from activist groups that oppose circumcision."[3]

Under AAP, a statement expires after five years unless it is reaffirmed, but the AAP did not reaffirm its flawed 2012 statement, so it expired in 2017.

2012 AAFP circumcision position statement

The AAFP issued a circumcision position statement in 2012 that was based on the 2012 AAP position statement.[4]

The statement claims that non-therapeutic infant male circumcision has "potential benefits". Potential means to exist in possibility but not in actuality,[5]

External links

  • ↑ REFweb (2007). Male circumcision for HIV prevention, World Health Organization. Retrieved 16 April 2020.
  • ↑ REFjournal Frisch, Morten, Aigrain, Yves, Barauskas, Vidmontas, et al. Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision. Pediatrics. 1 April 2013; 131(4) PMID. DOI. Retrieved 4 April 2020.
  • ↑ REFweb Wikipedia article: American Academy of Pediatrics. Retrieved 31 March 2020.
  • ↑ {{REFweb |url=https://www.aafp.org/about/policies/all/neonatal-circumcision.html |title=Neonatal Circumcision |last= |first= |accessdate=2019-12-10
  • ↑ REFweb Potential, Medical Dictionary, Farley. Retrieved 18 April 2020.
    Quote: Capable of doing or being, although not yet in course of doing or being; possible, but not actual.
    • Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/w/index.php?title=American_Academy_of_Family_Physicians&oldid=13807"