15,495
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Combine citations.
* the American Urological Association
are heavily populated with circumcised doctors, so their pronouncements on male circumcision, as compared with those of other nations, tend to be biased in favor of male circumcision.<ref name="goldman2005goldman2004">{{REFjournal
|last=Goldman
|first=Ronald
|issue=9
|pages=630-633
|url=https://wwwacademic.circumcisionoup.orgcom/wp-contentpch/docsarticle/CircumcisionPolicy_A_Psychosocial_Perspective.pdf9/9/630/2648566?login=true
|quote=
|pubmedID=19675851
}}</ref> report that circumcision is traumatic, so one may expect that circumcised doctors experienced trauma and that their behavior is impacted.
* Stein et al. (1982) sent out questionnaires regarding circumcision practice to medical doctors in San Diego, California. The questionnnaire included questions about personal circumcision status. The authors reported:
<blockquote>
Older and circumcised physicians were more likely than either younger or uncircumcised physicians to maintain a positive attitude about routine neonatal circumcision. Although the number of female physicians in this study was limited, they were less likely than male physicians to favor circumcision.<ref name="stein1982">{{REFjournal
One reason that flawed studies are published is that science is affected by cultural values. A principal method of preserving cultural values is to disguise them as truths that are based on scientific research. This 'research' can then be used to support questionable and harmful cultural values such as circumcision. This explains the claimed medical 'benefits' of circumcision.<ref name="goldman1999"/></blockquote>
* [[Ronald Goldman|Goldman]] (2004) stated, "On the other hand, there are various factors that may contribute to or suggest a bias in favour of circumcision. A survey of randomly selected primary care physicians showed that circumcision was more often supported by doctors who were older, male and circumcised."<ref name="goldman2004">{{REFjournal |last=Goldman |first=Ronald |init= |author-link=Ronald Goldman |etal=no |title=Circumcision policy: A psychosocial perspective |trans-title= |language= |journal=Paediatrics & Child Healh |location= |date=2004-11-01 |volume=9 |issue=9 |article= |page= |pages=630-33 |url=https://academic.oup.com/pch/article/9/9/630/2648566?login=true |archived= |quote= |pubmedID=19675851 |pubmedCID=2724127 |DOI=10.1093/pch/9.9.630 |accessdate=2021-10-23}}</ref>
* Andries J. Muller (2010) conducted a survey of Saskatchewan medical doctors in specialties that perform non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision. He reported "the circumcision status of, especially, the male respondents played a huge role in whether they were in support of circumcision, or not." The circumcision status of their sons was a secondary factor.<ref>{{REFjournal