Changes

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 and . ==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 been reaffirmedin 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>