Changes

The '''{{Construction SiteFULLPAGENAME}}''' was formed to replace the deficient 1989 Circumcision Policy Statement that was produced under the chairmanship of [[Edgar J. Schoen]], which rejected the use of analgesia for the [[Pain| pain of circumcision]].  The 1999 Circumcision Policy Statement has issues of its own however. This statement discussed "potential benefits". The word ''potential'' is usually defined as existing in possibility but not in actuality, so the claimed ''potential benefits'' are actually unproven imaginary non-existent benefits.

|Text=Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male [[circumcision]]; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend [[Routine Infant Circumcision| routine neonatal circumcision]]. In the case of circumcision, in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child’s current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child. To make an informed choice, parents of all male infants should be given accurate and unbiased information and be provided the opportunity to discuss this decision. It is legitimate for parents to take into account cultural, religious, and ethnic traditions, in addition to the medical factors, when making this decision. Analgesia is safe and effective in reducing the procedural [[pain ]] associated with [[circumcision]]; therefore, if a decision for circumcision is made, procedural analgesia should be provided. If [[circumcision]] is performed in the newborn period, it should only be done on infants who are stable and healthy.