17,052
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Wikify; Add link in SEEALSO section.
'''Circumcised doctors''' are male doctors who were [[circumcised]] as infants, so they lack any personal knowledge and experience of a normal male body part – — the [[foreskin]] of a normal, complete, functional [[penis]]. Circumcised doctors, as compared with [[intact]], [[foreskinned]] doctors tend to be highly [[Bias| biased]] in favor of non-therapeutic infant [[circumcision]].
[[Circumcised]] doctors are more likely to give poor advice on the care of [[intact]] boys.
|DOI=10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1093.x
|accessdate=2020-03-15
}}</ref> & [[Gregory J. Boyle|Boyle]] et al. (2002)<ref>{{BoyleGJ GoldmanR SvobodaJS FernandezE 2002}}</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:
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]] (2005) 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="goldman2005" />
* 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
* [[Bias]]
* [[Psychological issues of male circumcision]]
* [[Trauma]]
{{LINKS}}