Changes

|accessdate=2011-02-19

}}</ref> and vehemently promoted it,<ref>{{REFjournal

}}</ref> long before there was any "research" to prove it. [[Valiere Alcena]] has stated that Fink's assertions "was based on my ^[Alcena's] idea".<ref>{{REFjournal

}}</ref>

According to Fink's son-in-law, Fink had a son who had a botched circumcision and corrective surgery, and then died at the age of four-years due to a brain tumour. Fink spent the rest of his life trying to justify his son's circumcision and the pain that he endured during the four years of his life.<ref>{{REFweb

| last=

}}</ref>

Fink's proposal appeared in media throughout the US and Canada. Asked about his idea by a United Press reporter, Fink replied "This is nothing I can prove."<ref>{{REFbook

|last=Glick

}}

Fink repeated his argument in a small book on circumcision, ''Circumcision: A parent's Decision for Life'', addressed to parents and published in 1988.<ref>Fink, Aaron J. ''Circumcision: A Parent's Decision for Life''. Mountain View. Calif.: Kavanah, 1988.</ref> The focus was on sexually transmitted diseases, which Fink declared to be "no longer a matter of morals but an issue of life or death." Defeating the threat, he informed prospective parents, and called for immediate action: "The facts now point to circumcision, cutting off the foreskin, as a life-sparing path to public and personal health." And lest anyone doubt the urgency of the situation, he added the questions likely to generate unease among the skeptics and human right proponents:

}}</ref>

In 1987, Fink filed a resolution entitled "Newborn Circumcision as a Public Health Measure" with the California Medical Association, saying that "it has been recently hypothesized that a circumcision, preferably in the newborn period, may lessen the acquisition, and in turn, the spread of AIDS, a sexually transmitted disease." The association's advisory panels on pediatrics and urology concluded that the argumens for adoption were "not sufficiently convincing"; and although one panel stood by circumcision as an "acceptable preventive health measure," both panels recommended against the adoption of the resolution. The association's Scientific Board declined endorsement, and the resolution was not adopted.<ref>Aaron Fink, California Medical Association, Resolution 712-87, March 7-11, 1987; Joan B. Hodgman and Joseph B. Hart, "Report to the Scientific Board" (undated, March 1987?)</ref>

In 1988, Fink repeated the resolution with a new paper of the same title, but much lengthier. The Scientific Board recommended against the adoption, but the resolution passed by voice vote.<ref>Aaron J. Fink, California Medical Association, Resolution 305-88, March 5-9, 1988; Fink, ''Circumcision'', 63-65.</ref> In 1989, John W. Hardebeck presented a counter resolution entitled "Newborn Circumcision: Medical Necessity or Useless Mutilation?" stating that newborn circumcision "is a procedure without factual, demonstrable, supportable medical indications in the overwhelming majority of cases," and that "most medical authorities worldwide feel that newborn males have a right to remain 'intact' except in rare instances." This was rejected.<ref>Hardebeck, John W. "Newborn Circumcision: Medical Necessity or Useless Mutilation?" Truth Seeker I, 3 (July-August 1989)</ref><ref>Snyder, "Testimony Against Circumcision." (California Medical Association, March 4, 1989.) Truth Seeker I, 3 (July-August 1989): 51.</ref>

In response to the controversy surrounding the Fink's resolution, and Hardebeck's attempt to counteract it, a group of circumcision opponents held a conference in a hotel across the street from the one housing the medical meeting. The conference organizer was the nation's leading opponent of infant circumcision: Marilyn F. Milos. the founder and director of the National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers (NOCIRC).<ref>Marilyn Milos, personal communication with [[Leonard B. Glick]], July 27, 2001</ref><ref>Hardebeck, John W. "Newborn Circumcision: Medical Necessity or Useless Mutilation?" Truth Seeker I, 3 (July-August 1989)</ref><ref>Snyder, "Testimony Against Circumcision." (California Medical Association, March 4, 1989.) Truth Seeker I, 3 (July-August 1989): 51.</ref> The three-day conference, labeled the First International Symposium on Circumcision, was so successful that six more symposia, resulting to date in publication of four volumes based on the proceedings, have been held since then, in locations as diverse as Lausanne, Oxford and Sidney.<ref>Denniston, George C., and Marilyn Fayre Milos, eds. ''Sexual Mutilations : A Human Tragedy''. New York: Plenum, 1997.</ref><ref>Denniston, George C., Frederick Mansfield Hodges, and Marilyn Fayre Milos, eds. ''Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Considerations in Pediatric Practice''. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 1999.</ref><ref>Denniston, George C., Frederick Mansfield Hodges, and Marilyn Fayre Milos, eds. ''Understanding Circumcision; A Multi-Disciplinary Aproach to a Multi-Dimensional Problem''. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 2001.</ref><ref>Denniston, George C., Frederick Mansfield Hodges, and Marilyn Fayre Milos, eds. ''Flesh and Blood: Perspectives on the Problem of Circumcision in Contemporary Society''. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 2004.</ref> It could be said that Fink unintentionally created a vigorous new expression of opposition to circumcision.