“Canada’s pediatricians are about to update their advice on whether baby boys should be circumcised, revising and softening their stand for the first time in 17 years.”
“Their review comes as new Canadian research suggests half of expectant parents would consider circumcision if they had a son – and that the single most important factor is the circumcision “status” of the father. The Canadian Paediatric Society’s old policy, issued in 1996, opposed routine circumcision of newborns. The new statement is expected to be more neutral.”
“The old policy deemed circumcision medically unnecessary for the “well-being of the child.””
“At the end of the day … it will very much be influenced by dad’s status, as well as the cultural and religious issues.”
Dr. Nancy, Your Birth Coach Comments:
I have to say this is disappointing. Medical opinion/policy should not be based on cultural preference it should be based on what is best for the long term physical and emotional outcomes of the individual (not the parents of that individual). People can then do what they choose but medical opinion should not be influenced by that.
Sorry but condoms prevent HIV and STI’s and hygiene prevents UTIs not circumcision. Circumcised or not you need to use condoms to prevent STI’s (plus if you read the studies they are actually BS since they didn’t follow the participants properly.) I would prefer to wash and drink cranberry juice should an infection happen and have a lifetime of using my sexual organs to their fullest capacity then prevent the risk of an infection that is typically no big deal and easy to treat at home with no medical attention.
I would not cut off my breasts at birth to prevent breast cancer, which is much more prevalent than penile cancer. Female circumcision would also eliminate folds that need cleaning and would prevent UTIs and also interfere with sexual function like male circumcision.
I could also prevent appendicitis it I removed my appendix at birth. There are plenty of organs we can survive without but will we thrive? I realize we undervalue the importance of healthy sexual relations in our society but will you baby wish they had full function and sensation of their penis. I think so.
If parents would choose plastic surgery to have their baby’s nose match daddy’s (which they will see much more often than their penis) would the Canadian Pediatric Society make a neutral statement on it?
Circumcision is still medically unnecessary, so why does CPS feel it is necessary to change that statement. It already is neutral because medically we don’t NEED to cut off body parts at birth.
How do monkeys prevent UTIs? No other species feels the need to amputate body parts at birth, why do we?
If you don’t know how circumcision affects sexual function watch this video.