Letters: Opposes circumcision for males, too

Regarding the article Dangerous, deadly, scarring, on female circumcision (AMNews, Oct. 28):

We invite physicians, particularly obstetrician- gynecologists, to be introspective about Dr. John C. Nelson's statement, We ... cannot allow females or any other group of patients to be mutilated.

It is inherently mutilative when obstetrician- gynecologists excise the healthy, functional prepuce from a male newborn who cannot consent to this genital cutting.

Well-intending adults may believe that it is in the child's best interests to perform the circumcision, but intellectually honest physicians know that the alleged medical indications for routine infant circumcision are weak at best, and that many parents are motivated by irrational social fears or customs.

What circumcising unconsenting male and female children share in common is not severity, but sovereignty. Every man, woman and child has inherent human rights to physical integrity and self determination.

Tim Hammond
Founder National Organization to Heal the Abuse and Routine Mutilation of Males

Symbolic incision a possible alternative to mutilating female circumcision

I am opposed to female genital mutilation. I am opposed to any form of mutilation of humans, animals, plants, art, etc. However, I heal with a large population of East African immigrants each day and I think we need to recognize our ethnocentric tendencies.

Female circumcision has been in these peoples' culture for generations. As physicians, we need to be careful and specific with the terms we use in the diagnosis and management of different conditions.

When counseled against the procedure, some East Africans wonder why we allow the practice of male genital mutilation, which we call simply circumcision.

We are working with the East African community in our area to educate them about the problems and complications of infibulation and other types of female circumcisions.

In addition, we have proposed allowing a symbolic incision in the prepuce of the clitoris, which would not remove any tissue and which would not cause the problems associated with the more radical procedures.

The solution to the problem is increased involvement in the communities in order to educate and gain trust. A simple law against years of tradition will only push people to do it underground in unsterile conditions, possibly creating more problems than it solves.

Neil Kaneshiro, MD
Seattle

 Back to the News 1996 page.

The Circumcision Information and Resource Pages are a not-for-profit educational resource and library. IntactiWiki hosts this website but is not responsible for the content of this site. CIRP makes documents available without charge, for informational purposes only. The contents of this site are not intended to replace the professional medical or legal advice of a licensed practitioner.

  © CIRP.org 1996-2024 | Filetree | Please visit our sponsor and host:  IntactiWiki.