Circumcision: A letter to Ann Landers

February 25, 1993

Ms Ann Landers
Chicago Tribune
435 N. Michigan Ave.
Chicago, IL
60611-0562

Dear Ms Landers:

The recent advice in your nationally syndicated column to a young married couple, who inquired about circumcision, was totally incorrect: The headline of your recent advice column read, Clear medical evidence favors circumcision for baby boys. What medical evidence?

We are the only western nation that routinely straps helpless male infants to a plastic tray, and painfully cut the protective foreskin (without anesthesia) from the glans and amputate it, leaving a raw wound open to constant irritation from feces and urine-soaked diapers. Infection is an obvious problem in addition to the needless accidents when too much foreskin is removed or the tiny penis is destroyed. We can only speculate about the psychological damage. As it has long been recognized that the foreskin is a functional body part and a protective cover throughout life, and that there are no valid medical reasons for infant circumcision, its continued practice is barbarous child abuse (not to mention needless medical expense).

In North America, this bit of ritual savagery is done ostensibly as a hygenic measure, although soap and water would do just as well. The latest scare tactic being used by some members of the medical profession is UTI (urinary tract infection) and AIDS. In fact, every excuse for this curious practice has been proved false. 85% of men in the world have an intact/natural/uncut (uncircumcised) penis that they were born with. Are North American foreskins so different from those in Mexico, Europe, Asia, Central and South America, that they need to be amputated? Obviously not.

In this day and age when we are hearing so much about a WOMAN's right to choose when it involves her body, isn't it about time that a MAN be given the same respect (and legal protection) to choose when it involves his body? The child may belong to his parents, but his foreskin definitely belongs to him! No doubt if you were living in Africa, or were a product of Moslem religious indoctrination, you would also be in favor of female circumcision.

Have you read any books on this subject, such as Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy by Edward Wallerstein, or Circumcision: The Painful Dilemma by Rosemary Romberg, or Circumcision: What Every Parent Should Know by Anne Briggs, or Circumcision: What It Does by Billy Ray Boyd, or Say No To Circumcision by Thomas Ritter, M.D.? Since I doubt that you have, I have enclosed a few articles on circumcision; by Dr. Lorraine Stern, M.D., by Dr. George Denniston, M.D., M.P.H., by Dr. Benjamin Spock, M.D., and by Dr. Thomas J. Ritter, M.D., which I trust you will find interesting, informative, and enlightening.

No, Ann Landers, world-wide medical evidence does NOT favor circumcision for baby boys: It only seems to be favored in areas and countries that have a high percentage of the medical establishment who are Jewish.

Therefore, in the future, would you please refrain from dispensing incorrect advice on a subject that you obviously are unqualified to speak on objectively.

Sincerely,

John H. Mark
Director, Circumcision Information Resource Center of Washington
P.O. Box 75594
Seattle, Washington
98125
Tel. (206) 523-4410

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.