Part of a debate published in BMJ, 2007;335:1180 (8 December), doi:10.1136/bmj.39406.520498. Geoff Hinchley argues that the practice of male infant circumcision is harmful and should be stopped.
The unpalatable truth is that logic and the rights of the child play little part in determining the acceptability of male genital mutilation in our society. The profession needs to recognise this and champion the argument on behalf of boys that was so successful for girls.
Article in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 31, Issue 8, 2005;31:463-469 doi:10.1136/jme.2004.009340. The authors conclude that "it is ethically inappropriate to subject children—male or female—to the acknowledged risks of circumcision and contend that there is no compelling legal authority for the common view that male circumcision is lawful."
Article published in Future Medicine, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 193-199 , May 2008. DOI 10.2217/17469600.2.3.193 The authors examine the three randomized clinical trials (RCTs) conducted in Africa and find them wanting. A recent commentary claims that circumcision is "at least as good as the HIV vaccine we have been waiting for, praying for and hoping to see in our lifetimes." The article provides an analysis that refutes that statement.
A vlog by a mother-to-be who takes a stand against infant circumcision. The video blog is short, but she makes a very good presentation why infant circumcision should not be done.
She is dead set against circumcision. She admits that male infant circumcision is a controversial topic, but there is no reason to do. Cleaner is a bogus reason because women have no trouble keeping the vagina. Do it to match dad? That is a foolish reason.
She says if the choice is between looking like an anteater or Darth Vader, she thinks the anteater wins because the foreskin protects the glans. With a protected glans, the penis remains most sensitive. She wants to give the best to her children, and that includes them to be happy and have a good sex life.
The Victorian era is examined, along with the medical establishment's idea at that time that the foreskin must be excised as a routine precaution against every imaginable sexual dysfunction, from syphilis and phimosis to masturbation and bed-wetting. Why Britain adopted a practice it had traditionally abhorred and then abandoned it after only two generations is the subject of A Surgical Temptation.
The author reveals that circumcision has always been related to the question of how to control male sexuality. Many men in the US claim that their infant circumcision has not affected them in any way. Unfortunately, men cut at birth have no way of telling how their sexual pleasure has been affected by their infant circumcision. This book attempts to add a ray of light to the circumcision controversy.
Article by C.J. Cold, MD, and J.R. Taylor published in British Journal of Urology (now BJI International), Vol. 83, Supp. 1, pp. 34-44, 1983. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.0830s1034.x The authors describe the prepuce as a common anatomical structure of both male and female genitalia. The authors discuss the embryology, anatomy, and function of the prepuce. Based on the complex anatomy and the function of the prepuce, or foreskin, the authors advise against neonatal (infant) circumcision. The state that the removal of normal genital anatomy in children and infants should be deferred until the individual can make their own informed choice.
An article by Paul M. Fleiss, M.D., and Frederick M. Hodges about the male foreskin. The two provide a detailed description of the foreskin and how it functions with the rest of the penis.
The article discusses what is the foreskin, how big is the foreskin, what does the ridged band do, why is the foreskin attached and not retractable for young children, and what are the specialized nerver receptors in the foreskin. With the circumcising culture in the United States, very little is known about the foreskin, how it works, and why it is there. Dr. Fleiss and Fred Hodges answer many of the questions people have about the foreskin.
Research article published in Archives of Disease in Childhood, Vol. 62, Issue 1, pp. 80-81, 1987. doi:10.1136/adc.62.1.80
Four newborn babies developed acute heart failure a few hours after circumcision at 8 days. During this procedure, a sponge soaked in epinephrine was applied to the circumcision site and left there for several hours. Treatment was with digoxin and diuretics and signs of heart failure disappeared within 24-72 hours.
Article by Dr. Andrew E. MacNeily, FRCSC, FAAP, published in Canada Urological Association Journal: Can Urol Assoc J. 2007 November; 1(4): 395397. Dr. MacNeily addresses the common myths that male infant cicrumcision has medical benefits. Using evidence based analysis, he disputes various claims and gives sound reasons why there is no benefit sufficient to justify infant circumcision.
Unfortunately, Dr. MacNeily does not address the current evidence that refutes many previous studies and information. For example, he says that penile cancer is reduced compared with uncircumcised men, although the American Cancer Society states that other factors contribute to penile cancer.
Restoring Tally is just an ordinary guy who had to confront his prostate and circumcision problems. This site chronicles his journey in dealing with these issues. He has had prostate surgery and he is restoring his foreskin.