StopTheCut.org

Circumcision requires some forethought

Opinion

April 3, 2013 at 6:43 PM | Danielle Palmer-Friedman

Today, approximately half of the male population of the United States is circumcised at birth, meaning approximately half of American parents are making the choice to remove part of their son’s body before he is able to provide any sort of input.

If I gave birth to a baby boy and decided I wanted him tattooed — we’re talking full back piece, something epic — I’d probably have to deal with a lot of dirty looks. People would try and stop me. They’d tell me I was an unfit parent and that I was making a mistake.

But if I decided to have the same baby boy circumcised, instead of tattooed, not many people would give it a second thought. I would be following a popular social norm, and not even a doctor would question me.

This decision, as permanent as a tattoo, needs to be reconsidered. What seems like an obvious option may be way off base.

Many UW students are members of an intact activist group, The Whole Network. You might have seen their handiwork around campus — little chalk messages on the walkways that share messages about the dangers of circumcision.

“117 babies died last year from circumcisions,” said Amanda Morse, a member of The Whole Network and the source of these chalked up warnings. “Only 11 died in car seats.”

These sorts of facts, however daunting, seem ridiculous. And they don’t seem to provide enough of an argument against circumcision because, in the minds of many Americans, circumcision is still considered to be a harmless procedure. And foreskin is considered to be completely unnecessary.

And there are indeed health benefits to being circumcised. In fact, the American Academy of Pediatrics declared in 2013 that some of the benefits include prevention of urinary tract infections, HIV, penile cancer, and some sexually transmitted diseases.

However, the penile foreskin contains 20,000 nerve endings, with more nerve endings in the foreskin than any other part of the penis. The foreskin serves other functions as well, such as providing natural lubrication during sexual intercourse.

It’s likely that most boys who are circumcised don’t know what they are missing. They probably don’t feel cheated by their parents or miss their foreskins. But their views are somewhat of an automated response generated by American culture.

Not many uncircumcised penises are likely to be seen on the pornography circuit. For one reason or another, the porn industry has decided to perpetuate the image of hoodless penises. This image — and the coinciding idea that it is “normal” to be circumcised — is communicated to countless impressionable viewers.

And this is exactly the image activists are forced to fight against.

Morse and the rest of The Whole Network view male circumcision as a human rights issue, plain and simple, rather than a health issue.

Link to original article

Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision

Abstract
The American Academy of Pediatrics recently released its new Tech-
nical Report and Policy Statement on male circumcision, concluding
that current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn
male circumcision outweigh the risks. The technical report is based
on the scrutiny of a large number of complex scientific articles.
Therefore, while striving for objectivity, the conclusions drawn by
the 8 task force members reflect what these individual physicians
perceived as trustworthy evidence. Seen from the outside, cultural
bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in
the United States seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are
different from those reached by physicians in other parts of the
Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia. In this
commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based physi-
cians and representatives of general medical associations and so-
cieties for pediatrics, pediatric surgery, and pediatric urology in
Northern Europe. To these authors, only 1 of the arguments put
forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics has some theoret-
ical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the
possible protection against urinary tract infections in infant boys,
which can easily be treated with antibiotics without tissue loss. The
other claimed health benefits, including protection against HIV/AIDS,
genital herpes, genital warts, and penile cancer, are questionable,
weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western
context, and they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery
before boys are old enough to decide for themselves.
Pediatrics
2013;131:796–800

Circumcision rates are steadily decreasing in most Western countries
around the world, including the United States. Still, a majority of
newborn male infants undergo the procedure in the United States.

In its newly released Technical Report and Policy Statement on male
circumcision, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has changed
from a neutral to a more positive attitude toward circumcision,claiming
that possible health benefits now outweigh the risks and possible
negative long-term consequences. The AAP does not recommend
routine circumcision of all infant boys as a public health measure but
asserts that the benefits of the procedure are sufficient to warrant
third-party payment. In Europe, Canada, and Australia, where infant
male circumcision is considerably less common than in the United States,
the AAP report is unlikely to influence circumcision practices because the
conclusions of the report and policy statement seem to be strongly
culturally biased.

In this commentary, a different view is presented by non–US-based
physicians and representatives of general medical associations and
societies for pediatrics, pediatric surgery and pediatric urology in
Northern Europe.
Link to article

Dr. Jerome Segal: - “Als Jude sage ich, Beschneidung ist ein barbarischer Akt“

Article in German.

Translation of the title:  “As a Jew I say that circumcision is a barbaric act.”  - Dr. Jerome Segal

(Wien, 5.12.12, PUR) Auch Juden brechen nun ihr Schweigen und kritisieren Beschneidung an nicht einwilligungsfähigen Babys als barbarischen Akt. Wissenschaftshistoriker Jerome Segal, Assistenzprofessor an der Pariser Sorbonne, derzeit in Wien lehrend, übt nun massive Kritik an der Haltung der israelitischen Kultusgemeinde. “Ich bin empört über Oskar Deutschs Gegenanzeige“, sagt Segal. Ein Missbrauchs- sowie ein Beschneidungsopfer haben ja vergangene Woche einen Mohel (Beschneider) angezeigt, der angibt, über 1000 jüdische Buben beschnitten zu haben. “Es muss doch möglich sein, barbarische religiöse Rituale kritisieren zu dürfen.“ Segals drei Söhne sind nicht beschnitten, auch er selbst ist es nicht – obwohl er Mitglied der israelitischen Kultusgemeinde ist. “Ich halte Beschneidung an nicht einwilligungsfähigen Babys und Kindern für grausam. Es ist eine starke Beeinträchtigung der körperlichen Unversehrtheit. Österreich hat die Kinderrechtskonvention ratifiziert“, so Segal weiter. “Aus Art.19 gehe klar hervor, dass Kindern keine körperliche Gewalt zugefügt werden darf“.

“Todesstrafe wurde ebenfalls abgeschafft“
Piercing ist erst ab 14 und Tätowierung ab 16 erlaubt (mit Zustimmmung der Eltern). “Eine Operation wie die Zirkumzision, mit derart unwiderruflichen Folgen und möglichen negativen Konsequenzen auf das Sexualleben, sollte vom Gesetzgeber erst mit 16 oder 18 Jahren zugelassen werden“, sagt der Universitätsdozent. Segal ist bekennender Atheist und lehnt Religionsprivilegien ab, vor allem wenn im Namen der Religion Gewalt legitimiert wird. “In der Thora stehen auf Ehebruch und auf Homosexualität die Todesstrafe, das wird zum Glück schon lange nicht mehr angewendet“, so Segal. In Israel gibt es seit über einem Jahrzehnt Antibeschneidungsaktivisten, die sich für das “Brit Shalom“ Ritual einsetzen – das bedeutet, dass die Beschneidung nur noch symbolisch durchgeführt wird. Auch www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org, eine Gruppe liberaler amerikanischer Juden, ist gegen Beschneidung. “We are a group of educated and enlightened Jews who realize that the barbaric, primitive, torturous, and mutilating practice of circumcision has no place in modern Judaism.” steht auf deren Homepage.

Empörender Angriff auf Meinungsfreiheit
Segal kennt auch noch andere Mitglieder der IKG, die ebenfalls gegen Beschneidung sind, sich jedoch nicht trauen, das öffentlich zu sagen. “Der soziale Druck innerhalb der Gemeinde ist einfach zu groß, sie fürchten Repressalien. Etwa, dass ihren Söhnen der Besuch einer jüdischen Schule verwehrt wird“, so Segal. Im November fanden die IKG Wahlen statt. “Leider wagte es keine der kandidierende Fraktionen, dieses tabuisierte Thema anzugehen. “In der WINA, der Monatszeitschrift der IKG, stand groß zu lesen, dass Beschneidung nicht zu hinterfragen sei“, ärgert sich Segal. “Dass IKG Präsident Deutsch nun diese Gegenanzeige zur Einschüchterung tätigt, ist für mich ein massiver Angriff auf die Meinungsfreiheit. Dabei könnte Deutsch der jüdischen Gemeinschaft einen Dienst erweisen, wenn er sich für eine symbolischen Beschneidung bei Minderjährigen einsetzen würde“ so Segal abschließend.

Video: Jerome Segal im Gespräch mit Teresa Arrieta: “Als Jude sage ich, Beschneidung ist ein barbarischer Akt“: www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8gRNBvCDpU

www.kirchen-privilegien.at
www.beschneidungsdebatte.info

Charges brought against two religious circumcisers for the first time in Austria

Submitted by: Sepp Rothwangl

Criminal charge: grievous bodily harm inflicted on at least 2000 babies and small children

(Vienna, 29 November 2012) – Charges are being brought against the community rabbi and mohel of the Jewish Religious Community in Vienna. The rabbi has stated himself that for religious reasons he has performed operations, where there was no medical indication, on the genitals of over 1000 male babies. The second accused is a general practitioner who runs a circumcision centre in Vienna and is specialized in ritual Islamic circumcision. He is also the president of the Islamic Religious Community in Vienna. On his website he proudly presents photos of circumcised children online. The doctor also faces charges by the disciplinary commission of the Chamber of Doctors. The rabbi will also be charged for violation of medical law.

Circumcision is a severe trauma for children

“The removal of the penis foreskin is a surgical operation on the physical integrity of the patient. In cases where there are no medical reasons, it is a matter of deliberate grievous bodily harm,” explains Anja Oberkofler, lawyer. Even nowadays the operation is often carried out without an anaesthetic and is extremely painful: babies have no protective mechanism and because of the shock often fall into a momentary coma. The circumcision ritual is often performed without any explanation and frequently also without any anaesthetic; for little boys aged between 6 and 8 this causes severe trauma. The foreskin is the most sensitive part of the penis and thus highly erogenous tissue. When it is removed the glans is covered by a layer of hard skin. This can result in the loss of sexual sensitivity and a limited ability to achieve an orgasm, as testified by many of those affected. Possible complications can occur after the operation such as bleeding or mutilation: according to current medical information the ratio is between 2 and 10 per cent.

Religiously motivated bodily harm is not per se exempt from punishment

A further reason for the charge: for an operation with such grave consequences it is necessary to gain the consent of the person concerned. This does not occur in the case of babies and children. As lawyer Oberkofler stated, “It is incomprehensible why religious approval to inflict grievous bodily harm should be exempt from punishment.” Austria has signed the UNO convention on the rights of children which contains a regulation concerning punishment for the circumcision of children due to religious reasons. The right of protection of bodily integrity is also anchored in the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union. “The fundamental right of the child to have physical integrity ensured cannot be annulled by arguing for the religious freedom of the parents. The religious freedom of the parents in bringing up their children ends where grievous bodily harm inflicted on their child begins”, she says.

Charge brought by victim of abuse and circumcision

The charge is being brought by Sepp Rothwangl, who was subject to sexual abuse in his childhood by a member of the church. “Nowadays I see it as my duty to ensure that children should not suffer physical and emotional harm because of religious privileges which go unpunished.” Rothwangl has also been instrumental in organizing the campaign against church privileges; signatures are at present being collected for this campaign. “I am totally against special rights for religious communities, because it should not be allowed to mutilate children’s sexual organs in the name of religion without being punished,” stated Rothwangl. “This is where civil society and the rule of law have to intervene.” The campaign against church privileges is therefore also in favour of bringing the current criminal charges.

Afflicted persons break their silence

The second person bringing charges is Cahit Kaya, who was circumcised as a child according to Islamic ritual. “I would have liked to have had the freedom myself to decide whether I would be circumcised or not”, says Kaya today. “But without my consent, without any information and without any preparation on the part of the doctor nor on the part of my parents, I was circumcised in a state hospital in Vorarlberg. Many Moslems suffer a great deal from the sexual consequences of their circumcision and are ashamed to have been a victim of this operation. If they do indeed talk about it, then only in their very closest circle of friends. This silence finally has to be broken.”

www.kirchen-privilegien.at

www.beschneidungsdebatte.info

For press enquiries: Campaign against Church Privileges (Initiative gegen Kirchenprivilegien)

When will people learn?

Link to article