Male Circumcision Debate
Male circumcision has long been a debate with decisions based on cultural, ethnic, religious and social preference of the parent. There are both benefits and risks associated with the procedure of male circumcision. The procedure involves the removal of some or, the entire foreskin around the penis. Neonatal circumcision is rising among English speaking countries and it is known now that more than 80% of the male population has been circumcised. (CDC, 2006) This number is rising however; studies show that there is insufficient evidence to recommend neonatal circumcision as a routine decision. (AAP, 2006). Many debates of this procedure relate to the benefits versus the risk and medical costs that the procedure entails. This paper will discuss the benefits and risks of this procedure and will portray my position on this debated decision. Although questionable by many researchers, benefits of this procedure include better hygiene reducing the incident of infant UTI, reduction of sexually transmitted disease, and reduction in the spreading of the HIV virus in heterosexual relations. A study was conducted on 1000 circumcised infants and 1000 uncircumcised infants within 1 year of birth to determine which cohort had more incidents of UTI. The results of this study show that in the circumcised group, 1 or 2 of the 1000 infants developed a UTI and of the 1000 uncircumcised group, 7 to 14 infants developed a UTI. (AAP, 2006) This study shows that circumcision reduces the risk of UTI after circumcision within the first year of life. Although this study does show an increase in risk of UTI in uncircumcised infants, I question the validity of this study due to the fact that there are uncontrolled variables such as, samples of infants studied, determination of circumcision status, method of urine collection, and UTI definition. All of these variables can affect the study, making it not valid. Another study was conducted that claims male
References: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241595988_eng.pdf. (2007). Retrieved November 28, 2010 from www.who.net: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241595988_eng.pdf. http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686. (2008). Retrieved November 28, 2010 from htt/://aap.net: http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;103/3/686. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm. (2007). Retrieved November 28, 2010 from www.cdc.gov: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/resources/factsheets/circumcision.htm. http://www.nocirc.org/articles/. (2000). Retrieved November 29, 2010 from http://www.nocirc.org: http://www.nocirc.org/articles/. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070223103150.htm. (2007). Retrieved November 29, 2010 from http:www//.sciencedaily.com: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070223103150.htm.