or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › CDC wants US circ program
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CDC wants US circ program - Page 3

post #41 of 112
Nancy Snyderman and Matt Lauer are discussing this right now. It's pretty disgusting.
post #42 of 112
Just read the NYT article. Can someone point me to threads or links that I can use as a counter-argument if my parents (undoubtedly) get wind of this. They haven't supported our choice not to circ my son (he's 16 months and I still have a bad taste in my mouth over how they treated us immediately following his birth) and I'd like to be prepared in case they throw this *research* in my face.
post #43 of 112
I just watched the Today Show, I think I'm going to be sick.
post #44 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minarai View Post
I signed too, but my gut tells me it's not gonna work... :

I'm so glad I decided to leave the USA when I graduate from college. I will NEVER give birth to or raise children in a country where MGM is required by law.
The article doesn't say they intend to require it by law and I'm pretty sure that's not what the CDC is suggesting. They just want to recommend that parents do it, which of course is only a little better.
post #45 of 112
Here's the link (I think) for the clip from the Today Show ...

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/261848...37110#32537110

I'm still not convinced that performing unnecessary surgery on an infant that cannot consent is the best wast to stop the spread of HIV in the US.
post #46 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohannaInDairyland View Post
Here's the link (I think) for the clip from the Today Show ...

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/261848...37110#32537110

I'm still not convinced that performing unnecessary surgery on an infant that cannot consent is the best wast to stop the spread of HIV in the US.
In the clip, Nancy Snyderman alludes that the reduction in the transmission of chlamydia and herpes through routine circumcision of all male infants is another benefit.

Why surgically alter people's genitals without their consent rather than teach them *many years after birth* to choose sex partners wisely and wear condoms? I just don't get it

Amy
Momma to 3 intact boys
post #47 of 112
I just saw the clip when I was checking my email. : Man I'm so upset. Just disgusted.
post #48 of 112
I just looked at the NBC clip, and I thought it was complete BS. It made me really mad. "No doubt there is a 50% reduction rate." What utter BS. That lady made it sound as if uncircumcised men are a public health threat. I can guarantee you that she never looked at the HIV studies or their criticisms. I think that the way this story is being covered is also total BS. There won't be any recommendation for routine surgery. The science does not hold up. It says that pretty clearly in the NYT article two paragraphs in. This is a perfect example of disinformation and scare tactics. Forcing men to get circumcised? Am I living in a fanatical dictatorship or the United States of America? What kind of question is that? Again, this is an example of disinformation and scare tactics. I am so glad that Intact America is at the Atlanta conference, and I hope that Ms. Chapin and others will counter all this utterly ridiculous rubbish.
post #49 of 112
It makes my blood boil and makes me wanna puke. Sorry. I won't even look at that clip, I might throw the laptop against the wall as a reaction....
Ok I'm gonna out my DH as a Rush Limbaugh listener here. He called me down cause he was talking about it. And even he said: leave our penises alone!
Arrggghh I'm more and more inclined not to apply for citizenship this December, I'm so mad about the pressure to mutilate and change our children in the USA. Not saying there is no push for things in Europe, but circ isn't among them.
post #50 of 112
I saw the news reports. I already have posted comments to many of them. Many of the news articles, which show pro-circ bias, also ignore the main reasons of pro-intact movement. They focus on the HIV argument, question as to the validity or effectiveness of HIV, whicha re important areas, but miss the fact that no matter if the studies are correct or not, no matter if circumcision prevents HIV or not, circumcision of children is still wrong. The main reason circumcision is wrong is that it violates bodily integrity rights of the person and is in violation of medical ethics since it is destruction of a healthy and normal body part of a child. It already qualifies to be illegal under law as an assualt for that reason.

We as a society cannot conviently exclude certain acts from assault laws because they are popular or we cant accept the fact we have been assaulting our boys for all these years. Basically some people judge acts by how popular it is, how long it has been done for, and whethe they have done it, not based on what it actually does to the victim or some consistent ethical principle. Assaults are defined as being a physical injury to a person, it could be a hitting of a person, or it could be a cutting them or destroying a body part. A constistent principle does not make rules arbitrarily. Unless we are to allow the possibility that anything can be permitted, including cutting of childrens arms and legs, as long as a doctor does it in a sanity environment and enough people do it, we need to place a boundary between what is valid medical procedure and an assault, this boundary is where there isa scientifically verifiable present and current medical abnormality on the part which is serious or life threatening and urgently requires the surgery, and where there is not. a consenting person can consent to optional surgeris but since children cannot always consent, first any amputation has to pass the medical necessity criteria being required to treat current and present medical conditions.

Because of the fact we cannot accept the hard reality of circumcision, abd people remain in ignorance and try to continue to promote the practice to try to avoid having to confront reality, the assault and crime continues to be amplified and worsened by its continueing infliction on children. The herd effect is similar, people simply think that if enough people do something, it must be okay. These repeater activity basically results in people not thinking for themselves but instead like a herd, letting others think for them. It often can result in terrible atrocities being propogated without people even thinking about and questioning what it is, atrocities which would be clearly wrong to an outsider who has not be subjected to cultural brainwashing and herd behaviours. One example is chinese foot binding. It was instantly recognisable to westerners that this was a horrific practice, but to the chinese, they had been so brainwashed by the cultural herd of programmed, mindless thinking, they thought it was normal.
post #51 of 112
Here is my response to a friends post on facebook mentioning the CDCs probable new recommendation.

"0.7% of the population is effected by HIV in the United States. There is a 2-10% rate of complications resulting from routine circumcision. Therefore the risk/benefits ratio clearly does not favor routine circumcision.

An uncircumcised male will reap the benefits of being intact as well as avoiding any possible complications from circumcision.

If it is so effective at preventing HIV transmission why are we not recommending that the 40% of the US population of ADULT males who are uncircumcised go get the procedure? (You know the people who are actually having sex)"
post #52 of 112
Horrible, horrible, horrible....and they'll use the 'HIV threat' to terrorize new parents into doing it.
HIV is prevented through education, condoms, needle exchange programs, early safe sex education in our schools, and awareness, not through infant genital mutilation.
post #53 of 112
I can't believe that lady said that circumcision is "tougher" on adult men than it is on newborns. Is being strapped down and screaming through the surgery easier? Did anyone ask a newborn how "tough" his circumcision was?

Did anyone ever do a study on HIV transmission amonge circumcised FEMALES? If that showed a decrease in HIV would the CDC be pushing for cicumcision of a American FEMALES? I'd love to see that outcry.
post #54 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by childsplay View Post
Horrible, horrible, horrible....and they'll use the 'HIV threat' to terrorize new parents into doing it.
Just like they did to my brother...

Quote:
HIV is prevented through education, condoms, needle exchange programs, early safe sex education in our schools, and awareness, not through infant genital mutilation.
BUT!
Conservative parents, churches and politicians (especially down here) have been fighting sex education in schools for a LONG time, claiming it's an introduction to sexual deviance and/or promiscuity. They argue in favor of parents talking it over with their kids or just not talking about it at all, since kids' minds are oh-so-fragile and we don't want them dabbling in any "taboo" subjects.
post #55 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Narn View Post
I can't believe that lady said that circumcision is "tougher" on adult men than it is on newborns. Is being strapped down and screaming through the surgery easier? Did anyone ask a newborn how "tough" his circumcision was?
Yeah, that was seriously out there. If you ask adult men, circ is tougher on adults. Well gee, makes sense to ramp up the surgery on the peope who can't talk then, huh?
post #56 of 112
So what's the financial and or political benefit behind this?

I'm trying to connect the dots but it's not matching up. There's always a political or financial aspect when dealing with things like this. (Health care, maternity care, vaccinations, etc)

What's the connection? And what do they get out of this?
post #57 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericaz View Post
Just read the NYT article. Can someone point me to threads or links that I can use as a counter-argument if my parents (undoubtedly) get wind of this. They haven't supported our choice not to circ my son (he's 16 months and I still have a bad taste in my mouth over how they treated us immediately following his birth) and I'd like to be prepared in case they throw this *research* in my face.
go to the intactamerica.org website and click on the "news" section - there is a recent article about the "myth of circumcision and HIV" - that will be good amunition.
post #58 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by HisBeautifulWife View Post
So what's the financial and or political benefit behind this?

I'm trying to connect the dots but it's not matching up. There's always a political or financial aspect when dealing with things like this. (Health care, maternity care, vaccinations, etc)

What's the connection? And what do they get out of this?
well, a couple of things - first, if you think about every American boy being born with a $500 coupon on his foreskin - that shows physician and hospital motivation to continue the practice.

And second, and I really think this is the most important - recently there has been a lot more talk about ethics - there was a lawsuit a few years ago from an 18 year old that sued his doctor for circumcising him as a newborn (and won a settlement). I think this scared some doctors a lot. Keep in mind the American Academy of Pediatrics is a trade organization, with their first priority of protecting and benefitting their members. If there recommendations also benefit children, great, but if a choice must be made, this group must go for its members. I think the AAP is seeing the writing on the wall - either they must "prove" newborn circumcision offers "significant" medical benefit, or they must put down their knives. Legally, they cannot continue to remove healthy body parts for no medical reason - thing about what would happen - the floodgates of lawsuits would evantually open.
The CDC, is heavily political - it has been heavily lobbied by a few pro-circumcision people, and is clearly made up of people who are circumcised. Are they really in a position to acknowledge the harms?
post #59 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCA2008 View Post
The CDC, is heavily political - it has been heavily lobbied by a few pro-circumcision people, and is clearly made up of people who are circumcised. Are they really in a position to acknowledge the harms?
And what I'd like to know is are they prepared to apologize for and compensate every boy who gets a life-long botched circ. thanks to their stance?? Every time I hear them saying benefits outweigh risks, I want to throw up. What they're saying to the 2-10 out of 100 that get the botch jobs is TOO BAD.....the other 90-98 went just FINE! :
post #60 of 112
This is awful! I hope everyone took the poll at the todayshow.com. Bomb the board and let them know what people really think. Idiots!

I already voted, so it wouldn't let me go right to the page, but it's on the upper right hand side right under the pic of the baby.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Understanding Circumcision
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › CDC wants US circ program