AAP shifting FGM polocy - Page 3

[Fyrestorm]

Originally Posted by fruitful womb

do they really think they're above the law?

Of course they do

[emnic77]

Originally Posted by Claire and Boys

I never saw this coming. I really think it is an attempt to address the double standard that we have been pointing out for years. I think it has a LOT to do with the upcoming CDC statement and am quite nervous now about what that might contain in the light of this.

Ditto this 100%. I absolutely agree.

Just unbelievable.

[Mama~Love]

Originally Posted by fruitful womb

do they really think they're above the law?

They are the law, they can do whatever they please, they don't report to anyone.

[fruitful womb]

Originally Posted by Mama~Love

They are the law, they can do whatever they please, they don't report to anyone.

Law enforcement and a body of free thinkers are two separate entities.

[FernG]

Originally Posted by jessjgh1

I've posted links and info on this on my facebook- and not said a word about male circumicsion.... so far no one has commented. I'm a little scared that people just don't even get this on a base level. I don't expect most of them to make leaps to MGM.... but gee, even before I had my son and knew anything about circumcision (I figured male circ as the norm, hand't really thought about it) if I'd heard about this I would be thinking WTF- in the US?? That's outrageous?

Jessica

No response on my facebook post either.

[Mama~Love]

Originally Posted by fruitful womb

Law enforcement and a body of free thinkers are two separate entities.

Do you really think that law enforcement will get this changed? Didn't think so.

[AXEius]

I think it has nothing to do with cultural sensitivity and everything to do with cashing in on the money they are loosing by not performing more genital mutilations and infants.

[Fyrestorm]

Originally Posted by Mama~Love

They are the law, they can do whatever they please, they don't report to anyone.

Actually, they are mandated reporters - but, do you think they are planning on reporting themselves for child abuse?

[KaylaBeanie]

Originally Posted by Mama~Love

Do you really think that law enforcement will get this changed? Didn't think so.

Just like a whacko AAP statement isn't going to change a national law. Until someone manages to get a lawsuit to change the FGM law that has a shot of passing, all this panic is pretty pointless. Sure, write the AAP, talk about it, but it's not like there will be 50% of girls getting cut up tomorrow. It's still illegal, and there is no immediate danger of that changing. The panic needs to be saved for if and when there IS danger of that changing.

[Fyrestorm]

What people seem to be forgetting here is that the AAP is a trade organization - no more, no less. Their members pay dues and they are represented in their best interests. Not in childrens best interests, just their own.

[phathui5]

Here are the actual recommendations from the revised AAP policy:

RECOMMENDATIONS

The American Academy of Pediatrics:


Opposes all forms of female genital mutilation (FGM).


Recommends that its members actively seek to dissuade families from carrying out FGM.


Recommends that its members provide patients and their parents with compassionate education about the physical harms and psychological risks of FGM.


Recommends that its members decline to perform any medically unnecessary procedure that alters the genitalia of female infants, girls, and adolescents.

[phathui5]

But this is a case of doing something purely because it is cultural, with no (NONE!!) supposed medical benefits, contradictory or otherwise, and the AAP is okay with it?

The AAP is suggesting doing something that would hopefully prevent families from performing actual female genital mutilation. If sticking a labia with a needle (ritual nick) keeps a girl from losing her clitoris because the family then feels like they did what they needed to, I think doctors can feel good about that.

[knucklehead]

Doing something a "little bad" to prevent something "really bad" is not justifiable to me.

A little bit of child porn, for example, is not allowed in this country to prevent child rapists from victimizing oversees.

Or, minor spousal abuse is not tolerated to prevent people from traveling outside the country to engage in honor killings.

[Pirogi]

Originally Posted by phathui5

Here are the actual recommendations from the revised AAP policy:

RECOMMENDATIONS

The American Academy of Pediatrics:


Opposes all forms of female genital mutilation (FGM).


Recommends that its members actively seek to dissuade families from carrying out FGM.


Recommends that its members provide patients and their parents with compassionate education about the physical harms and psychological risks of FGM.


Recommends that its members decline to perform any medically unnecessary procedure that alters the genitalia of female infants, girls, and adolescents.

No. These are the old recommendations from 1999. The new recommendations are:

The American Academy of Pediatrics:

Opposes all forms of FGC that pose risks of physical or psychological harm.

Encourages its members to become informed about FGC and its complications and to be able to recognize physical signs of FGC.

Recommends that its members actively seek to dissuade families from carrying out harmful forms of FGC.

Recommends that its members provide patients and their parents with compassionate education about the physical harms and psychological risks of FGC while remaining sensitive to the cultural and religious reasons that motivate parents to seek this procedure for their daughters.

If you go to the actual policy statement, they also say (bolding mine)

The American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement on newborn male circumcision expresses respect for parental decision-making and acknowledges the legitimacy of including cultural, religious, and ethnic traditions when making the choice of whether to surgically alter a male infant's genitals. Of course, parental decision-making is not without limits, and pediatricians must always resist decisions that are likely to cause harm to children. Most forms of FGC are decidedly harmful, and pediatricians should decline to perform them, even in the absence of any legal constraints. However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful and is much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting. There is reason to believe that offering such a compromise may build trust between hospitals and immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguring and life-threatening procedures in their native countries, and play a role in the eventual eradication of FGC. It might be more effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possible compromise to avoid greater harm.

This absolutely reeks of CYA with non-discriminatory genital cutting.

[jessjgh1]

Exactly, instead of fixing the double standard of male circumcision, let's just make it okay to cut girls, too.
No. Not okay.
Although, maybe this is one way to push this issue. Is America willing to sacrafice girls just so we can cut boys??? Isn't that what it comes down to?
My hesitation is that I come across as a looney if I try to express this to anyone not already knowledgeable about intactivism.

Jessica


Jessica

[serendipity22]

However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful and is much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting.

Its interesting that they conclude something is not harmful because it is less extensive than male circ.

Of course a ritual nick is harmful.

if federal and state laws enabled pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick ...

Sounds like they want to offer it, without it being asked for...

The American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement on newborn male circumcision expresses respect for parental decision-making and acknowledges the legitimacy of including cultural, religious, and ethnic traditions when making the choice of whether to surgically alter a male infant's genitals.

I think doctors should stick to medicine, the AAP has no more business making judgments on ethics etc. To me its like saying "The AAP acknowledges the legitimacy of ten year olds to choose to have sex, binge drink and smoke."

or
"The AAP supports child marriage, polygamy, forced marriage." Its not their area.