Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › Positive article about new CDC stats
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Positive article about new CDC stats

post #1 of 5
Thread Starter 
I write a column for examiner.com on parenting so when I saw these stats I wrote an article about it. I see that a lot of the coverage actually bemoans the lower rates and blames us "fringe, lunatic intactivists" so I wanted to do a story with a positive slant. Not that I get a ton of readers but still.

I would love it if you guys would take a look and let me know what you think.

http://www.examiner.com/early-childh...-to-33-percent

Any feedback would be great!
post #2 of 5
I like the article! I'm glad you wrote it.

My only problem is that I don't believe for one minute that the US rates of circ are down to 33%. The map that shows what each state's circ rate is, I don't believe that either. My state (TX) supposedly has a 49-50% rate. I've never seen that at any hospital in my state. Yes, circ rates are dropping, but not that much. I don't know what the CDC is trying to spin with their 33% rate, but it's not a true national snapshot.
I also tried a little experiment a few months ago where I called random OB/newborn departments at hospitals. I randomly called a few out on the east coast (states where the stats are supposed to be in the 20%). I was told info anywhere from "the majority of our boys are still circed" to "it's about 50/50%). So I'd have to think that some states have a zero % circ rate to balance out the high rates of the midwest for the national average to be 33%.
My very best guess as an OB nurse (and from talking to fellow nurses all over the country) is that at one month of life the majority of boys are still circed. Maybe 35 - 40% still have their foreskin - maybe.

I left my hospital job over circ. Our OB and Newborn departments were merging and I would be required to take care of freshly circed babies, teach parents the after-care, etc. I knew I couldn't do it. If only a few babies had circs, maybe I could, but I knew I couldn't handle it everyday with the vast majority of boys. I'd love to hear from other OB/Nursery nurses (I know we have at least 3 or 4 others on here) and find out what their circ percentages are.
post #3 of 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Night_Nurse View Post
I like the article! I'm glad you wrote it.

My only problem is that I don't believe for one minute that the US rates of circ are down to 33%. The map that shows what each state's circ rate is, I don't believe that either. My state (TX) supposedly has a 49-50% rate. I've never seen that at any hospital in my state. Yes, circ rates are dropping, but not that much. I don't know what the CDC is trying to spin with their 33% rate, but it's not a true national snapshot.
I also tried a little experiment a few months ago where I called random OB/newborn departments at hospitals. I randomly called a few out on the east coast (states where the stats are supposed to be in the 20%). I was told info anywhere from "the majority of our boys are still circed" to "it's about 50/50%). So I'd have to think that some states have a zero % circ rate to balance out the high rates of the midwest for the national average to be 33%.
My very best guess as an OB nurse (and from talking to fellow nurses all over the country) is that at one month of life the majority of boys are still circed. Maybe 35 - 40% still have their foreskin - maybe.

I left my hospital job over circ. Our OB and Newborn departments were merging and I would be required to take care of freshly circed babies, teach parents the after-care, etc. I knew I couldn't do it. If only a few babies had circs, maybe I could, but I knew I couldn't handle it everyday with the vast majority of boys. I'd love to hear from other OB/Nursery nurses (I know we have at least 3 or 4 others on here) and find out what their circ percentages are.
The basis for the 33% was insurance claims. Obviously, claims alone will not give you an accurate assessment of U.S. circumcision rates, and the CDC stressed that the low percentage should not be used as an estimate. With regard to your other point about the "intact rate" of 35-40%, with that being the high, I think that's an underassessment. Yes, circumcisions are done outside hospital settings (peds, mohels, etc), but the very vast majority are still performed by OBs/interns in the first few days of life. Those circumcisions that are carried out later on don't have much of an impact on overall trends.
post #4 of 5
Great job, nicely written. Thanks for sharing and thanks for taking the time to write it. This is what should be reported in the other articles...
post #5 of 5
Thread Starter 
Thanks! I figure if I can change one mind, I accomplished something. I've idea if the estimate is a good one or not, that's why I made sure and said the CDC said it, lol! But I think for those who ONLY do it because "everyone else" does, maybe this will change their minds.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Case Against Circumcision
Mothering › Forums › Health › The Case Against Circumcision › Positive article about new CDC stats