How will RIC come to an end in the United States? - Page 2

[Frootloop]

Originally Posted by tammylsmith

ya know... why don't insurance companies drop it? Does anybody have better insight into that question? I don't understand because it seems like they'd save a lot of $$ if they stopped covering it and it isn't like people can do anything about it. I hate how big insurance runs the US, but in that case, their bottom line seems to line up with the right thing to do in this case. People could always buy a "cosmetic surgery" rider at extra cost...

*Bolding mine*
Obviously, this is only my opinon, but I think that it quite likely has something to do with the insurance companies having to pay for all of the more expensive (general anesthesia, etc etc) circumcisions that have become "medically necessary" (*ahem* as in, CAUSED by improper care instructions or other iatrogenic issues) when the boys are older. It's cheaper for them to pay for circs of newborns than it is for older children.

As for "when will it stop?".. I'm afraid that it won't until all of those in the medical profession get their heads out of their butts and learn about the true function of the foreskin and how NOT to treat it. Until then, insurance companies will continue to pay for its removal.. and it will never stop until the vast majority of insurance companies stop paying for it. I know of so many parents who have used "insurance covering it" as just another one of their reasons for having it done.. they figure if it wasn't "needed", their insurance wouldn't cover it.

[peainthepod]

Originally Posted by PuppyFluffer

Right now, I think the most effective place of action is with individual parents. The medical community is far far away from ceasing to solicit circumcision but educated parents do refuse their offers. The intactivist efforts to educate individuals are very important.

I agree. It was this forum that made me research and then ultimately reject circumcision as a valid choice. Overcoming the fear of talking about it with other parents is a huge first step. I never would have thought twice about circumcision at all if a dear intact friend hadn't gently asked whether we intended to cut our son. He took a huge risk by doing that, but he also ensured that any future children of ours will be intact, and his bravery has encouraged me to gently talk to other parents about their plans. I'm not always successful, but every little boy saved from this brutality is a huge victory, and I cherish the success stories.

Just talk about it, mamas. The worst that can happen is you offend someone who is about to do something much, much worse to their helpless child than cause mere offense. It's always worth a try.

[hakunangovi]

Originally Posted by mrs_mandolini

It will be on the way out when gov. run health insurance stops paying for it.

Sadly it has not played out this way in Canada. It is at least a decade since the last province (Manitoba) stopped paying for circumcisions, yet it seems to continue at far too high a frequency. I naively thought that our rate in Alberta was down to about 10% (as quoted on the genital integrity website), then somewhere else read a figure of around 40%. I was confused , so on my last visit to the doctor, I asked her what she has observed. Her response was "about that" to the 40% figure. I am horrified. It was around 50% when my ds was born 29 years ago. We have not made much progress.

[Jenivere]

After the email I got back about how a family member is doing it because "it's easier to clean, less chance of infection and getting teased in the locker room" I'm feeling rather negative about it ever coming to en end.

[Zenbuoyant]

Once doctors and hospitals stop soliciting genital surgery and by default educate parents about their sons normal intact prepuce organ, "circumcision" will stop.

Doctors really need to stop suggesting boys, whom born as they come from the womb (whole & healthy) are ignorant, weak beings lacking the intelligence needed for hygiene and attract diseases and therefor need to be "fixed".

[serendipity22]

The rates drop very quickly when medical people change their attitude. This is the most important factor. Look at what happened in the UK and NZ.

The financial incentives for circumcisions need to be removed.

Medical schools need to teach the value of the foreskin, its normal development
etc and the importance of not retracting. etc etc

OB/Gyns need to stop doing them completely. It is out of their area.

Removal of insurance is also important.

[eepster]

Originally Posted by hakunangovi

Sadly it has not played out this way in Canada. It is at least a decade since the last province (Manitoba) stopped paying for circumcisions, yet it seems to continue at far too high a frequency. I naively thought that our rate in Alberta was down to about 10% (as quoted on the genital integrity website), then somewhere else read a figure of around 40%. I was confused , so on my last visit to the doctor, I asked her what she has observed. Her response was "about that" to the 40% figure. I am horrified. It was around 50% when my ds was born 29 years ago. We have not made much progress.

Being right next to the US may be keeping the rates higher. There is a fair amount of people going back and forth across the boarder. The UK, Australia and NZ all offered it just as Canada did. They stopped coverage sooner and rates dropped further in those countries though.

[hakunangovi]

Eepster, you might be right that there is some influence there. What I suspect from the disparity in figures is that few babies are circumcised in the hospital at birth, which is nationaly less than 10% (I think), however many are taken back to the doctor later to have it done. Hence the 40% figure. What I find distressing is that I have heard of some of our doctors actualy encouraging and soliciting circumcision. I thought Canada was past that for the most part.

The only way that this cruel custom is ever going to end (excepting religious considerations) is when our medical schools start teaching the value and function of the foreskin to their students.

[KaylaBeanie]

I absolutely think it'll be a gradual decline, which will force doctors to become more knowledgeable.

For example, yesterday my friend posted an anti-circumcision status, and three 20-ish males participated. They're just normal American guys, certainly not crunchy and definitely not hippie. Two said that they believed in leaving it up to the child, one said he was pro-circumcision but politely participated and wasn't quite so pushy by the end and has told me that he wouldn't fight if his wife wanted to leave his kids intact. My generation also is shaping up to be less religious and more pro-choice, which will lead to less circumcision. I've seen several posts online from my peers that say "I think uncut penises are gross, but hey, it's not my penis and not my decision." It's a strange attitude to have I suppose, but those boys are intact at the end of the day.

[WaitingForKiddos]

Well, our ped, an old guy is currently having new peds work in his office under his wing. The new drs are in the room during visits. At EVERY appt the old ped says to me and the new ped, "and NO ONE is to retract his penis for ANY reason!".

I just learned yesterday that Dh's cousins, 18 and 14 are intact. Even though Uncle is.
SIL and I have been talking about circ with her soon to be ttc and she's not allowing it.

So, things are changing. Of all the moms I know...even Dhs mom..their cut their sons to match dad. So with all these cases above the cycle had ended.

[Fellow Traveler]

One of the signs of changes that I frequently see are positive blog posts discussing the issue and many supportive comments. Parents posting asking about circumcision or saying they didn't and that is often followed up with others saying they didn't either, ect...

I think there is defiantly progress but I don't think those who don't circumcise are necessarily inclined to fight the cause as we do.