Suing the AAP?

[moonmama7]

What are the prospects for a class action lawsuit against the AAP for their stupid, wishy washy policy statement? If they were TRUTHFUL in their statement, it would cut back on circ rates drastically -- even among those doing it for that thing which can't be discussed on this board.

Violet

[Lara vanAEsir]

I thought they were pretty truthful. They said it's not medically necessary. What more could we wish for? If they made a statement we would like to see such as "circumcision is an idiotic, abusive procedure," it's credibility amoung the 50% of the population who think otherwise would be shattered.

How about petitioning the UN or the WHO to emphisize that fact that FGM type 1 is the same as MGM?

[moonmama7]

Originally Posted by Lara vanÆsir

I thought they were pretty truthful. They said it's not medically necessary. What more could we wish for? If they made a statement we would like to see such as "circumcision is an idiotic, abusive procedure," it's credibility amoung the 50% of the population who think otherwise would be shattered.

How about petitioning the UN or the WHO to emphisize that fact that FGM type 1 is the same as MGM?

I think they should be more than "pretty" truthful -- how about listing all the lost functions, anti-viral, bacterial properties, sexual losses, amount of skin actually removed, they still mention it reduces UTI's, they say it's "legitimate" for parents to take cultural factors into consideration when making the decision, etc. Do you think it's legitimate? I don't. What's wrong with expecting them to make a forceful, honest statement AGAINST circumcision?

[Lara vanAEsir]

Originally Posted by moonmama7

I think they should be more than "pretty" truthful -- how about listing all the lost functions, anti-viral, bacterial properties, sexual losses, amount of skin actually removed, they still mention it reduces UTI's, they say it's "legitimate" for parents to take cultural factors into consideration when making the decision, etc. Do you think it's legitimate? I don't. What's wrong with expecting them to make a forceful, honest statement AGAINST circumcision?

What is wrong with it is at the time the policy came out, the AAP was being pressured from both the pro-circumcision side and th anti-circumcision side. Do I think they could have included more anti-circ information in their statement? Yes. But, if they had been too forcefully anti-circumcision, the pro-circumcision side would have caused a ruckus and accused the AAP of curtailing to the anti-circumcision side. The AAP might have been (mildy) discredited.

I think something less radical than a lawsuit is in order. A petition or whatnot. Doing something is a good idea though.

[Dave2GA]

Matthew Gianetti, now a lawyer, wrote an article in the Iowa Law Review a few years back suggesting suing the AAP under the theory of trade association liability for putting out inaccurate information. You should be able to find it at cirp.org. I am waiting for an 18 year old whose parents actually relied on either the 1988 or 1999 statement when deciding to circ to appear and ask me to help him sue.

By the way, the hearing in Chicago was very gratifying. We got a lot of info before the court. Unfortunately the press did not really cover what our experts had to say, i.e. medical treatment is all that is ever necessary in a case like this one. We hope for a good result for the boy after we submit our closing statements. Since we are in litigation, I really can't say anything more.

Dave

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

The AAP statement dosnt really say that it is against RIC.
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org...cs%3b103/3/686

Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision. In circumstances in which there are potential benefits and risks, yet the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being, parents should determine what is in the best interest of the child.

The way it is phrased leaves room for doubt that there "may" just be a medical reason they just havnt found it yet I think it should be worded differently especially the part about parents should determining things.

[trmpetplaya]

We should sue (could we?) or protest the government for its sexist policy of protecting females by law from genital mutilation and not protecting males at all...

love and peace.

[Revamp]

The AAP is basically just an organisation consistant of people who know what they are talking about and like to say it.

To sue them for this would be a breach of the right to free speech.

In addition, even if we suceeded, it would make us look like the shrill, rash, reactional pack of fools the pro-circs need us to be to keep circumcision alive.

[moonmama7]

Originally Posted by Revamp

The AAP is basically just an organisation consistant of people who know what they are talking about and like to say it.

To sue them for this would be a breach of the right to free speech.

In addition, even if we suceeded, it would make us look like the shrill, rash, reactional pack of fools the pro-circs need us to be to keep circumcision alive.

Revamp -- that's not quite true. It's a professional trade association holding itself out as an expert in this area and it is obligated to meet a certain standard of care which it clearly hasn't -- they've willfully ignored all kinds of information to appease special interest groups. It makes my blood boil.

[Nikki39293]

Originally Posted by trmpetplaya

We should sue (could we?) or protest the government for its sexist policy of protecting females by law from genital mutilation and not protecting males at all...

love and peace.

This is the only way we will ever get anything to protect boys is to go for discrimination.

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by moonmama7

Revamp -- that's not quite true. It's a professional trade association holding itself out as an expert in this area and it is obligated to meet a certain standard of care which it clearly hasn't -- they've willfully ignored all kinds of information to appease special interest groups. It makes my blood boil.

Fair point.

[gridley13]

Personally, I was thinking the other day...
How about a deluge of letters, with personal anecdotes from parents on how they feel on the issue? Included could be stories of forced retraction, outdated information given by health professionals, stuff like that. What about gathering as many letters from parents as possible, all expressing our experiences and feelings on this, and sending them all on the same day so they are bombarded with letters in a matter of a few days. What do you all think?

[susienjay]

My biggest complaint with the AAP statement is that most of it is devoted to the "benefits" of circumcision. It spends several paragraphs talking about UTI's and cancer of the penis. If you actually read it in detail you realize that the risks are low but if a parent quickly goes through it I can see how they would feel circumcision is beneficial. They barely mention complications and things like meatal stenosis. That condition is way more common in circed boys than UTI's are in intact boys but yet they go into no detail on meatal stenosis.

It's been awhile since I looked at the statement but if I remember they still mention hygiene as a reason to circ although they admit that hygiene of the intact penis is not difficult. :

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by gridley13

Personally, I was thinking the other day...
How about a deluge of letters, with personal anecdotes from parents on how they feel on the issue? Included could be stories of forced retraction, outdated information given by health professionals, stuff like that. What about gathering as many letters from parents as possible, all expressing our experiences and feelings on this, and sending them all on the same day so they are bombarded with letters in a matter of a few days. What do you all think?

That might have some effect...

[ericswifey27]

Originally Posted by Lara vanÆsir

What is wrong with it is at the time the policy came out, the AAP was being pressured from both the pro-circumcision side and th anti-circumcision side. Do I think they could have included more anti-circ information in their statement? Yes. But, if they had been too forcefully anti-circumcision, the pro-circumcision side would have caused a ruckus and accused the AAP of curtailing to the anti-circumcision side. The AAP might have been (mildy) discredited.

I think something less radical than a lawsuit is in order. A petition or whatnot. Doing something is a good idea though.

The AAP is supposed to have the best interests of children in mind (Roll eyes here). Who gives a crap if they were being pressured from the pro-circumcision side? They should have stood up for what was right. They have failed millions of little boys.

[phatchristy]

I think the AAP has to act as the Canadian Pediatric Association has done and write "routine circumcision of newborns should not be performed." And take the stance that circumcision should be performed only when medically necessary.

I believe, by taking the wishy-washy approach, medically unnecessary but 'OK for social/religious reasons' they are in essence presenting circumcision as non-harmful and unrisky.

I think, the issue as Dave has said, may be that they are unlikely to do that as long as we live in the litigious era that we do . I would be interested in Dave's perspective as to why/if that would indeed be a factor.

Have there been any cases where adults have sued their parents?

(LOL, if I could work this issues all day I would go to law school as well...DH is an attorney here, I am the 'scientist' though was always good at everything academic so the thought still lurks).

[kldliam]

Steven Svoboda

I discussed suing the AAP with Mr. S. less than a year ago. He didn't feel that it would be 'winnable'. Taking on a very powerful trade Association is no small task. Suing a medical trade association is definately in order here....even if the case didn't win, it sure as hell would make some headlines!!

We need the PR. The AAP should be sued! The question is when, where and who? Their wishywashy policy statement enables them to continue making more money of the 'procedure' i suspect. It enables them to stay out of the 'emotional' debate I suspect. Nevermind that there is no justifiable medical reason why people should do this to their kids...they cleverly escape responsibliity by "leaving it up to mom and dad". It's a brillant tactic on their part to shoulder the responsibility like this! It's extremely lousy bioethics tho. I can't wait until someone brave enough (with legal standing) comes forward to sue their pants off. Any circ victim could do it....as long as he is within the SOL I believe.

:

[aira]

I worry that if they leave a fairly wide door for "medical necessity", then they will all become medically necessary (necessary for the doc to collect the fee), and then insurance will again have to cover them.

The AAP stance against spanking is stronger than circ. (But don't get me started on a rant about what they do advise.

[coloradoalice]

Originally Posted by phatchristy

I think the AAP has to act as the Canadian Pediatric Association has done and write "routine circumcision of newborns should not be performed." And take the stance that circumcision should be performed only when medically necessary.

I feel this is a very important point. To say "It isn't necesssary" and then to say "But we will do it anyway" is so unethical. If they came out and said "it should never be done on newborns, and that it should only ever be done when all other avenues of treatment have failed" then they would be making a true and ethical statement.

As long as they keep making money off it and parents keep blindly walking the path of ignorance things will not change.

[paminmi]

Originally Posted by coloradoalice

I feel this is a very important point. To say "It isn't necesssary" and then to say "But we will do it anyway" is so unethical. If they came out and said "it should never be done on newborns, and that it should only ever be done when all other avenues of treatment have failed" then they would be making a true and ethical statement.

As long as they keep making money off it and parents keep blindly walking the path of ignorance things will not change.

: