Parents Magazine...OH NO! - Page 2

[janellesmommy]

Even if circumcision actually helped prevent AIDS, it still would be no reason to circumcise INFANTS.

[Ivan's Mom]

Correct Address Here, I Called to confirm

Here is my letter to the correct addy:
[e-mail]

Dear Parents.com,

I am saddened to see that your website is giving credit to the flawed Circumcision/AIDS study that was done in Africa. Please read this article from Doctors Opposing Circumcision to see the truth behind this flawed "study."

http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcisi...Statement.html

Because of your article, I fear many more children will be put through the torment of circumcision for no good reason. Are you aware of the many problems that can arise from circumcision? Are you aware of the excruciating pain that is involved with circumcision? Are you aware that this "study" says that condoms must still be worn to protect against AIDS? Please remove this article from your website before too many parents read it and put their baby through unnecessary surgery.

[hunnybumm]

Originally Posted by Ivan's Mom

OMG! OMG! OMG! OMG!

Did anybody else see the advertisement at the right side of that stupid article.

Here it is!
http://www.myskinclamp.com/?gclid=CP...FQx1VAodVFq2uQ

Stupid stupid stupid people.

: : : : : : : : : :

How is that for complete irony. Here, it is better for everyone if you cut off your sons penis at birth, oh and when he is an adult he can just grow it back!

I acutally find it sort of funny that they have an article about how circ is great, then a link that is pro intact. I guess they are just making money all the way around!

Do we have a correct email to send a letter to? I can literally hear the baby boys screaming from all the readers getting so much confirmation that circ is the right choice, and those on the fence falling off.

[Ivan's Mom]

Originally Posted by hunnybumm

Do we have a correct email to send a letter to? I can literally hear the baby boys screaming from all the readers getting so much confirmation that circ is the right choice, and those on the fence falling off.

Here is my letter to the correct addy:
[e-mail]

[buckeyedoc]

Sent one, too, very similar to my post on the "what do I say about the HIV studies" thread a few days ago. What an irresponsible article by someone who clearly never thought about why it would have anything to do with US infant circumcision. I'm a very disgruntled Parents subscriber, and I made that clear in my letter.

[TigerTail]

Thanks IM, I'm glad I saved it here . Re-sent.

[LavenderMae]

Thanks Ivan's Mom for the email addy, I re-sent my email to that address.

[dynamohumm6]

Originally Posted by Sheacoby

Thanks Ivan's Mom for the email addy, I re-sent my email to that address.

me too.

[Daisyuk]

I can't believe even a mainstream parenting magazine can be that irresponsible.

How many AIDS deaths are they now going to be responsible for amongst adult men who will now think that they are protected? How is it that they manage to forget all the men that were circ'd in those studies and still got it?

This is just unbelievable stupidity, that journalist deserves to be fired for dangerously incompetent journalism.

[Super Pickle]

Thanks. I wrote:

Dear Parents Magazine,
It is absolutely appalling that you would promote infant male circumcision on your website, based on questionable studies about the link between circumcision and HIV transmission in Africa.
Neither the American Medical Association nor the American Academy of Pediatrics has changed its position on routine infant circumcision in light of the African studies. On the contrary, they have reaffirmed their statement that they find no medical basis for recommending it. It is highly irresponsible for you to print an article promoting it, when the national medical organizations are still saying that the potential benefits do not outweigh the risks and side effects.
A child born today has fifteen to twenty years before he becomes sexually active. By then, we will know far more about the link between circumcision and HIV. At that point, a mature young man will be able to evaluate his own behaviors and risk, weigh the evidence, and make his own decision about circumcision. It's just too personal a choice to be made by any but the man who will have to live with the consequences.
Your token mention of cultural and ethical considerations at the end of the article did not mask the piece as unbiased. You were attempting to paint as sensible the most irrational of American customs--the genital mutilation of baby boys. Boy or girl, African or American, no child deserves to be seized by stronger adults, forcibly restrained, and suffer the severing of the most sensitive, private parts of his or her body. Circumcision irrevocably alters a person's sexuality and deprives him of control over his or her own body. It's not a medical question; it's a human rights issue.
Here's an idea: Why don't you print a piece that looks at the rise of the intactivism (anti-circumcision) movement and the decline of circumcision rates in America? There's a controversy raging in this country over male genital cutting, and you would do your readers a better service by reporting on that debate than by promoting an unnecessary surgery that even the AMA and AAP don't recommend.
Sincerely,
A mother of two young boys

[guestmama9908]

After I get the kids in bed tonight I am going to write a letter. I think if they are going to promote circumcision they should shed light on its consequences as well.

I am going to make sure to point out the high rate of Penile Adhesions caused by circumcision in this country. I think I will be forced to share our horror story with those.

[hunnybumm]

Originally Posted by Daisyuk

I can't believe even a mainstream parenting magazine can be that irresponsible.

How many AIDS deaths are they now going to be responsible for amongst adult men who will now think that they are protected? How is it that they manage to forget all the men that were circ'd in those studies and still got it?

This is just unbelievable stupidity, that journalist deserves to be fired for dangerously incompetent journalism.

I was talking to my DH about that last night. I mean how do they really test this? I admit I haven't read the full study. WHY would someone want to be a part of a study that is testing whether they will get HIV or not? I mean, how responsible is that these men are having sex (unsafe I assume) and they are counting how many get infected. I realize the study is probably more complicated than that, but it still boggles me.

[leah martinez]

Oh my! that makes my stomach turn!!!! :

[travisandjill]

Originally Posted by Sheacoby

: Horrible horrible horrible article. They just got many many more baby boys cut.

Yeah the sad thing is that parent really are stupid enough to circ based on what they read in a magazine. If this article makes parents circ, then they dont deserve to even be parents at all. When I found out I was having a boy I did research the WHOLE time I was PG. even after I had my baby I still wasnt convinced one way or the other so I "held off on circ" until I could think clearly about it. I asked several doctors oppinions, and my ped even told me off for asking about it! She said you better not change your mind now (when ds was at his 2 week appt). I chose NOT to circ. Yes it was hard decision to make especially because I was being yelled at by family members who told me I was ruining my sons life. But I didnt care. I wanted to know exactly what would happen to my son during circ. I was appalled by what I saw. I will never regret my decision to keep him whole

Jill

[DahliaRW]

"The results from the African studies were so staggering that the
clinical trials were halted by the National Institutes of Health Data
Safety and Monitoring Board, which concluded that not offering
circumcision to every man was unethical and an unnecessary risk to their
lives."

Notice it says every MAN, not ever baby. Not that it makes it better, but sure, if you want to give grown men the option of circ it's their body and their choice. A baby has no choice. And no major medical organization had recommended INFANT circ based on the findings (that I'm aware of). The article is completely irresponsible. But what do you really expect from "Parents"?

[~Kira~]

Just sent a REALLY strongly-worded email. Read it out loud to DH, who said "Jeez, calm down, hon!"





- Kira

[Mamm2]

Ok, I sent an email.

[TigerTail]

Hm, what happened to my response? I think it was (to Kira): 'Calm' is for when people stop torturing little boys & girls.

[My*Scorpio]

Originally Posted by Super Pickle

Thanks. I wrote:

Dear Parents Magazine,
It is absolutely appalling that you would promote infant male circumcision on your website, based on questionable studies about the link between circumcision and HIV transmission in Africa.
Neither the American Medical Association nor the American Academy of Pediatrics has changed its position on routine infant circumcision in light of the African studies. On the contrary, they have reaffirmed their statement that they find no medical basis for recommending it. It is highly irresponsible for you to print an article promoting it, when the national medical organizations are still saying that the potential benefits do not outweigh the risks and side effects.
A child born today has fifteen to twenty years before he becomes sexually active. By then, we will know far more about the link between circumcision and HIV. At that point, a mature young man will be able to evaluate his own behaviors and risk, weigh the evidence, and make his own decision about circumcision. It's just too personal a choice to be made by any but the man who will have to live with the consequences.
Your token mention of cultural and ethical considerations at the end of the article did not mask the piece as unbiased. You were attempting to paint as sensible the most irrational of American customs--the genital mutilation of baby boys. Boy or girl, African or American, no child deserves to be seized by stronger adults, forcibly restrained, and suffer the severing of the most sensitive, private parts of his or her body. Circumcision irrevocably alters a person's sexuality and deprives him of control over his or her own body. It's not a medical question; it's a human rights issue.
Here's an idea: Why don't you print a piece that looks at the rise of the intactivism (anti-circumcision) movement and the decline of circumcision rates in America? There's a controversy raging in this country over male genital cutting, and you would do your readers a better service by reporting on that debate than by promoting an unnecessary surgery that even the AMA and AAP don't recommend.
Sincerely,
A mother of two young boys

Great letter!

[stelly]

I sent them a short email. Suggested they should write another article correcting that one, based on the idea that their readership demographic are not living in Africa and therefore the studies bear no relevance. Grrrr.