I hate the word "routine".

[serendipity22]

Doctor's organizations like the AAP are fond of saying things like
we do not recommend routine neonatal circumcision.

I wish they would just say that we do not recommend neonatal circumcision.

The use of the word routine is poor communication and is very confusing. Adding the word routine means the statement can mean just about anything. Are they deliberately trying to be ambiguous or are they just muddle headed? Or both?

[fruitful womb]

Write a letter to Dr. Berkelhamer, the director of the AAP. Ask them to
issue a stronger policy statement against neonatal circumcision. I think our on the right track!

[minkajane]

They're deliberately trying to be ambigous. They're basically saying "We don't think it's necessary, but we're not going to say you shouldn't do it because people would be mad at us. So we'll just say make up your own minds."

:

[kldliam]

it serves them well I say. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[serendipity22]

i just found the email address from another thread
i used google and it was on mothering.com!

[e-mail]

[veganf]

This got me thinking about other terminology I don't like. Even the term "Intact" versus "Uncircumcised" bothers me. I would prefer to use "Normal" penis. I mean, we don't refer to any other part of the body with a special name simply because 10% of the population has had surgery to remove it (20% of men in the world circ'd, ~50% of total human population is male). "All of my boys have intact arms" : .

[A&A]

I do see your point about the word "routine," but it specifies non-religious circ. I love the word "intact" because it's a powerful word and it gets people to think.

[Treece]

I don't like the word either. And I do think RIC should just be changed to neonatal circumcision or how about circumcision? Only three medical conditions require circumcision (frostbite, cancer, and gangrene) and these normally don't occur in infants, children, teens, or even adults. All other "medically necessary" circs are for conditions that could be healed with time, other measures, etc.

Off topic:
Alot of people on here talk about how we don't cut something off just to prevent disease at a later date (ie breasts, appendices, etc) BUT in our currrent world, we don't try to prevent disease, we only treat the symptoms NOT the imbalance. So I think the whole medical system (at least in America) is way off, and nonreligious neonatal circumcision is a sign and a symptom of that. Anyone with half a brain would recognize that if 80% of the world's men are intact (sporting au natural) and their equipment isn't diseased or whatever, then it is a very unnecessary procedure.

When I first researched it, I came to the conclusion that my children would never indure the PAIN. I didn't care if it was or was not necessary. I couldn't allow the intense PAIN to be done to them due to my signature. KWIM?