SoCo Intactivists
10-18-2015, 09:33 PM
Joint Response from
Georganne Chapin, MPhil, JD: Executive Director, Intact America and
Marilyn Fayre Milos, RN: Executive Director, NOCIRC
to The Canadian Pediatric Society’s 2015 Position Statement on Newborn Male Circumcision
October 2, 2015
On September 8, 2015, the Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS) released its new statement on Newborn Male Circumcision. Appearing three years following the American Academy of Pediatrics’ report on the same subject, and two years after announcing it was forthcoming, the statement’s expressed goal is to give “guidance to health care providers and up-to-date information for the parents of newborn boys, to enable them to make informed decisions regarding circumcision.”
On a positive note (and because to do otherwise would be unconscionable), we admire the CPS for acknowledging that routine circumcision of male infants and children is not medically necessary. The statement’s authors also acknowledge the protective and sensory function of the foreskin, and recognize that it is normal (i.e., not pathological) for the foreskin to be non retractile in a male infant or child.Further, the CPS states that applicable law and bio ethical principles require that medically unnecessary surgery be deferred until a person is old enough to choose for him- or herself.
If only the CPS had stopped there. ...
Complete text of IA/-NOCIRC statement is available at: (https://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5922/images/CPS%20Joint%20statement%20for%20newsletter%20100215a.pdf)https://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5922/images/CPS%20Joint%20statement%20for%20newsletter%20100215a.pdf
And here's the important take-away message:
"Thanks in large part to growing and publicly expressed discontent among circumcised men, andthe availability of good information on websites and other social media, parents are becomingincreasingly reluctant to remove parts of their sons’ genitals. The equivocations and obfuscationsin documents like the CPS statement might fool some of the people some of the time, but theywill be increasingly irrelevant as people learn that pediatric trade associations are so financiallyself-interested and so historically and ethically compromised that they cannot be trusted to dowhat’s best for children.
The CPS should publicly apologize for the errors and dishonesty in its 2015 statement, andfollow the facts to their logical conclusion—a call for doctors to cease removing functional,protective genital tissue from children who cannot consent."
Georganne Chapin, MPhil, JD: Executive Director, Intact America and
Marilyn Fayre Milos, RN: Executive Director, NOCIRC
to The Canadian Pediatric Society’s 2015 Position Statement on Newborn Male Circumcision
October 2, 2015
On September 8, 2015, the Canadian Pediatric Society (CPS) released its new statement on Newborn Male Circumcision. Appearing three years following the American Academy of Pediatrics’ report on the same subject, and two years after announcing it was forthcoming, the statement’s expressed goal is to give “guidance to health care providers and up-to-date information for the parents of newborn boys, to enable them to make informed decisions regarding circumcision.”
On a positive note (and because to do otherwise would be unconscionable), we admire the CPS for acknowledging that routine circumcision of male infants and children is not medically necessary. The statement’s authors also acknowledge the protective and sensory function of the foreskin, and recognize that it is normal (i.e., not pathological) for the foreskin to be non retractile in a male infant or child.Further, the CPS states that applicable law and bio ethical principles require that medically unnecessary surgery be deferred until a person is old enough to choose for him- or herself.
If only the CPS had stopped there. ...
Complete text of IA/-NOCIRC statement is available at: (https://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5922/images/CPS%20Joint%20statement%20for%20newsletter%20100215a.pdf)https://org2.salsalabs.com/o/5922/images/CPS%20Joint%20statement%20for%20newsletter%20100215a.pdf
And here's the important take-away message:
"Thanks in large part to growing and publicly expressed discontent among circumcised men, andthe availability of good information on websites and other social media, parents are becomingincreasingly reluctant to remove parts of their sons’ genitals. The equivocations and obfuscationsin documents like the CPS statement might fool some of the people some of the time, but theywill be increasingly irrelevant as people learn that pediatric trade associations are so financiallyself-interested and so historically and ethically compromised that they cannot be trusted to dowhat’s best for children.
The CPS should publicly apologize for the errors and dishonesty in its 2015 statement, andfollow the facts to their logical conclusion—a call for doctors to cease removing functional,protective genital tissue from children who cannot consent."