Child Circumcision - page five

• The removal of the foreskin ensures that it will never become cancerous, but a man is more at risk of breast cancer than foreskin cancer. Should men then have their breasts removed at birth? The American Cancer Society says that circumcision should not be promoted as a preventative measure for penile cancer, cervical cancer, or any other cancer.

• Some doctors think that because the circumcised penis stays drier, it should be less susceptible to the AIDS virus. Yet others have argued that skin abrasion during intercourse is far more common in circumcised men, making AIDS infection more likely. They point out that the highest AIDS rates in the world are found in the US and Africa, both of which are among the only regions that already have high rates of circumcision. Either way, this argument is dangerous. Suppose for a moment that your son in his adulthood thinks his penile condition makes him safer from AIDS or any other disease. The only possible influence of such an idea would be to make him less cautious in a sexual encounter where a spontaneous decision is required. Condoms, not foreskins or the lack of them, are the only effective precaution during sexual intercourse.

• Some have argued that the circumcised penis is easier to keep clean. The same argument would apply to our fingers, if only we had the nails removed. Does someone want to advocate that newborn infants have their fingernails removed before they leave the hospital?

• While some research indicated higher rates of urinary tract infection (UTI) in intact boys, analysis of the data shows that UTI is not the pivotal issue. Other research has indicated that circumcision itself puts boys at immediate risk of UTI.

The surgical removal of sexual tissue can almost certainly reduce the incidence of some diseases. Islamic physicians seem to have evidence that this can be even more effective in females than it is in males. The most common female circumcision removes only the hood (the foreskin) from the clitoris. Then the vaginal orifice is sewed almost closed. Statistics show that as a group these women begin their sex lives later and have fewer sex partners, which means they are exposed to fewer diseases. Islamic medical institutions have produced statistics which show these women live significantly longer. This is a more compelling "benefit" than any claimed for male circumcision.

Such "benefits" of both male and female circumcision work only to the degree that they cripple one's sexuality. Such results don't justify the removal of healthy body parts from non-consenting juveniles. Whatever their stated or underlying motives may be, those who desire to sexually mutilate children must at least learn to content themselves with mutilating only their own children.

What happens when a child circumcision goes wrong?