Reasons Not to Circumcise Your Baby

Medical and Ethical Arguments against Routine Infant Circumcision

Jan 8, 2009

Circumcision rates in America are dropping as more parents and doctors learn of the physical consequences of male genital mutilation (MGM).

Famously promoted by Dr. Kellogg (of cereal fame) as a masturbation preventive, routine infant circumcision (RIC) is still widely practiced in the USA despite its lack of recommendation by any national medical organisation. Circumcision is the subject of a number of widespead myths and misconceptions, including the false “uncircumcised penises are hard to clean” myth. Less well-known are the reasons against circumcising.

Circumcision is a Human Rights Violation

Given that RIC is circumcision without medical justification, the practice amounts to performing painful cosmetic surgery on an infant who cannot consent. Most parents would consider it unethical to cosmetically change an infant's nose (or for a more accurate analogy, amputate a few toes) on the subjective grounds of prettiness; for the same reason, circumcision without consent is unethical. The practice involves parents putting non-consenting babies at a needless risk of complications and death, as well as the inevitable permanent disfigurement and loss of sexual function described below.

Recently a number of men have successfully sued for damages over their infant circumcisions. A number of physicians are now speaking out against circumcision – Dr. Denniston says RIC "clearly violate[s], all in one instant, the Golden Rule (I certainly would not have wanted that done to me); the major tenet of medical practice, First, Do No Harm; and all seven Principles of the American Medical Association's Code of Ethics" [Violating the Golden Rule].

Circumcision Reduces Sexual Function

More than "just a flap of skin", the foreskin contains thousands of sensitive nerve endings. Its primary job is to protect and moisturize the glans (head of the penis), in much the same way as the eyelid protects the eyeball. When the foreskin is amputated, as well as the obvious loss of sensation from removing nerve-rich tissue, a man experiences a gradual loss of sensation due to keratinization. This is the skin on the glans thickening and coarsening to protect it from constant abrasion against clothes. Just as a work-roughened hand is less sensitive than a baby's hand, the dried-out exposed glans is less sensitive than an intact glans.

Another function of the foreskin is to aid in sexual intercourse by providing a gliding mechanism. The lack of a foreskin severely affects the mechanics of sex. A study by Gillian Bensley and Gregory J Boyle that circumcision can contribute to sexual problems such as female vaginal dryness and lack of orgasm. Thus, circumcising a baby is affecting not only his future sex life, but the sex lives of his future partners.

Circumcision Carries Risks of Complications and Death

Aside from the obvious complication that a circumcised infant is lacking sensitive tissue and will face reduced sexual function, circumcision carries with it a number of risks ranging from mild to severe and common to rare. The latter include death and cases in which the penis dies or is amputated – although rare, it is important to note that these accidents were entirely preventable by omitting the practice of RIC. More common complications include:

Circumcision may also result in an interrupted breastfeeding relationship, due to the trauma experienced by the baby.

The psychological ramifications of RIC are less clear-cut. Some anti-circ advocates claim circumcision leaves babies traumatised and breaks the bond of trust between mother and child; others have attributed qualities such as rage and misogyny to the practice. As yet, no definitive studies have been performed in this area.

The copyright of the article Reasons Not to Circumcise Your Baby in Infant & Toddler Health is owned by Sarah Tennant. Permission to republish Reasons Not to Circumcise Your Baby in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.