Circumcision for healthy children is not in their best interest. Females are protected from any genital cutting, males need to be as well. It is your job as doctors to protect your patients not actively advocate unnecessary surgery on minors. Proxy consent given by parents is not a valid form of consent for unnecessary, harmful and risky surgery. Death and disfigurement due to medically unnecessary and unjustifiable surgery are not risks to be taken lightly as the AAP seems to be doing. Unless there is a defect that requires surgery to fix, proxy consent should not be considered in cosmetic preference cases like circumcision.
Infants and children do not have sex. UTIs are rare in infants especially makes and just because a boy is intact does not mean he is prone to infection. Circumcised boys get UTIs as well.
The soon to be release to be put out by the AAP on circumcision is unethical and does not put the needs of the child first.
(name omitted on my blog)
The World Health Organization and UNAIDS have supported circumcision as a preventive for HIV infections in regions with high rates of heterosexually transmitted HIV; however, the circumcision solution has several fundamental flaws that undermine its potential for success. This article explores, in detail, the data on which this recommendation is based, the diffi- culty in translating results from high risk adults in a research setting to the general pub- lic, the impact of risk compensation, and how circumcision compares to existing alterna- tives. Based on our analysis it is concluded that the circumcision solution is a wasteful distraction that takes resources away from more effective, less expensive, less invasive alternatives. By diverting attention away from more effective interventions, circumcision programs will likely increase the number of HIV infections