Circumcision, in the NY Times

The NY Times has a column by a pediatrician, discussing the medical evidence bearing on circumcision of infants in the United States: Should You Circumcise Your Child?

Here are some posts about attempts in various times and places to make circumcision a repugnant transaction: 

More on circumcision

Circumcision is a medical procedure that is also a traditional religious ritual for Jews and Muslims. There are also those who regard it as a repugnant transaction that should be banned, either because of questions about whether it serves a medical purpose, concern about elective procedures on children (an issue of consent, or in some readings, abuse), and antipathy to Jews and Muslims. (In California, a potential coalition to ban circumcision came apart when some of the organizers revealed strong anti-semitic inclinations, and in fact a 2011 law put a stop to the movement: New California law prohibits circumcision bans)
************
In Israel the anti-semitic component of proposed European bans is regarded as a political issue.

Knesset produces film defending circumcision
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4485174,00.html 

"After Council of Europe uses Jewish director's documentary to specify risks of religious ritual, Israeli parliament creates film featuring Jewish and Arab hospital directors voicing their support for medical advantages of circumcision"
**************

Recently some new medical evidence suggests that circumcision should be regarded as akin to child vaccination: Circumcision Benefits Outweigh Risks, Study Reports

"The authors conclude that the benefits — among them reduced risks of urinary tract infection, prostate cancer, sexually transmitted diseases and, in female partners, cervical cancer — outweigh the risks of local infection or bleeding. Several studies, including two randomized clinical trials, found no long-term adverse effects of circumcision on sexual performance or pleasure.
...
“Male circumcision is in principle equivalent to childhood vaccination,” said the lead author, Brian J. Morris, emeritus professor of medical sciences at the University of Sydney. “Just as there are opponents of vaccination, there are opponents of circumcision. But their arguments are emotional and unscientific, and should be disregarded.” ******

Prior posts on efforts to ban circumcision here.

Circumcision: maybe not so repugnant after all

While a German court's ban on circumcision earlier this summer continues to be debated in Germany (where criminal charges have now been filed against a mohel--a religious circumciser), the American Academy of Pediatrics has issued a report saying that the health benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks, and that it should be covered by medical insurance.

Here's the NY Times story: Benefits of Circumcision Are Said to Outweigh Risks

"The American Academy of Pediatrics has shifted its stance on infant male circumcision, announcing on Monday that new research, including studies in Africa suggesting that the procedure may protect heterosexual men against H.I.V., indicated that the health benefits outweighed the risks.

"But the academy stopped short of recommending routine circumcision for all baby boys, saying the decision remains a family matter. The academy had previously taken a neutral position on circumcision.

"The new policy statement, the first update of the academy’s circumcision policy in over a decade, appears in the Aug. 27 issue of the journal Pediatrics. The group’s guidelines greatly influence pediatric care and decisions about coverage by insurers; in the new statement, the academy also said that circumcision should be covered by insurance.

"The long-delayed policy update comes as sentiment against circumcision is gaining strength in the United States and parts of Europe. Circumcision rates in the United States declined to 54.5 percent in 2009 from 62.7 percent in 1999, according to one federal estimate. Critics succeeded last year in placing a circumcision ban on the ballot in San Francisco, but a judge ruled against including the measure.

"In Europe, a government ethics committee in Germany last week overruled a court decision that removing a child’s foreskin was “grievous bodily harm” and therefore illegal. The country’s Professional Association of Pediatricians called the ethics committee ruling “a scandal.”

"A provincial official in Austria has told state-run hospitals in the region to stop performing circumcisions, and the Danish authorities have commissioned a report to investigate whether medical doctors are present during religious circumcision rituals as required.

"Officials with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, which for several years have been pondering circumcision recommendations of their own, have yet to weigh in and declined to comment on the academy’s new stance. Medicaid programs in several states have stopped paying for the routine circumcision of infants."
*********************

The American pediatricians are unlikely to have much impact on the debate in Europe, but their opinion might make it even harder for attempts to ban circumcision in the U.S., like the failed attempt in California.

More on circumcision in Germany

Further developments on the ruling of a German court earlier this summer, banning circumcision.

"German lawmakers have passed a cross-party motion to protect religious circumcision, after a regional court ruled it amounted to bodily harm.

The resolution urges the government to draw up a bill allowing the circumcision of boys.

Germany's main political parties - together with Jewish and Muslim groups - have criticised the ruling by the Cologne court in June.

Chancellor Angela Merkel said it risked making Germany a "laughing stock".

The Cologne ruling involved a doctor who carried out a circumcision on a four-year-old that led to medical complications.

The doctor involved in the case was acquitted and the ruling was not binding. However, critics feared it could set a precedent for other German courts.

Germany's Medical Association told doctors after the ruling not to perform circumcisions.

'Tolerant country' The motion approved on Thursday in the lower house of parliament says the government should "present a draft law in the autumn... that guarantees that the circumcision of boys, carried out with medical expertise and without unnecessary pain, is permitted".

"Jewish and Muslim religious life must continue to be possible in Germany. Circumcision has a central religious significance for Jews and Muslims," it added.

The new law would overrule the decision by the Cologne court.

Ahead of the vote, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said the proposed motion showed that Germany was a "tolerant and cosmopolitan country".

European Jewish and Muslim groups earlier also joined forces to defend circumcision.

An unusual joint statement was signed by leaders of groups including the Rabbinical Centre of Europe, the European Jewish Parliament, the European Jewish Association, Germany's Turkish-Islamic Union for Religious Affairs and the Islamic Centre Brussels.

"We consider this to be an affront [to] our basic religious and human rights," it said.

The BBC's Stephen Evans in Berlin says opinion in Germany about the issue has been mixed, though slightly more Germans were in favour of the ban.

He says that many readers' comments on newspaper websites have indicated anger that this generation of Germans seems to be being constricted in its actions because of the Holocaust."

Angela Merkel intervenes over court ban on circumcision of young boys--Spokesman says right to circumcision must be restored as a matter of urgency, after Cologne court's ruling against practice

"Angela Merkel's spokesman has promised Germany's Jewish and Muslim communities they will be free to carry out circumcision on young boys, despite a court ban that has raised concerns about religious freedom.

"The government said it would find a way around a ban imposed by a court in Cologne in June as a matter of urgency.

"For everyone in the government it is absolutely clear that we want to have Jewish and Muslim religious life in Germany," said Merkel's spokesman, Steffen Seibert.
*********

Ynet covers the story this way: Chancellor told party members she did not want Germany to be 'only country in which Jews cannot practice their rites'
************

 July 19: German MPs vote to protect religious circumcision

"German lawmakers have passed a cross-party motion to protect religious circumcision, after a regional court ruled it amounted to bodily harm.

The resolution urges the government to draw up a bill allowing the circumcision of boys.

Germany's main political parties - together with Jewish and Muslim groups - have criticised the ruling by the Cologne court in June.

Chancellor Angela Merkel said it risked making Germany a "laughing stock".

The Cologne ruling involved a doctor who carried out a circumcision on a four-year-old that led to medical complications.

The doctor involved in the case was acquitted and the ruling was not binding. However, critics feared it could set a precedent for other German courts.

Germany's Medical Association told doctors after the ruling not to perform circumcisions.

...

The motion approved on Thursday in the lower house of parliament says the government should "present a draft law in the autumn... that guarantees that the circumcision of boys, carried out with medical expertise and without unnecessary pain, is permitted".

"Jewish and Muslim religious life must continue to be possible in Germany. Circumcision has a central religious significance for Jews and Muslims," it added.

The new law would overrule the decision by the Cologne court.

Ahead of the vote, Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said the proposed motion showed that Germany was a "tolerant and cosmopolitan country".

...

The BBC's Stephen Evans in Berlin says opinion in Germany about the issue has been mixed, though slightly more Germans were in favour of the ban.

He says that many readers' comments on newspaper websites have indicated anger that this generation of Germans seems to be being constricted in its actions because of the Holocaust.

Will circumcision become a repugnant transaction in Germany?

A court in Germany has ruled that circumcising young boys for religious reasons amounts to bodily harm.

Earlier attempts to ban circumcision in California lost support because of the “grotesque anti-Semitic imagery" employed by activists in favor of the ban.

HT: Sven Seuken

Update on efforts to ban circumcision in CA

Here's a legal update on the matter, from the Volokhs... Court Tentatively Decides That State Law Preempts Proposed San Francisco Ban on Circumcision of Boys.

Some background on the effort to ban circumcision is in my earlier post here.

Efforts to ban circumcision in California

Just as there are efforts to make unrepugnant transactions that have long been regarded as repugnant (like same sex marriage), there are also efforts to make repugnant things that have been accepted since antiquity.

Efforts to Ban Circumcision Gain Traction in California
"When a group of activists proposed banning circumcision in San Francisco last fall, many people simply brushed them aside. Even in that liberal seaside city, it seemed implausible that thousands of people would support an effort to outlaw an ancient ritual that Jews and Muslims believe fulfills a commandment issued by God.

"But last month, the group collected the more than 7,100 signatures needed to get a measure on the fall ballot that would make it illegal to snip the foreskin of a minor within city limits. Now a similar effort is under way in Santa Monica to get such a measure on the ballot for November 2012.

"If the anticircumcision activists (they prefer the term “intactivists”) have their way, cities across the country may be voting on whether to criminalize a practice that is common in many American hospitals. Activists say the measures would protect children from an unnecessary medical procedure, calling it “male genital mutilation.”

“This is the furthest we’ve gotten, and it is a huge step for us,” said Matthew Hess, an activist based in San Diego who wrote both bills.

"Mr. Hess has created similar legislation for states across the country, but those measures never had much traction. Now he is fielding calls from people who want to organize similar movements in their cities.

“This is a conversation we are long overdue to have in this country,” he said. “The end goal for us is making cutting boys’ foreskin a federal crime.”

"Jewish groups see the ballot measures as a very real threat, likening them to bans on circumcision that existed in Soviet-era Russia and Eastern Europe and in ancient Roman and Greek times. The circumcision of males is an inviolable requirement of Jewish law that dates back to Abraham’s circumcision of himself in the Book of Genesis."
...
"Mr. Hess also writes an online comic book, “Foreskin Man,” with villains like “Monster Mohel.” On Friday, the Anti-Defamation League issued a statement saying the comic employed “grotesque anti-Semitic imagery.”
**********

Of course not all opponents of circumcision are happy to welcome into their coalition those motivated by antipathy to Judaism or Islam:
In Santa Monica, Circumcision Opponent Abandons Efforts
"The primary backer of an effort to get a ban on circumcision on the ballot in Santa Monica is abandoning her push, saying the proposed legislation had been misrepresented as an effort to impinge on religious freedom."