Circumcision Opponents Use the Legal System and Legislatures
ARGO, N.D., Jan. 16 — Josiah Flatt, like about 60 percent of other newborn American boys, was circumcised soon after he was born here, in the spring of 1997. Two years later, his parents sued the doctor and the hospital.
They did not contend that the circumcision was botched or deny that Josiah's mother, Anita Flatt, had consented to the procedure in writing. They said, instead, that the doctor had failed to tell them enough about the pain, complications and consequences of circumcision, removing the foreskin of the penis.
It's now well established that circumcision is not medically necessary. I don't do them. This causes some trouble for me, as I have to buy my partner lunch sometimes if she has to come in to the hospital to do one for me.
But if my job as a physician is to do only medically necessary procedures -- I just cant see how performing circumcisions is indicated. Indeed, one of my concerns is that most parents do not receive adequate information to make the decision. When I round with the residents in the hospital -- they all anticipate that I'm going to "try to talk the parents out of circumcision." In fact, that's not my goal. I do want to make sure that they understand that it's an optional procedure. Very often, no one has told them that.
The fact that it is also a quick procedure that generates revenue for physicians and hospitals cannot be left out of this equation. When (not if) insurance begins to curtail the compensation -- I'll bet we'll see the circumcision enthusiasm from both physicians and hospitals wane.
