|
|
|
|
Home / Health / Child Health / Circumcision / Organizations / American Academy of Pediatrics / 1999 Circumcision Position Statement / Organization Responses
|
|
|
|
Web Sites
|
- Attorneys for the Rights of the Child (ARC) Response - The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has been charged with continuing to betray vulnerable children in its release today of a new policy regarding circumcision.
www.cirp.org/AAP/releases/ARC.html
- Circumcision Resource Center (CRC) Response - An excellent insightful review of the AAP policy - more than just the few highlights reported in the press. It describes the 7 signs of progress that the AAP is finally beginning to understand the effects of circumcision and the 9 deficiencies the report failed to address
www.circumcision.org/aap.htm
- InfoCirc of Montreal response - Although the AAP says that the medical benefits of circumcision are not significant enough to recommend the procedure, their statement leaves wide latitude to continue circumcision for non-medical reasons. This is clearly a violation of medical ethics (physicians are only allowed to perform surgery when medically necessary).
www.infocirc.org/top.htm?aap1.htm
- NOCIRC International response - Now that the American Academy of Pediatrics has aligned itself more closely with medical organizations worldwide by not recommending routine male circumcision, the already declining circumcision rate in the U.S. should drop dramatically.
www.cirp.org/AAP/releases/NOCIRC
- NOCIRC of Illinois response - American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Affirms that Claimed Medical Benefits Do Not Justify Routine Infant Circumcision; At Last Recognizes the Pain and Stress of Circumcision; Tragically Omits Crucial Information Necessary for Parents to Make an Informed Decision
www.cirp.org/AAP/releases/NOCIRC-IL.html
- NOCIRC of Maine response - AAP Refuses to Endorse Infant Circumcision for 26 Years Running.
members.aol.com/Scookie5/NOCIRCofMaine.pressrelease.html
- NOCIRC of North Carolina response - Children's health advocates lauded the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) today for its refusal to recommend infant circumcision. The AAP policy has now come in line with all of the other medical societies' circumcision policy statements in the English speaking world. This position underscores the idea -- widely accepted around the world -- that circumcision does not specifically contribute to children's health in any way. In countries that do not circumcise, including all of continental Europe, urological health appears to be as good as, or better, than in the United States.
www.cirp.org/AAP/releases/NOCIRC-NC
- NOCIRC of North Dakota response - AAP Fumbles Again: Contradicts Itself
www.cirp.org/AAP/releases/NOCIRC-ND
- NOHAHMM response - Doctors' Group Charged with Dumping Kids' Rights
www.cirp.org/AAP/releases/NOHARMM.html
- NORM response - Pediatric Circumcision Policy Better, But Still Inadequate. - "At last the AAP has admitted that it is both unnecessary and painful. R. Wayne Griffiths, NORM's founder, notes that "now it is clear that the greatest danger to a baby boy's penis is from a doctor's knife."
www.infocirc.org/nr-norm.htm
- Responses to AAP Statement - Responses by various organizations regarding the 1999 AAP statement.
www.cirp.org/AAP/releases
|
|
|
|
|