Why have circumcision rates declined so drastically in the US?

Question

It was about 90% about 30 yrs ago. Now its down to 55%.
http://www.cirp.org/news/iowacitypresscitizen07-28-03/

Answer 1

The circumcision rate has declined in the US in much the same way it declined in other countries that once practiced it, like Canada, Britain, and Australia.

In all these countries, circumcision is no longer advocated by the medical authority, stating that at the very best that it has "potential" benefits, but that the benefits and risks even out. Given this statement, there is no true medical incentive to continue the practice, since a person is just as likely to "benefit" as to be "harmed."

There have been many studies attempting to prove circumcision lowers STDs and HIV rates. But there are also studies stating the exact opposite. It is largely concluded that there is no statistically significant difference between circumcised and uncircumcised men and that relation to STD contraction rates (see links).

Also, infant circumcision can be especially risky since the infant is so small. This can range from excessive bleeding to local infections to skin bridges, to far more severe and rarer consequences like amputation, gangrene, and death.

In light of all this info and controversy, most insurances no longer cover circumcisions because it's now more or less categorized as plastic surgery. There is no point for health insurance to cover for an elective procedure that could potentially cause harm instead of good. Because of this, many people decide to forego the operation, if only to save money.

Answer 2

It was never questioned 30 years ago. It was just something Americans did to all their male infants routinely, and doctors were taught to recommend the surgery.

The only justification given was that the foreskin can get infected, but that only requires that boys be taught to clean it regularly.

Since then, there have been studies that have suggested that this traumatic procedure may be linked to violent or paranoid behavior in men, as well as decreased sexual sensation in 50s and beyond.

Answer 3

Because people are now realizing that it is wrong and unnecessary to mutilate the penis of an uninformed new born baby boy,without it's consent.Circumcision should only be done when there is a specific medical need and shame on people who still have this barbaric practice performed on their offspring

Answer 4

because it is unnecessary!. an uncircumcised man enjoys sex more than an circumcised man. because the foreskin has more nerve endings whereas a circumcised man loses it, and therfore less pleasure when having intercourse. foreskin protects the head of the penis.

Answer 5

Because it is unnecessary.

The American Academy of Pediatrics used to recommend it, but now they don't.

It is a cosmetic procedure in infants.

Answer 6

Because people are realizing that it's unnecessary, wrong, and barbaric. More people are recognizing it as mutilation that violates the rights of genital integrity and equality.

Answer 7

They haven't. The anticirc people are using old statistics. Hospitals no longer keep track of the circumcision rate because mothers only stay overnight after giving birth. Most infants are circumcised as out patients in the hospital, in doctors offices, and in clinics. No statistics are kept. Except for Latinos who don't usually circumcise their boys, circumcision rates have remained about 85% nation wide for the last 20 years, with midwestern and southern states increased to 95% plus. Cities like Chicago, Houston, and Atlanta have even higher rates. But Los Angeles and Miami are lower because of large Latino populations. But with better incomes among Latinos and Cubans, they are circumcising their sons. In Mexico City, the same is true, and Mexican persons here are also. Is the question you asked because you wonder whether you should have any of your sons circumcised? I say go for it for a lot of reasons: simplified washing of the penis, prevention of HIV, American culture, etc. Don't let anyone tell you it is mutilation. It is not. Look up the word in a good dictionary. Recent studies have shown that the sexual life of circumcised men is just a good as with uncut men. Many including myself will tell you that. Besides women prefer oral sex with cut men. Medical studies have proved both in recent times. And the American Pediatric Association now says that people should take into account the culture, religion, and family tradition when making their circumcision decision.

Answer 8

circumcision is merely a cosmetic stylistic fashion - and fashion trends come & go , it may yet make a comeback in future.

Answer 9

One, need for it was cultural, not health, related

Two, it costs about $150 to do

Answer 10

The “medical” reasons for circumcision are for Doctors to make MONEY!!!
Circumcision is “nothing” compared to other much more terrible things that people do for MONEY, when MONEY is involved EVERYRHING is possible, MONEY is the priority not moral values, not ethics, not health, not wrong or right, not even human life, etc. People are selfish by nature. And that is soooo sad. $$$CASH$$$

MOTHERS, the feelings of mothers who observed the circumcision of their babies. Go here if you have the courage:
http://www.circumcision.org/mothers.htm
They do not remember the pain when they grow up, but I wonder what kind of neurological/emotional damage it does to inflict such severe pain to such a young one!

In the US circumcision started to stop boys from masturbating; they will take much longer to reach the orgasm, and the orgasm will not be as intense, but that will not stop them.
Nowadays the “medical” reasons to circumcision are for Doctors to make MONEY!!!

RELIGION--If God intended boys to not have "skin" He would have made them so.
Also, if you examine the bible, lest just say that is full of terrible things that are considered very illegal nowadays, and many of those terrible things are AGAINST WOMEN. Women, how would you like it if those things get legalized?
http://www.nocirc.org/religion/

HYGIENE--Use a new invention, soap and water!!! Women produce much more “smegma”, all kinds of discharges, wetness, and smells; because of physiologic and anatomical reasons, and how would you feel if they cut your vulva lips??? Women, why don’t you answer my question, are you afraid? Women are more likely to get urinary tract infections and no one suggests we surgically alter them at birth to reduce the risks! Just one of many double standards and laws that always treat men worse.

MEDICAL REASONS--No medical reasons. It is not a birth defect! A extremely small chance of a complication do not justify the removal of the foreskin, if so, why don't we remove the tonsils and the appendix when a child is born, and the chance of complications of the tonsils and the appendix is much greater. And what is even greater is the chance of breast cancer so the best thing to do is to remove the breast glands of young girls or at least remove them at the first sign of trouble without trying any alternative treatments first in order to preserve the breast(women, how do you like it now?). And for infections of all the organs, including female organs, use a new invention called antibiotics. Talking about complications, in fact many baby boys die each year from circumcision and related complications.
EVEN if “TRUE phimosis” occurs, instead of chopping it off like barbarians!, use Conservative Treatments like:
-Topical Medication(non-traumatic and non-destructive)
-Dilation and Stretching(non-traumatic and non-destructive)
-Combination treatment(non-traumatic and non-destructive)
-Preputioplasty is the medical term for plastic surgery of the prepuce or foreskin(many methods).
If you want more detail on Conservative Treatments, go here:
http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/
http://www.circinfo.org/alternatives.html
The foreskin can still be tight even after puberty, and it is natural, not TRUE phimosis.
And now they invented a new reason to make money, the risk of STD in uncircumcised men. Well actually uncircumcised men have more protection, but in practical terms that protection means nothing, because circumcised or not, if you have sex without protection and your partner have an STD you will be infected FOR SURE! That means, it is just one more stupid and desperate reason in order to make money with circumcisions.

SEX--Foreskin actually enhances the sexual experience for men because it constantly moves over the head of the penis causing more friction and pleasure. Men will also lose much sensitivity to the glans if circumcised.
Circumcised men will have to deal with discomfort and dry glans. Uncircumcised men, pull the foreskin back for a day, and see how it feels against your underwear all day, and see what happens. The frenulum is the G SPOT in men.
The foreskin have those functions: protective, erogenous, sensory, and sexual physiologic. After all, why would you want to lose all of those “Meissner corpuscles”, the same nerve complexes which provide fine touch to the fingertips?
It is there for many reasons, that is how a man should be(it is natural).
If women like it better circumcised because it looks better(strange, not natural) or gives them more sexual pleasure(strange, not natural), then too bad, they do not have the right! All men do not like mutilated vulvas, and all men like breasts with nipples, they do not like mutilated breasts, etc, etc, etc, because that is the way those organs are supposed to be, it is natural. Interesting, isn’t?!!!

If that was a common practice to do that to baby girls, all the women would be in a BIG UPROAR about it(and men too!, men are not like women), but it’s ok to mutilate little boys. The great majority of the ones that agree with circumcision are women for their stupid selfish reasons. Even court cases reported in which mother and father fight because the mother wants to mutilate the son, it is always the mother!. You women should be ashamed to that to your son. Men that are not circumcised, will not get circumcised when adults, they would scream, kick, fight and run, if someone tries to mutilate their privates area, just like you women would run too if someone tried to do that to your labia. Men that where circumcised do not realize what they lost because never had one, and most of them that do realize try to justify it so they do not feel bad about it. Many circumcised men feel very bad emotionally because of what was done to them to such a private area.
It is mutilation of defenceless children in the most private spot, genital mutilation.
It is cruel and barbaric.
It is a human rights violation.
It is not the parent’s decision; it is the parent’s decision if they want to abuse him, rape him, or to kill him? It is the parent’s decision to choose the son religion? How can he chose a religion or his believes, if he is just a baby?
I do not even agree that it is ok if an adult man wants to get circumcised. I think it is wrong, because if a man wants to lose a finger, the Doctor can not do that to him. Think about it, think, think. And by the way, adult men that decide to get circumcised, do it because they know most women like it, they just do it to be more accepted by women.
I think it is just like slavery and all other barbaric acts of the past, it was accepted because it was common practice or tradition, everyone accepted slavery without questioning the facts, but it is not accepted anymore in a modern and fair and civilized society. Circumcision must not be allowed, BY LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Many other reasons not to do it, check it out:
http://www.mothersagainstcirc.org/
http://www.cirp.org/library/treatment/phimosis/
http://www.noharmm.org/
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/
http://www.circumcisionquotes.com/boydies.html