Article Text
Statistics from Altmetric.com
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Task Force on Circumcision published its policy statement and technical report on newborn circumcision in September 2012.1 ,2 Since that time, some individuals and groups have voiced objections to the work of the Task Force, while others have conveyed their support. The AAP task force is pleased that the policy statement and technical reports on circumcision have stimulated debate on this topic and welcomes respectful discussion and dialogue about the scientific and ethical issues that surround neonatal circumcision. We believe this is a complex issue that does not lend itself to simplistic solutions. The Task Force encourages those of all viewpoints to contribute to a vibrant, thoughtful and respectful evidence-based dialogue. We appreciate that the free exchange of competing ideas is a necessary component of scientific discovery. We also recognise that all clinical decisions carry ethical dimensions and that a respectful and thoughtful dialogue about these issues is important. However, the Task Force also feels strongly that this debate and the academic literature are demeaned when those with an ideological agenda disseminate inaccurate information, misapply scientific principles, make accusations that are unsupported, communicate in a vitriolic tone, and attempt to discredit and mischaracterise alternative views and those who hold them. Healthy debate and …
Footnotes
-
The AAP Task Force on Circumcision 2012 Susan Blank, MD, MPH, Chairperson; Michael Brady, MD, Representing the AAP Committee on Pediatrics AIDS and Committee on Infectious Disease; Ellen Buerk, MD, Representing the AAP Board of Directors; Waldemar Carlo, MD, Representing the AAP Committee on Fetus and Newborn and is a Director of Mednax; Douglas Diekema, MD, MPH, Representing the AAP Committee on Bioethics; Andrew Freedman, MD, Representing the AAP Section on Urology; Lynne Maxwell, MD, Representing the AAP Section on Anesthesiology; Steven Wegner, MD, JD, Representing the AAP Committee on Child Health Financing; Charles LeBaron, MD, Liaison from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Lesley Atwood, MD, Liaison from the American Academy of Family Physicians; Sabrina Craigo, MD, Liaison from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
-
Competing interests None.
-
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
- Current controversies
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine: a critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision
- Out of step: fatal flaws in the latest AAP policy report on neonatal circumcision
- Male or female genital cutting: why ‘health benefits’ are morally irrelevant
- Medical aspects of male circumcision
- Prophylactic interventions on children: balancing human rights with public health
- A covenant with the status quo? Male circumcision and the new BMA guidance to doctors
- Circumcision: Divided we fall
- Male circumcision and HIV prevention: ethical, medical and public health tradeoffs in low-income countries
- Benefits of newborn circumcision: is Europe ignoring medical evidence?
- Risk factors for genital HPV DNA in men resemble those found in women: a study of male attendees at a Danish STD clinic