Revisiting Circumcision

In light of the decidedly pro-circumcision statement released yesterday by the American Academy of Pediatrics, I thought it would be a good time to repost something I wrote last year on why we chose not to circumcise. A major criticism I keep hearing about the new AAP statement is that it fails to address the ethical issue of circumcision, which is the main reason many parents, myself included, choose to keep our sons intact. I am extremely reluctant to permanently alter my child's body without his informed consent. I wouldn't give my baby a tattoo or piercing or electively remove any other healthy, functioning organ just so he can match his dad, or because our culture deems it acceptable; that goes for his privates, too. Anyways, here is my old blog post on the reasons we left our sons intact:
http://downrightdomesticity.blogspot.com/2011/10/why-we-chose-not-to-circumcise.html

A good critique of the new AAP statement by Doctors Opposing Circumcision:
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/pdf/2012-08-26A_Commentary.pdf
And another: http://www.circumcision.org/aap.htm

I think what sealed the deal for me was learning about the functions of the foreskin-- it's not just a flap of skin!
http://www.drmomma.org/2012/08/the-aap-2012-circumcision-policy.html

Also, keep in mind that the AAP is not infallible. There are many medical organizations that do not agree with the AAP's stance.

So I guess this is my yearly circumcision post. Above all else, be informed!