NEWS
EVENTS
To Snip or Not To Snip That Is The Question
Other | Tuesday 21st August 2012 | Osh
I was having a conversation with a friend of mine over coffee not so long ago and somehow the conversation turned to the topic of penises.
Yes I know a strange topic of conversation for lime tart and black coffee, but what I did garner from this discussion is that on a personal level there are a number of reasons why a child is circumcised and why he is not. My friend happens to be Jewish and thus the reason for his snip becomes one of tradition and religion and one, might I add that he is very pleased with. However recent statistics by the World Health Organisation indicates that in the UK male circumcision is at a rate of about 9% in comparison to the United States who see levels of over 75 %.
It seems however that the rate of circumcision around the world is becoming a topic of not when but if, unlike in previous years when to be uncircumcised it was feared, would lead to poor health, infection and bullying.
According to a recent BBC article, In the US, the popularity of circumcision dates back 140 years to Dr Lewis Sayre, one of the founders of the American Medical Association, says David Gollaher author of Circumcision: A History of the World's Most Controversial Surgery.
Sayre believed that many medical conditions had their root in a dysfunction in the genital area, and that circumcision could be used to treat a startling array of problems, from depression to mental health issues, syphilis and epilepsy.
Circumcision was also promoted as a way of discouraging masturbation, and was regarded as clean and hygienic. It was particularly popular among the higher classes, and was seen as a sign of being well-off enough to afford a birth at hospital rather than at home.
Meanwhile in the US, circumcision came to be so widespread, "it became part of how people viewed the normal body," says Gollaher.
It had become a cultural norm, he says, transferred from generation to generation, from father to son, and from doctor to trainee - but it is a norm that is increasingly being challenged.
But why is it now being challenged? The 1990 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child brought into the global psyche a greater emphasis on the subject under the light of child autonomy. Broadly introduced was the idea that although only a child, the parent does not have sole dominion over the body of their child, especially when the child is unable to make that decision for themselves.
No longer does the very present fear of fathers, that their son will not look like them, or that they will be subject to teasing due to their “difference”, remain a relevant argument for circumcision. And parents are beginning to question the necessity of the act and whether the physical hurt is worth it to maintain social norms.
It seems that in some medical circles male circumcision was a panacea for all aliments and a way to make all men equal in the downstairs department. However trends, especially in Europe are changing as a recent move by the German government indicates. In June this year there was like, the Royal Dutch Medical Association in 2010, a ruling which argues that circumcision of boys “conflicts with a child’s right to autonomy and physical integrity”. The outcome is such that Germany has stated that there is a solid case for banning the practice but stopped short of this, recommending instead a “powerful policy of deterrence”.
On the flip side, it is not so easy to frame the issue as archaic or socially outdated for those throughout the world who choose this surgery for their little boys for religious or cultural reasons. Without the health motivation it becomes a completely different kettle of fish, one fuelled by centuries of strict tradition as well as spiritual and emotional wellbeing. In these circles, all good reasons to continues the practice.
Within the Jewish religion, circumcision is compulsory and seen as a covenant between God. While in the Muslim religion this practice is also very much a religiously motivated norm, that is often carried out both as a newborn but also later on in life. So how to deal with the religious and human rights contention that circumcision presents? In Europe where the practice is less frequent several countries have made recommendations. Norway’s ombudsman for children's rights proposed Jews and Muslims replace circumcision with a symbolic ritual, while some MPs have called for minimum age of 18. While a state in Austria and two hospitals in Switzerland have temporarily suspended circumcision in response to Germany’s June ruling, but have most recently resumed operations. However in Sweden it has been determined that all circumcisions must be done within the first two months of a child’s life, under anaesthetic and by a registered physician or nurse, in order to limit the increased negative effects brought about by further penile development in older children and adults.
In the US, although rates are declining by roughly one percent a year, the overall number remains high, as it does in countries like Australia and Korea. It is an issue often compared to Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) in some circles and certainly when I was studying this in university it was indeed strongly compared. However sufferers of FGM and supporters of male circumcision find the comparison offensive due to the barbaric methods and reasons for FGM. But in the end the decision rests with the parents, and I think it’s fairly safe to say that whatever decision, it will be done in the child’s best interest within the religious and cultural understandings of those particular parents.
As trends begin to change more rapidly throughout the western world it will now be a matter of becoming better educated about circumcision whether it be maintaining it due to tradition or discarding it in light of changing social norms.
By Saabeah Aforo-Addo
