Your column about infant circumcision [January 28] contained erroneous information. The enclosed remarks by Dr. John Taylor should clarify that “God’s little mudguard” is not basically ordinary skin. It is a highly specialized organ that serves several distinct and important purposes. Arguments about penile cancer and urinary tract infections may be enough to scare American physicians into perpetuating this dubious practice, but the fact is that 85 percent of the world’s males are uncircumcised. Enclosed are two articles from just 35 years ago which seriously promoted female circumcision. It will not be long before we look back with equal horror on male circumcision. Violating the genital integrity of an innocent child of either sex by submitting him or her to unnecessary surgery when s/he cannot consent is genital mutilation and a violation of human rights. –Tim Hammond, National Organization to Halt the Abuse and Routine Mutilation of Males (NOHARMM), San Francisco
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
We do have a diversity of opinions here, don’t we? To address the points raised in these and similar letters:
Circumcision reduces the chances of getting AIDS and other venereal diseases. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the evidence for this is conflicting.
