American Medical Association takes irresponsible and ill informed position on male circumcision!
by Marc Angelucci:
Today the Los Angeles Daily Journal printed Marc Angelucci’s op-ed responding to the American Medical Association’s irresponsible and unexamined 11/15/11 statement that male circumcision has documented health benefits.
The AMA completely disregarded what national medical associations worldwide are saying, and based on some of their responses on Facebook it appears they didn’t even read them. The AMA’s announcement on its Facebook page has well over 150 very critical comments from the public about this decision. See:
Interestingly, two of their members answered by admitting this was somewhat of a quick decision. One of them, Sam Mackenzie, said this was made with only “limited debate,” and he offered to draft a resolution for reconsideration at their June meeting, and he said that the AMA’s report “stated that there was very limited testimony arguing against the resolution. The limited debate was framed around intrusion of patient choice and physician practice, not on the merits of circumcision. I’m not saying this is appropriate–just that it’s what happened. Second, this was submitted as a late resolution; hence, it was not privy to discussion on the online forum before the meeting. A strong case could have been made for referral to a council, for example, the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. In hindsight, this would have been my preferred action, but as a medical student, I was focused on other issues, for example, those centered around Medicaid revisions and cuts to GME funding.”
Marc Angelucci
Vice President NCFM
they waited until the end on purpose. so no one could fact check and counter it due to lack of time to prep. (circumcision: it’s a personal choice) thats a flat out lie. personal choice meaning ones own choice regarding there own ming/body. but the child can't make a choice. so they are saying that its one of the parents personal sexual preference choice. that could be summed up in one word INCEST.
Yes, resolutions passed near the end of days-long conferences are often faulty, because many have left and the rest want to get away.
Infant circumcision is ALWAYS a violation of patient choice, since the infant is the patient, not his parents. His human rights trump "the merits of circumcision" since the great majority of men in the world get on very well without it – and would do you violence if you tried to do it to them.
It really shows just how much some doctors love money compared to how much they love their patients which is really sad.