December 21, 2003

The Editor
Canadian Family Physician
2630 Skymark Ave
Mississauga, ON    L4W 5A4

Re:  Rivet C. Circumcision and Cervical cancer: Is there a link?. Can Fam Physician 2003;49:1096-7.

To the Editor:

Dr. Christine Rivet's (1) favorable review of Castellsagué's et al defense of circumcision is another reminder of why I am constantly astounded by the self-serving arguments promoted by circumcisers claiming the latest and greatest benefit to be had by amputating the most sensitive, protective, and sexually important part of the penis from non-consenting infants.  Since its introduction into medical practice during Victorian-era notions of sex and hygiene, circumcision of males in the English-speaking countries has been touted as a cure-all for everything from alcoholism to asthma, curvature of the spine, enuresis, epilepsy, elephantiasis, gout, headache, hernia, hydrocephalus, insanity, kidney disease, rectal prolapse and rheumatism. (2)  In the face of rationality and modern research,  contemporary circumcisers have abandoned most of these claims but replaced them with cancer, urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted diseases, and other pathologies. Currently, circumcision advocates stand completely isolated from all major peer medical organizations, not one of which endorses infant circumcision as a preemptive prophylactic measure.(3)  This is one of the reasons founding director of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law, Dr. Margaret Somerville, considers circumcision to be criminal assault.(4)

Simply stated, the normal, natural prepuce of males or females is not a pathological birth defect requiring amputation by the medical profession. The sexual organs of human beings are at the very apex of natural selection, developed over millions of years to maximize human sexual experience and protect against disease.  Yet time and again circumcisers claim their amputations are an improvement over what nature has created.  The arrogance, greed, and ignorance of this position can only be categorized as self-serving barbarism masquerading as medical practice. Lawyers are beginning to take note of this, and men who were circumcised as children are pressing litigation in the courts.(5)  If physicians cannot find the moral fiber necessary to end this altogether unnecessary and harmful cultural cutting, then let the lawyers have their day.  Perhaps then, primum non nocere will have sufficient meaning to stop this gratuitous sexual assault on children.

Rio Cruz, PhD
Executive Co-Director
International Coalition for Genital Integrity
Email: info@icgi.org
Web: http://icgi.org

We recognize the inherent right of all human beings to an intact body.
Without sexual, racial or religious prejudice, we affirm this basic human right.

The International Coalition for Genital Integrity is an alliance of 26 organizations dedicated to protecting the normal anatomy of males and females. Its members include healthcare professionals, psychologists, researchers, attorneys, journalists, ethicists, academicians, and concerned citizens dedicated to ending unnecessary genital cuttings.
____________________________

References

1. Rivet C. Circumcision and cervical cancer. Is there a  link? [Critical Appraisal]. Can Fam Physician 2003;49:1096-7.

2 Gollaher D. L.  From Ritual to Science:  The Medical Transformation of Circumcision in America.   Journal of Social History. Fall 1994; 28 Number 1: 5 - 36.

3. See: http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/

4. Somerville M. A. The Ethical Canary: Science, Society, and the Human Spirit Toronto: 2000. 344

5.  See:  http://www.cirp.org/cgi-bin/htsearch