Neonatal Circumcision: What Are the Factors Affecting Parental Decision?

Neonatal Male Circumcision: Clearly Beneficial for Public Health or an Ethical Dilemma? A Systematic Review

Contrasting ethical and legal arguments have been made concerning neonatal male circumcision (NMC) that merit the first systematic review on this topic. We performed PRISMA-compliant keyword searches of PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, LexisNexis, and other databases and identified 61 articles that met the inclusion criteria. In the bibliographies of these articles, we identified 58 more relevant articles and 28 internet items. We found high-quality evidence that NMC is a low-risk procedure that provides immediate and lifetime medical and health benefits and only rarely leads to later adverse effects on sexual function or pleasure. Given this evidence, we conclude that discouraging or denying NMC is unethical from the perspective of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which emphasizes the right to health. Further, case law supports the legality of NMC. We found, conversely, that the ethical arguments against NMC rely on distortions of the medical evidence. Thus, NMC, by experienced operators using available safety precautions, appears to be both legal and ethical. Consistent with this conclusion, all of the evidence-based pediatric policies that we reviewed describe NMC as low-risk and beneficial to public health. We calculated that a reduction in NMC in the United States from 80% to 10% would substantially increase the cases of adverse medical conditions. The present findings thus support the evidence-based NMC policy statements and are inconsistent with the non-evidence-based policies that discourage NMC. On balance, the arguments and evidence reviewed here indicate that NMC is a medically beneficial and ethical public health intervention early in life because it reduces suffering, deaths, cases, and costs of treating adverse medical conditions throughout the lifetimes of circumcised individuals.

Psychological, psychosocial, and psychosexual aspects of penile circumcision

Policy statements on penile circumcision have focused primarily on disease, dysfunction, or sensation, with relatively little consideration of psychological and psychosocial implications of the procedure. There has also been minimal consideration of potential qualitative changes in the subjective experience of sexual activity following changes in penile anatomy (foreskin removal) or associated sexual biomechanics. We present a critical overview of literature on the psychological, psychosocial, and psychosexual implications of penile circumcision. We give consideration to differences among circumcisions performed in infancy, childhood, or adulthood. We also discuss potential psychosocial effects on parents electing, or failing to elect, circumcision for their children. We propose a framework for policy considerations and future research, recognizing that cultural context is particularly salient for the narratives individuals construct around penile circumcision, including both affected individuals and medical professionals who perform the surgeries. We argue that additional attention should be paid to the potential for long-term effects of the procedure that may not be properly considered when the patient is an infant or child.