Tuesday, February 28, 2017

LAW SUIT: Child Loses "Significant Portion" of Penis During Circumcision


According to a recent news report, parents in Carbon County PA have filed a lawsuit seeking damages for negligence, after a doctor cuts off a 0.3-inch portion of their child's penis, permanently scarring and disfiguring him. (Circumcision already permanently scars and disfigures, but this one would be particularly scar and disfigure beyond what is acceptable.)

The lawsuit names Dr. Stephen R. Glicken, who carried out the procedure on July 20th of last year, three days after the child's birth. Additionally it names Lehigh Valley Hospital Hazleton, Lehigh Valley Physician Group Hazleton and the Lehigh Valley Hospital and Health Network as defendants.

The lawsuit alleges that the medical staff failed to transfer the partially amputated part of their son's penis on ice, causing it to be in a condition that would make its reattachment to be "unlikely to succeed and could result in additional complications."

The parents have been told that their child's penis will never have a normal appearance, and will never achieve the size it would have achieved otherwise.

Thoughts
Without medical or clinical indication, how is it that doctors can be performing surgery on healthy, non-consenting minors?

Let alone give parents any kind of "choice?"

Male infant circumcision carries risks.

The risks include infection, partial or full ablation, hemorrhage and even death.

Were this child's parents fully informed of these risks?

How is it conscionable that a child be put at these risks for elective, non-medical surgery?

The AAP and other American medical organizations whose members stand to gain from the procedure like to downplay the risks of male infant circumcision.

As much as they want to deny the risks even exist, the risks are real, and it's sad that people only get to hear about them when stories like these make the news.

It must be remembered that not all the botches and deaths make the news.

Doctors and hospitals have financial incentive to keep these stories under wraps, and they're not required to report their number of deaths and complications.

Is the AAP etc. actually counting?
Related Posts: 
CIRCUMCISION BOTCHES: Colombia and Malaysia

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: This Time in Russia 

FACEBOOK: KENTUCKY - Botched Circumcision Gives Newborn Severe UTI


MALE INFANT CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Boy Dies

CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Dies

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yet Another One (I Hate Writing These)

Another Circumcision Death Comes to Light

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yes, Another One - This Time in Israel

FACEBOOK: Two Botches and a Death

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Child Dies After Doctor Convinces Ontario Couple to Circumcise

ONTARIO CIRCUMCISION DEATH: The Plot Thickens

Joseph4GI: The Circumcision Blame Game
 
Phony Phimosis: How American Doctors Get Away With Medical Fraud  
 
FACEBOOK: Another Circumcision Mishap - Baby Hemorrhaging After Circumcision
 
What Your Dr. Doesn't Know Could Hurt Your Child
 
FACEBOOK: Child in NICU After Lung Collapses During Circumcision
 
EMIRATES: Circumcision Claims Another Life
 
 
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: Circumcision Claims Another Life
 
TEXAS: 'Nother Circumcision Botch

Thursday, January 26, 2017

Mayo Clinic Proposes Training Neonatal Nurses to Cut Circumcision Costs


According to a recent news article, a new "study" authored by Mayo Clinic suggests that training neonatal nurse practitioners to perform circumcisions instead of having specialists do them could save somewhere between 100 to 200 million dollars every decade.

"If we could get our colleagues across town to do it, (and) if we could get people in New York to do it, this would save a lot of money for society," said author of the study Dr. Dennis Costakos.

There are a few problems with this line of thinking.

First, attention needs to be brought to the fact that cutting costs for a non-medical surgery on healthy, non-consenting individuals is being considered.

Since male infant circumcision is non-medical surgery conducted without any medical indication whatsoever, not to mention that the procedure is not without the risk of complications, one must wonder why money is being spent, even being made on the procedure at all.

Circumcision is performed on 1.3 million babies in the US yearly. At a dollar each, that's already a 1.3 million dollar a year industry. Hospitals can charge as much as $2000.00 for a circumcision. That's as much as 2,600,000,000 dollars a year.

For non-medical surgery.

Second, enough complications due to circumcision already occur as it is with specialists performing this non-medical surgery. The risks include infection, partial or full ablation, hemorrhage and even death.

Different sources cite different complication rates for different reasons. For one, doctors can't seem to agree as what constitutes a "serious complication." For another, complications aren't always reported, as doctors nor hospitals are required to disclose this information, and they have financial incentive, as can be seen above, to minimize, even hide this data.

But even if we were to go with the commonly cited conservative number of 2%, at 1.3 million babies, that's 26,000 babies who will suffer adverse affects.

For non-medical surgery.

And that's with "specialists" on the job.

Now Mayo is suggesting the job should be pawned off on nurse practitioners?

To save 100 to 200 dollars a decade?

That's 10 years.

Circumcision is worth as much as 2.6 trillion.

Thirdly, the only "cost" doctors at Mayo seem to be considering when it comes to male infant circumcision is the procedure itself. Should there be complications, and it happens to at least 2% of males circumcised a year, repair and treatment would also be an added cost.

Because circumcision would not be performed by specialists, wouldn't it be expected for this rate to rise?

Thereby actually increasing costs?

Because repairing circumcisions isn't free?

So hold the phone.

Instead of working to shave off a few mil, why aren't doctors calling to end this practice which is basically a freebie for American doctors?

70% of the world's men aren't circumcised, and there simply isn't an epidemic of all the horrific diseases circumcision advocates try to scare American parents with.

In the industrialized world, the US is the only country still routinely circumcising its male newborns.

The great majority of the circumcised 30% were circumcised out of cultural or religious custom.

Less than 1% of men ever have a medical problem that calls for circumcision.

Any "benefit" circumcision is supposed to afford is already easily afforded by less invasive, more effective means.

So why isn't it a problem that doctors are reaping profit from circumcision at all?

Billions, if not trillions of dollars a year could be saved if doctors simply stopped soliciting this non-medical surgery.

There are millions who need health care resources for medical needs.

Why are we spending millions on this ethically questionable practice with "benefits" already easily affordable without surgery?

It's amazing how disconnected educated medical professionals can be.

Clearly the doctors at Mayo are out of touch with reality.


Related Posts:
Circumcision Botches and the Elephant in the Room

Tuesday, January 24, 2017

Exec' Order to Defund Int'l Planned Parenthood Signed - GOOD


According to Life News, our new president has signed an executive order defunding International Planned Parenthood.

I'm not a fan of our new president. And I'm not too keen on completely defunding Planned Parenthood, as they do provide many important services, as I've already said on another post.

However, as long as they're trying to normalize male genital mutilation, standing in the way of legislation that would defund elective, non-medical infant circumcision (though such defunding would be of zero consequence to them), and promoting male genital mutilation in Africa in the so-called name of "HIV Prevention," I say, GOOD.

Perhaps if they weren't so willing to throw the rights of boys and men under the bus in the so-called name of "women's health," I'd be singing a different tune.

Until I see them publicly change this stance, I'm afraid I can only agree that federal funds should be cut.

As a taxpayer, I don't want to be paying into an organization that tacitly approves of, defends, advocates for, even facilitates male genital cutting, and promotes "women's health" at the expense of men's health and choices.

Not all of us agree; some intactivists have different priorities.

But these are mine; any organization that promotes the forced genital mutilation of any sex needs to be defunded. At the very least, it shouldn't be paid for by the American tax dollar.

Disclaimer:
The views I express in this blog are my own individual opinion, and they do not necessarily reflect the views of all intactivists. I am but an individual with one opinion, and I do not pretend to speak for the intactivist movement as a whole, thank you.
~Joseph4GI

Related Posts:
INTACTIVISTS: Planned Parenthood is Not Our Friend

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Mutilated is the New "Normal"

NEW HAMPSHIRE: Bill to Defund Circumcision Heard - Dissenters Included Planned Parenthood and a Rabbi

RED HERRING: The Abortion Debate

Thursday, January 19, 2017

CIRCUMCISION BOTCHES: Colombia and Malaysia

Colombian boy left in a vegetative state after a circumcision

It seems that recently, reports of circumcision botches are coming to light all over the world.

Just a few days ago, on January 17th, there was a report on a Colombian news show, 90 Minutos, about a child who was left in a vegetative state when he was circumcised 3 years ago.

The mother is trying to press charges on the doctor who has been since, nowhere to be found.

Not much detail is given about the boy's necessity to be circumcised, only that this was supposed to be an outpatient procedure, and that apparently, the doctor used too much anesthetic.

The YouTube video can be seen here:




It is not clear whether there was an actual medical indication, but given the recent history of circumcision, where doctors give phony excuses to circumcise healthy children, it may be possible that there was in fact none.

Another botch also made news reports earlier, this time in Malaysia.

According to Nation, 3 cases of botched circumcisions have come to light, and the Health Ministry is urging the child's parents to take the cases to court.

In South-East Asian countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, etc., both boys and girls are circumcised as a matter of religious course, as genital cutting is seen as religious sacrament there due Islam.

Unlike in America, boys in Muslim countries tend to be circumcised at later ages instead of as newborns.

According to one Dr. Subramaniam, "Hundreds of thousands of circumcisions were carried out every year in the country and that minor complications were bound to happen, but there were never any serious cases like these, even when traditional methods were widely used."

One of the victims, a 10-year-old boy, has to use a catheter and a urine bag after suffering severe damage to his penis. A portion of the boy’s private parts was severed by an assistant medical officer at a mass circumcision ceremony at a surau in Sungai Buloh on Nov 25.

The bleeding could not be stopped and the victim was rushed to Hospital Selayang.

The doctors were unable to reattach the head of the boy’s penis, which had already turned black.

The boy was then sent to a private hospital and underwent three surgeries, which were also unsuccessful.

In a different case, a nine-year-old boy had the glans of his penis severed during a circumcision at a private clinic in Jalan Ipoh on Dec 15.

And five days later, a 10-year-old boy lost the head of his penis as he was undergoing laser circumcision at a Taman Cheras Utama clinic.

The YouTube video for this report can be seen here:




It must be noted that both male and female circumcision are an ingrained part of the culture in South-East Asia.

These are cultures who, like America, should be used to this custom, and whose doctors, having done thousands of circumcisions, should be assumed to be well-trained.

In cases like these, circumcision advocates like to chant the old adage "Well if the circumcisions were performed by trained professionals, this wouldn't happen."

I don't think there could be any better trained professionals to do this than those who do it thousands of time for a living.

And they STILL happen.

It happens to trained doctors in America (The AAP gives a complication rate of 2%. What's 2% of 1.3 million babies a year?), it happens to Jewish mohels, it happens in the hospital, it happens when using the best equipment.

And the question must be repeated; how is this conscionable considering that circumcision is non-medical surgery, performed on healthy, non-consenting minors?

These are healthy children with no medical need for surgery we're talking about.

How is the complication rate anything above ZERO???

Instead of questioning the method, the persons who did it, where it was done, what setting, age, sex, WHATEVER, why aren't we questioning the need to circumcise ITSELF???

These children are going to suffer for the rest of their lives.

All for needless genital cutting.

Circumcision has risks.

The risks include infection, partial or full ablation, hemorrhage and even death.

Are these worth it for non-medical surgery?

For "benefits" already easily attainable through non-surgical means?

Related Posts:
CIRCUMCISION DEATH: This Time in Russia

FACEBOOK: KENTUCKY - Botched Circumcision Gives Newborn Severe UTI

FACEBOOK: Circumcision Sends Another Child to NICU - This Time in LA 

GEORGIA: Circumcision Sends a Baby to the NICU

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: This Time in Italy


INTACTIVISTS: Why We Concern Ourselves

MALE INFANT CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Boy Dies

CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Dies

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yet Another One (I Hate Writing These)

Another Circumcision Death Comes to Light

 CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yes, Another One - This Time in Israel

 FACEBOOK: Two Botches and a Death

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Child Dies After Doctor Convinces Ontario Couple to Circumcise

ONTARIO CIRCUMCISION DEATH: The Plot Thickens

Joseph4GI: The Circumcision Blame Game
 
Phony Phimosis: How American Doctors Get Away With Medical Fraud 

FACEBOOK: Two More Babies Nearly Succumb to Post Circumcision Hemorrhage
 
FACEBOOK: Another Circumcision Mishap - Baby Hemorrhaging After Circumcision
 
What Your Dr. Doesn't Know Could Hurt Your Child
 
FACEBOOK: Child in NICU After Lung Collapses During Circumcision
 
EMIRATES: Circumcision Claims Another Life
 
BabyCenter Keeping US Parents In the Dark About Circumcision
 
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: Circumcision Claims Another Life
 
TEXAS: 'Nother Circumcision Botch

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: This Time in Russia


Circumcision claims yet another life. This time, it happened in Russia.

According to the Moscow Times, a 3-yo boy at Krasnoyarsk, Russia, died following a circumcision performed at home.

The child underwent a circumcision at home on Jan. 6, performed by a surgeon summoned by his mother. The boy became seriously ill, and his mother tried to treat her son with various medicines. The boy as never even taken to the hospital, and he died at home.

Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights, Anna Kuznetsova, says criminal charges should be brought against the parents of a three-year-old boy, and that they must be held accountable for his death, regardless of whatever religious reasons they had for circumcising him at home and denying him proper medical attention.

But Yulia Zimova, a member of a presidential council on family issues, says that criminal charges would be inappropriate, given that the deceased boy’s parents “have already been punished by fate.” (Aw, poor parents...)

Before attempting to dismiss this case "because it wasn't performed in a medical setting," I'd like to remind readers that children have died in the hospital or clinical setting.

And I'd like to remind readers that in most, if not all cases, there was no medical or clinical indication.

Death is a risk of male infant circumcision, whether performed by "trained professionals" or amateurs with box cutters.


For other cases that have made the news, see the related posts below.

These are cases that have surfaced; there will be other cases that have not made the news because doctors and parents are complicit in keeping them secret, and American medical organizations whose members profit from male infant circumcision, aren't interested in documenting male infant circumcision deaths.

Death is a risk of male infant circumcision.

Are parents being properly informed of this risk?

Related Posts:
MALE INFANT CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Boy Dies
CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Dies

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yet Another One (I Hate Writing These)
CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yes, Another One - This Time in Israel
FACEBOOK: Two Botches and a Death

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Child Dies After Doctor Convinces Ontario Couple to Circumcise

ONTARIO CIRCUMCISION DEATH: The Plot Thickens
Another Circumcision Death Comes to Light
EMIRATES: Circumcision Claims Another Life
INTACTIVISTS: Why We Concern Ourselves
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: Circumcision Claims Another Life

Saturday, December 31, 2016

Carrots and Mushrooms: My Awakening to the Circumcision Issue


In this blog entry, I retrace my steps to when I first became aware of circumcision, and how deeply it was ingrained in American culture. Up until a certain point, it hadn't dawned on me that having anatomically correct male genitalia could be any kind of concern in the country where I was born and raised. I had known somewhat about circumcision, but until something prompted me to actually start looking up circumcision, I was blissfully unaware.

It all happened one afternoon at high school. I must have been 15 or 16 years old. It was during a P.E. class, and we were all walking from the gym to the football field to do our routine run around the track. All students had just finished changing into their P.E. clothes, and we were all walking slowly out of the locker rooms, slow enough that one could hear casual conversations among students. (At my high school we didn't get naked nor shower in front of each other, so no one ever saw each other naked. Cut and intact status was unknown amongst us.) I overheard a conversation among a group of 3 or four students. A male friend was pontificating to a group of 2 or 3 girls on the truths of the male penis. "Circumcised penises look like mushrooms, and non-circumcised penises look like carrots," the guy said. "Oh! So that's the difference," I heard one of the girls say. "Yes." They all agreed. It all sounded so matter-of-fact.

I remembered thinking "Circumcision? Now let's see... where have I heard this before... Circumcision, circumcision... Oh yes! This is something Jews do to their children as newborns." At that time, what I knew about circumcision was second-hand information, and limited to what I'd heard about. For example, I knew that circumcision was some important ritual for Jews. I think I've mentioned before on this blog, that I came from a very conservative protestant church that was very pro-Israel, very pro-Judaism. This church would have rabbis come speak, they would hold menorah lightings at Chanukkah, some homes had metzuzot on their door frames, and sometimes male members would wear yarmulkas to church. Now that I think of it, how pretentious and silly! I hope some members didn't take it as far as circumcision. I'm almost sure that some members thought they were being more Jewish by opting for circumcision for their children at hospitals. If Jewish scholars like Leonard Glick are correct, that's not the way it works.

I first became aware of circumcision as a religious ritual by overhearing others discuss it at bible studies. As far as I knew, it was something Jews did, but wasn't required by Christians because we've got baptism. Being called "uncircumcised" was supposed to be an insult in the Bible from Jews to non-Jews, and not being circumcised was, I guess, a problem back then. So I knew from a young age that not being circumcised could be seen as a problem by some, but I wasn't sure to what extent. To be sure, even though I knew there was a difference, I wasn't quite sure what that difference was, and what it actually meant to be circumcised.

I remember that one time I asked my mother this question. My father and some friends who were over at our house were having a bible study one day, and one of the topics that came up was circumcision. I must have been eight or nine. I take my mother to a different room and I ask her "Mom, what's circumcision? Why is it talked about in the bible?" The way she explained it was "Well, in Jewish families, when a boy is born, they cut off a little bit of skin from his little bird." (That's what she used to call it.) "Oh." I thought. "That's what this is all about? Cutting off a little bit of skin off a child's pee-pee? Doesn't sound like too big of a deal. Why is this always a big deal when people discuss it in the bible?" But those were just thoughts in my head. With my mother I just said "Oh! OK..." And that's where the conversation ended.

The image I had in my head following that conversation was light years away from the reality that is circumcision. I imagined someone taking a knife or blade and literally just taking a small piece of top layer of skin from the top of the penis. I didn't even think it had anything to do with the sleeve of flesh that covers the head of the penis. As a child, I thought maybe the piece of skin may be taken from the glans of the penis itself. I had absolutely no idea that circumcision actually meant taking a blade and actually cutting off the entire flesh hood covering the head of the penis to leave it exposed and raw.



My idea of circumcision as a 8 or 9yo...
In retrospect, circumcision may be closer to this...
Except it's not removing a top layer of skin,
but cutting off an entire sleeve of flesh.

At some other point, a few years later, my father would try to introduce me to the ritual of circumcision in his own way. I must have been 13 at this point. How did he do it? He showed me the movie "Europa, Europa." Before showing me the movie, he told me "This movie is a movie about the Jewish ritual of circumcision. It's right at the beginning of the movie, just so you know. It's about all the hardships that Jews have had to face, all because of circumcision," he briefed me before showing me the movie. So I watched the movie, and I thought "Now I'm going to see what it's all about. I'm going to see what was being talked about all these years." What I saw was a semblance of the ritual, people gathered, a baby screaming and a mohel there, but the movie didn't quite show the actual cutting. I think had the movie actually showed a real live circumcision, I might have been made an intactivist there and then. But it didn't happen this way.



After the movie, just like after any other holocaust movie, I felt real bad for Jewish people living in the Hitler era. It left me with the feeling of "Wow. It's so sad that Jews can't be allowed to practice their religion, and this is a part of their religion that they can't hide from anyone should they be stripped naked. When you're naked who is Jewish, and who is not is that obvious. And it's so sad that for Hitler to find out who is Jewish, all he had to do was strip people naked." I was left feeling sympathy for Jews and circumcision. Especially that last scene where two newly freed Jewish prisoners were allowed to "pee freely," to do something that you need to do every day without discrimination. It was touching. And now having grown up and being 35, kind of gross when I think about it... When a man is peeing, you look away, not check out to see if he's cut or not. But after seeing this movie, it makes you kinda wanna look, doesn't it.

Even after having watched that movie, the difference between circumcision and having anatomically correct male genitals wasn't clear. I think I can recall thinking that some guys' penises looked weird, that something was different about them, but I didn't put two and two together and thought that the reason was that those penises had been purposefully distorted to look that way. I can remember going to swimming classes and watching other men shower, and noticing that some men had funny looking penises. I think I can remember thinking to myself "Why do the ends of their penises look bulbous and discolored and dry like that? What's wrong with those men's penises?" At that time, I reasoned "It must be some genetic trait. Just like some people have outie belly buttons, and some people have innies, it must be that some people's penises just look that way." It hadn't dawned on me that I was looking at the results of circumcision.

Until that day in highschool when I heard the mushroom/carrot comparison. Even then, I was confused. I'm not circumcised, but I can assure you, when I get an erection and I pull back my foreskin, I most definitely have a mushroom. Even when I'm soft, I don't think my penis looks like a carrot. Maybe a bulbous, deformed carrot, but not really a carrot.

Hearing those words made me want to research what circumcision was once and for all. That same day, when I got home, I decided to look it up. Back then the big search engines were AltaVista and Ask.com. And that's how my interest in this issue all began.

I describe in another post my journey to becoming an intactivist. It would be a while after this before I would finally call myself an "intactivist." It was a difficult thing, coming to grips with how I really felt about male infant circumcision, and putting aside all that I was taught in childhood, that Jews were a special people who had suffered a lot, that circumcision was this important ritual for them etc. I felt, and continue to feel a pang of guilt when I think about it. I acknowledge that Jews have faced persecution for ages, and I understand that circumcision is an important rite for them. Even so, I have decided to break with my upbringing. I realize that in some people's eyes, this makes me look like an anti-Semite, and I accept this, for I feel that the forced circumcision of any sex, at any age, regardless of who does it, and for what reasons, is abuse, mutilation, and a gross violation of the most precious of human rights; the right to one's own body.

Life is short. You're born with one life, one body. Forced infant circumcision destroys this and condemns an individual with a damaged, maimed body for the rest of his life.

What does a human penis look like?

Before comparing it to mushrooms, carrots, anteaters, elephants' trunks or whatever, we must first ask ourselves, what does the human penis look like in its natural state? What does it look like left to be as nature intended it?

This is what the human penis is supposed to look like.

Anything outside of that is a forced, artificial phenomenon.

Related Posts:
I Remember

QUICK POST: "Just a Little Piece of Skin"

CIRCUMCISION: "Just a Little Piece of Skin?"

Male and Female Infant Circumcision: Which One is Worse?

Who am I? Why am I so against circumcision?

Intactivism: It's Not Just for Gentiles Anymore

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

FACEBOOK: Another Child in Critical Condition After Circumcision

Yet another circumcision botch from my Facebook news feed. These are way more common than circumcision advocates would like others to believe.

This one is unknown; the names have been blotted out for privacy.


What else can I say?

The foreskin is not a birth defect. Neither is it a congenital deformity or genetic anomaly akin to a 6th finger or a cleft. Neither is it a medical condition like a ruptured appendix or diseased gall bladder. Neither is it a dead part of the body, like the umbilical cord, hair, or fingernails.

The foreskin is not "extra skin." The foreskin is normal, natural, healthy, functioning tissue, present in all males at birth; it is as intrinsic to male genitalia as labia are to female genitalia.

Unless there is a medical or clinical indication, the circumcision of a healthy, non-consenting individuals is a deliberate wound; it is the destruction of normal, healthy tissue, the permanent disfigurement of normal, healthy organs, and by very definition, infant genital mutilation, child abuse, and a violation of the most basic of human rights.

Without medical or clinical indication, doctors have absolutely no business performing surgery in healthy, non-consenting individuals, much less be eliciting any kind of "decision" from parents.


Genital mutilation, whether it be wrapped in culture, religion or “research” is still genital mutilation.

It is mistaken, the belief that the right amount of “science” can be used to legitimize the deliberate violation of basic human rights.

The fact is 70% of the men in the world have anatomically correct penises, and there simply isn't an epidemic of "problems."

The highest prevalence of STDs including HIV can be observed in the US, where 80% of males are already circumcised from birth.

Only about 1% of males will ever need to be circumcised.

STDs are already better prevented with sex education and condoms.

The circumcision of healthy male infants is not medically necessary.

The risks of male infant circumcision include infection, partial or full ablation, hemorrhage, and even death.

Are American doctors fully informing parents of these facts?

Related Posts:
FACEBOOK: KENTUCKY - Botched Circumcision Gives Newborn Severe UTI

FACEBOOK: Circumcision Sends Another Child to NICU - This Time in LA 

GEORGIA: Circumcision Sends a Baby to the NICU

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: This Time in Italy


INTACTIVISTS: Why We Concern Ourselves
MALE INFANT CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Boy Dies
CIRCUMCISION: Another Baby Dies

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yet Another One (I Hate Writing These)

Another Circumcision Death Comes to Light
 CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Yes, Another One - This Time in Israel
 FACEBOOK: Two Botches and a Death

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: Child Dies After Doctor Convinces Ontario Couple to Circumcise

ONTARIO CIRCUMCISION DEATH: The Plot Thickens

Joseph4GI: The Circumcision Blame Game
 
 
Phony Phimosis: How American Doctors Get Away With Medical Fraud 

FACEBOOK: Two More Babies Nearly Succumb to Post Circumcision Hemorrhage
 
 
FACEBOOK: Another Circumcision Mishap - Baby Hemorrhaging After Circumcision
 
 
What Your Dr. Doesn't Know Could Hurt Your Child
 
 
FACEBOOK: Child in NICU After Lung Collapses During Circumcision
 
 
EMIRATES: Circumcision Claims Another Life
 
 
BabyCenter Keeping US Parents In the Dark About Circumcision
 
 
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: Circumcision Claims Another Life
 
 
TEXAS: 'Nother Circumcision Botch