Here is some food for thought:
The rate of unexplained infant deaths (SIDS) is 35% higher in male infants in states that have Medicaid funding for infant circumcision. In these states, circumcision rates are 50% higher. Death rates in girls do not show similar disparities.
So why are Maine Democrats trying to get circumcision added back to Medicaid? To kill more boys?
@ttpphd To get the votes of the religious nutcases whose god commands them to mutilate their children, presumably. Politicians' job is to do what their constituents want.
Based on these data, it's estimated that 200 to 400 babies are killed by their circumcision each year in the United States. Circumcision has no health benefits and is a violation of the child's right to bodily integrity.
Please consider contacting your #Maine state senator to tell them that you don't want your tax dollars being used to kill boys. Tell them to vote no on covering circumcision with #MaineCare, Maine's version of #Medicaid. Save lives and stop genital cutting.
@ttpphd Besides the obvious ethical problems with genital mutilation, it's pretty shocking that, even after all these years of research and practice, it still carries a statistically significant risk of harming the child. You'd think the procedure would have been just about perfected by now.
There is a lot of resistance to change. For a doctor to admit that circumcision is harmful is to admit that they have done harm to children. Their ego resists.
@ttpphd That is pretty shameful. It should have been immediately obvious that cutting off pieces of people would hurt them, create a risk of infection, and so on. It was obvious to me when I was a kid.
Also, the thought of my surgeon being egotistical is frightening.
Add comment