Circumcision funds cut amid state budget woes

[daledo]

A nationwide debate about circumcisions for newborn boys, combined with cash-strapped public health budgets, has Colorado taking sides with 17 other states that no longer fund Medicaid coverage of the once widely accepted procedure.

For years, Colorado lawmakers considered doing away with funding for circumcisions under Medicaid — a move that would save the state $186,500 a year.

Now facing a seismic budget shortfall estimated to be $1 billion at the beginning of this year, lawmakers finally approved the change, which takes effect July 1.

"We were just looking at virtually every option and trying to decide what was absolutely urgent now," said Republican Sen. Kent Lambert, a member of the budget-writing Joint Budget Committee. "I think 99 percent of it was completely economic."

The matter of circumcisions has gotten contentious in California, where San Francisco will be the first city to hold a public vote in November on whether to ban the practice.

Jewish and Muslim families are challenging that proposal in court, claiming it violates their right to practice their religion and decide what's best for their children.

Supporters of the ballot initiative say male circumcision is a form of genital mutilation that parents should not be able to force on their children.

'Violation of human rights'
Matthew Hess, the president of the group behind the San Francisco proposal, called the Male Genital Mutilation Bill, applauded Colorado's move and said he hopes it will lead to a drop in the circumcision rate.

"That's a good thing, because paying someone to amputate a healthy functional body part from an unconsenting minor is not just a waste of taxpayer money — it's also a violation of human rights," he said.
Story: Jews, Muslims join to block vote on circumcision ban

South Carolina is one of the most recent states to eliminate Medicaid payments for circumcisions amid budget concerns.

The change, which went into effect in February, was expected to save the state about $114,800 a year. States that also no longer fund circumcisions through Medicaid include Arizona, California, Florida, Maine and Louisiana.

Scott Levin, the regional director of the Mountain States office of the Anti-Defamation League, said Jews are unlikely to be affected by the defunding of Medicaid payments for circumcisions. For them, the procedure is not performed by a hospital physician, but a mohel — a specialist trained in Jewish ritual circumcision.
Vote: Should state Medicaid funds cover infant circumcision? (on this page)

Levin said his group is more concerned about places like San Francisco that are trying to ban the procedure because Jewish people see the ritual as one of their religion's most sacred.

The World Health Organization reported that circumcisions are one of the most common procedures performed on newborn males in the United States, but the practice is not as common in the rest of the world.

Reduces infection rate?
About 75 percent of baby boys in the U.S. are circumcised, compared to 30 percent elsewhere, the organization said. The figures refer to non-religious circumcisions.

Joanne Zahora, spokeswoman for the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, which administers health care programs for low-income families, said the research her organization has seen shows that circumcisions are not medically necessary.

But the procedure retains its supporters. Although the topic never became heated during the Colorado budgetary debate, some lawmakers spoke in favor of keeping the Medicaid funding. Among them was Democratic Sen. Irene Aguilar, a primary care doctor at Denver Health.

"It's really a pretty inexpensive procedure to perform, and so it's just a little penny-wise and dollar-poor," she said.

Aguilar argued that circumcisions reduce the rates of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and also lower the rates of cervical cancer for men's sexual partners.

She also said she worried that doing away with funding for circumcisions would be discriminatory for Jewish and Muslim people on Medicaid.

Lambert, from Colorado's JBC, said the topic is sensitive for most, but the question lawmakers faced really was whether the government has the money to pay for the procedure.

"I think the general answer was no," Lambert said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43521266/ns/health/t/circumcision-funds-cut-amid-state-budget-woes/

More articles
Jews-Muslims-join-block-vote-circumcision-ban
(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43498844/ns/health-kids_and_parenting/t/jews-muslims-join-block-vote-circumcision-ban/)

circumcision-ban-appear-San-Francisco-ballot (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43082562/ns/health/t/circumcision-ban-appear-san-francisco-ballot/)

[phillipbbg]

Simple User pays.....get the kid to pay when he gets a job, after all its his choice ....isn't it? Some African tribes as well as in the past Aboriginal tribes performed this as a right to adulthood when the infants reached teenage years.......

As far as infections from the medical papers on the subject the greatest problem is lack of cleanliness , meaning the infants are not shown how to clean themselves properly of often enough. It seems to be more about a way of differentiating different religious groups, tattoos etc work just as well....

[jcocks]

Yeah plenty of research has shown that the whole thing of preventing penile cancer, etc etc is a load of BULL**** - it does nothing of the sort. And I just so also happen to agree with the position that it is a violation of the human rights of the baby.

I'm proud to say I'm complete and so are my male kids - I'd never force them to go through something that painful unless there was a GOOD medical reason for doing so.

[DNA]

My buddy just had a kid and was complaining that the circumcision was going to cost him money and i told him the same thing.
Don't do it.
Or at the very least, educate yourself on the subject before making any rash decisions.

[loveandgratitude]

Psychological Effects

THIS IS A COPY OF A LETTER BY DR.GOLDMAN TO DR. SUSAN BLANK, M.D.
New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
125 Worth St. Box 73
New York, NY 10013



Dear Dr. Blank

As the author of Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma, I have studied the psychological effects of circumcision. These effects are generally unrecognized by medical doctors, but they are a necessary part of evaluating the advisability of the practice. As you work on developing circumcision policy, I hope you consider the known and unknown psychological effects of circumcision.

Infant neurological development, clinical experience, trauma theory, and research on circumcised infants all support the conclusion that circumcision is traumatic. Circumcision results in extreme pain and significant increases in heart rate and level of blood stress hormone. Some infants do not cry because they go into shock from the overwhelming experience. Anesthetics, if they are used, do not eliminate the pain or the trauma. Long-term infant behavioral changes and disruptions in mother-child bonding due to circumcision have been observed. An MRI showed permanent changes to a circumcised infant’s brain.

Circumcision trauma has long-term effects. In a medical journal survey of 546 circumcised men who reported circumcision harm, the following effects and feelings were noted.

anger, rage, sense of loss, shame, sense of having been victimized and mutilated
low self-esteem, fear, distrust, and grief
relationship difficulties, sexual anxieties, and depression
reduced emotional expression, lack of empathy, and avoidance of intimacy

Some of these men wish they had been given a choice at a later time rather than having circumcision forced on them when they were too young to resist. The survey does not suggest that all circumcised men have such feelings or how common the feelings are, only that they persist in some circumcised men, and more research is needed. Lack of awareness and understanding of circumcision, avoidance of the discomfort of questioning circumcision, and fear of disclosure help to explain why many circumcised men do not express dissatisfaction. Medical societies in Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom recognize the long-term psychological risks of circumcision.

Some harmful effects may not be connected to circumcision because they appear many years later. Because circumcision is common in the U.S., its effects are common and interpreted as normal. Symptoms of circumcision trauma fit the symptom pattern of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). American discomfort with and avoidance of the topic is a PTSD symptom. Some people cannot even say the word "circumcision."

As a trauma, circumcision changes the brain. Does circumcision affect the prevalence of autism and ADHD which both occur about four times more often in boys than in girls? We do not know. Sudden infant death syndrome occurs more often in boys than in girls. The rise and fall of male infant mortality correlates with the rise and fall of the circumcision rate. Is circumcision a contributing factor? We do not know. Perinatal experience can affect later behavior. Other unexplored areas include testing male children and adults for changes in feelings, attitudes, and behaviors (especially antisocial behavior); physiological, neurological, and neurochemical differences; and sexual and emotional functioning. Of course, it would be unwise and irresponsible to recommend circumcision until we know the answers to these questions.

As discussed in my journal article "Circumcision Policy: A Psychosocial Perspective," those who participate in circumcision policy committees are subject to psychosocial factors connected with circumcision. Dealing with these psychosocial factors can start with recognizing the potential bias of committee members. For example, an effect of (circumcision) trauma is the compulsion to repeat it on others. Conflict of interest is not just financial. Members of circumcision policy committees should disclose their circumcision status, number of circumcisions performed, circumcision status of any male children, and religious or ethnic background. Disclosure of this information would help in the assessment of the credibility of the committee and its work. Members of such committees should be held to at least the same standard as peer reviewers. As stated by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions” should be disclosed, and reviewers “should disqualify themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if they believe it to be appropriate."

Medical organizations should also be aware of the potential legal implications associated with a flawed policy. A law journal article claimed that the failure to act in a scientifically responsible manner could make a medical organization liable for trade association misconduct connected with publishing negligent recommendations on circumcision.


Ronald Goldman, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Circumcision Resource Center
P.O. Box 232
Boston, MA 02133

[pickle]

I have to ask... is the title of this thread intentionally hilarious? Cuts?.... :no:

For the argument about cleanliness, it doesn't say much for parents that can't mention the importance of washing his todger in clear water does it?

There is no reason to do this to your kids (apart from some crazy 'tribal' rule to them), and from those that I know had it done, they hate the fact that they have lost the feeling that their uncut friends have.

[Mike Gorman]

I'm very much against forced male circumcision-for that is what it is-if it wasn't meant to be there, the foreskin would not be there.
From a sexual health point of view, yes the foreskin does make the glans more sensitive, and hence produce the full sexual experience
for the man. Being a 'complete' model, I have not experienced any negatives in having a foreskin. Damned silly practice.

[Carmody]

read what I've written on the act of circumcision. (search for posts by me on circumcision)

I feel it is a purposely introduced trauma, which is 'religiously speaking' done on a specific day of the child's growth (Judaism commands it be done on the 8th day). This is as if someone is trying to create a specific kind of wound up sociopathic low empathy response pattern in the human males of that specific religious group. To cry for the depths of love..but never reach it? Does this distance create a wound up being which is set loose upon the world, in order to wreak a certain kind of controllable havoc?

I'm very serious about this. I don't feel it has one damned thing do with anything other than what I just accused it of being about.

The given letter quoted above falls exactly into that same area of thinking. He is stating factual aspects.

I'm directly pointing my finger and accusing.

[Lettherebelight]

Circumcision of healthy newborn boys is an unnecessary procedure in today's modern world. It is understandable that some men would feel trauma from this, and my heart goes out to them.

Long ago in the middle eastern deserts, birthplace of circumcision, access to fresh water was limited. it was perhaps thought to be helpful as far as increasing hygiene, thus avoiding related conditions. Here in modern times, I think this practise will fade away.

Speaking as a mother, my natural response to someone approaching my healthy newborn with a knife is...Get lost! (and that's the nice version).

[pilotsimone]

I spent several years on parenting debate boards focusing on this very topic. I don't care to participate much anymore. I do, however, want to share an interesting article on the subject. I think the men on this forum are a definitely more secure than most, but it does a great job explaining why this subject is very personal to some men.

The Vulnerability of Men
by Vincent Bach

I have been gathering my thoughts on what I think is the primary force behind circumcision in our culture - circumcised men. I’m not discounting secondary forces such as Medicaid and other health insurance providers, kooky doctors, foreskin aftermarket, etc. However, if there weren’t so many circumcised males running around, I think the secondary forces would quickly disappear.

I see on the boards many times where a pregnant wife is frustrated when attempting to discuss the issue with her circumcised husband. She wants to leave her son intact but he won’t listen to reason. Well, the rest of this article is written specifically to try and offer some insight and suggestions for those ladies. I hope it helps someone. As an intact man who grew up and has lived among circumcised men, I think I have some insight into what drives their behavior on the issue of circumcision. Of course this doesn’t apply to all of them, but I think my generalizations may be useful for you in dealing with this issue with your husband.

First of all, you need to understand that circumcised men are cornered on this issue. They were circumcised without their consent and have no inherent knowledge of what being intact is like. Even though they rarely will discuss the issue, they are keenly aware that they have been surgically altered in a very private way. There are several ways for a man to deal with this issue but the safest way, psychologically speaking, is to believe at all cost that the surgery performed on them was an enhancement and is preferred by women. Confirmation of this belief is essential to their sexual self-image. Do I need to tell you that sexual self-image is a major issue for men? Didn’t think so.

Now put yourself in the shoes of the circumcised man. He asks for very little. All he wants is football on Sunday and to be assured that there is nothing wrong with his package. A nice bonus would be that women actually prefer it the way it is. Then along comes the newly pregnant wife and the issue of circumcision is no more personal to her than a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and she starts openly discussing it with him with all the casualness that she would with her gal pals down at the salon. Yikes! Batten down the hatch. Incoming torpedo!!!! At first the strategy is to dismiss her without appearing to be alarmed. He’ll probably toss back the usual "It's not clean" or "That could cause health problems" hoping this will scare her off since he assumes she’s heard those things before. He won’t seem particularly disturbed at first. Its part of being a man to not show vulnerability.

If this doesn’t work and the wife mentions that she heard otherwise, he’ll be shifting uncomfortably in his chair just a little but still keep his cool. At this point he may try plan B which is to make fun of you for your silly ideas. Maybe make a joke about turtlenecks. If you persist, he’ll bring out the ol’ "I want him to be like me" knowing you women are suckers for us men when we talk of bonding and emotional attachment - any kind. Finally, if this doesn’t work, he’s probably going to relate some made up or exaggerated story from his school days when some uncircumcised kid at school was teased mercilessly until he circ’d himself right in the middle of Shop class. The resulting low mark the kid received in Shop kept him out of Harvard and he had to settle for a life as a carnival worker. Do you REALLY want that for your son?

If you haven’t given in by this time, he is probably now showing signs of agitation. You’re close to getting the ol’ "I have the penis so I have the last word!" Most men won’t go beyond this point in the discussion. They will clam up and refuse to discuss it any more. If he’s particularly panicked, he’ll probably enlist the help of sympathetic family members or friends to weigh in on what a mistake it would be not to circumcise your son.

I think it's important to acknowledge that its perfectly understandable that our circumcised friends react this way. Men who have been circumcised have an extremely difficult dilemma. For them to acknowledge that the practice is unnecessary and harmful means that they must acknowledge a painful personal reality. For that reason circumcised men can be forgiven if they don't want to lead the parade in the fight against routine infant circumcision. I can empathize and therefore understand completely why so many men will voluntarily offer their sons up for the same procedure without giving it a second thought. To do otherwise opens them up to some vulnerable feelings that can be most unpleasant. Society puts lots of expectations on women but it also puts a couple on men. One of them is that he be sexually virile. You know - masculine, strong, potent GRRRRR!! I think many circumcised men accept without question and perpetuate the myths regarding the intact penis in order to cope with this particular expectation.

So, the problem is how do we save our son’s genitals without psychologically emasculating their fathers?

Hmm...well I think the first step is having a better understanding of just how personal an issue this is for him. The reason I spent so long discussing it is because it's extremely important and he’s not going to tell you about it.

Going into the discussion, you’ll be much better off knowing what’s really bothering him. Trust me, he really doesn’t give a hooey whether his son’s penis looks like his. What is important is that his bulb is not dimmed. Probably not a good idea to refer to the practice in initial discussions as genital mutilation (although it certainly is that). The thing that you need to get across to him with all your female charm is that you love him EXACTLY the way he is and wouldn’t change a thing. In other words, I think the best strategy is probably to build him up as high as you can before lowering this boom on him. The ship can only take a hit so big before going under. So get your armor out and start fortifying his self-image. What means everything to him is that he is the best lover and provider that you could ever hope for.

Please don’t use my lame words exactly. I ain’t got no feminine charm :-). I suspect you get it and can take it from here. Ironically, if you succeed, you’ll be giving your man a huge future reward in that his son will someday be a man and will know all too well the tremendous courage it took for his father to break with this barbaric custom and leave him intact. With circumcision rates falling drastically and RIC possibly even being illegal by then, I predict he’ll be forever thankful to the both of you. Good luck! Your son and family deserve your best effort.

Source (http://www.udonet.com/circumcision/vincent/vulnerability_of_men.html)

[blufire]

You know. . . .teaching a little guy how to clean his foreskin is no different than teaching a little girl to clean her labial folds.

The barbaric things we will do because we are told to do so . . . . . .

[Teakai]

I always thought that circumcison in the Western world was done as a religious thing, but I was researching the other day and found that Cosntatnine forbade Jews to circumcise any of the slaves in their household.
So - I wonder where and how it started.

[Carmody]

I have Jewish friend who married a non-Jewish woman. He fought against circumcision for his sons. He wanted them to have no part of it. She insisted until she won.

It's a crazy world....

[Carmody]

read what I've written on the act of circumcision. (search for posts by me on circumcision)

I feel it is a purposely introduced trauma, which is 'religiously speaking' done on a specific day of the child's growth (Judaism commands it be done on the 8th day). This is as if someone is trying to create a specific kind of wound up sociopathic low empathy response pattern in the human males of that specific religious group. To cry for the depths of love..but never reach it? Does this distance create a wound up being which is set loose upon the world, in order to wreak a certain kind of controllable havoc?

I'm very serious about this. I don't feel it has one damned thing do with anything other than what I just accused it of being about.

The given letter quoted above falls exactly into that same area of thinking. He is stating factual aspects.

I'm directly pointing my finger and accusing.

We have two religions that treat women like crap or property and another who disallows connection to the priesthood. And that last one's record on women is far from stellar or even handed.

So, in effect.... we have overall cast of sociopathic tendencies in the males within those religious groups..... all with some level of wiring damage from having parts of their body chopped off when newborns. This damage is below the consciousness threshold and it can't be fixed as they are not aware how deep how emotional, how fundamental and how underpinning it is ----of their psychology.

If you look at the record on the hidden hand of groups of people and the result of their intrusions, I'd say that this falls into similar category.

The odds of it being an accidental side effect approach zero.

The paradox can be cleared if one can emotionally accept the fact that circumcision is direct physiological manipulation of and within the religion and it's conceptual basis --deep within it's reasons for being. Ie, how it is being run from the inside by those who do not have the best interests of human beings in heart or mind.

the oldest documented origins of circumcision are from Egypt.

It figures. Some stories never loose their charm. It came from Egypt. Again. And again. And again.

I hope this is making more sense now.

~~~~~~~~


As well, for some reason I had put this Egyptian origins (oldest trail) in the post, had it come back to me a finished thing (return to thread after posting and read results of said post, yet this is missing when I get back!)

This also surrounded a major denial of service attack. Each time I try to do an action on the thread, or forum, I have to reset my router/firewall. This as they find my IP and block it again.)