Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2014 May;89(5):677-86.
doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.01.001. Epub 2014 Apr 2.

Circumcision rates in the United States: rising or falling? What effect might the new affirmative pediatric policy statement have?

Affiliations
Free article
Review

Circumcision rates in the United States: rising or falling? What effect might the new affirmative pediatric policy statement have?

Brian J Morris et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014 May.
Free article

Abstract

The objective of this review was to assess the trend in the US male circumcision rate and the impact that the affirmative 2012 American Academy of Pediatrics policy statement might have on neonatal circumcision practice. We searched PubMed for the term circumcision to retrieve relevant articles. This review was prompted by a recent report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found a slight increase, from 79% to 81%, in the prevalence of circumcision in males aged 14 to 59 years during the past decade. There were racial and ethnic disparities, with prevalence rising to 91% in white, 76% in black, and 44% in Hispanic males. Because data on neonatal circumcision are equivocal, we undertook a critical analysis of hospital discharge data. After correction for underreporting, we found that the percentage had declined from 83% in the 1960s to 77% by 2010. A risk-benefit analysis of conditions that neonatal circumcision protects against revealed that benefits exceed risks by at least 100 to 1 and that over their lifetime, half of uncircumcised males will require treatment for a medical condition associated with retention of the foreskin. Other analyses show that neonatal male circumcision is cost-effective for disease prevention. The benefits of circumcision begin in the neonatal period by protection against infections that can damage the pediatric kidney. Given the substantial risk of adverse conditions and disease, some argue that failure to circumcise a baby boy may be unethical because it diminishes his right to good health. There is no long-term adverse effect of neonatal circumcision on sexual function or pleasure. The affirmative 2012 American Academy of Pediatrics policy supports parental education about, access to, and insurance and Medicaid coverage for elective infant circumcision. As with vaccination, circumcision of newborn boys should be part of public health policies. Campaigns should prioritize population subgroups with lower circumcision prevalence and a higher burden of diseases that can be ameliorated by circumcision.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • In reply--Bias and male circumcision.
    Morris BJ, Bailis SA, Wiswell TE. Morris BJ, et al. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014 Nov;89(11):1588-9. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.09.002. Epub 2014 Nov 3. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014. PMID: 25444491 No abstract available.
  • Bias and male circumcision.
    Jenkins I. Jenkins I. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014 Nov;89(11):1588. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.09.001. Epub 2014 Nov 3. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014. PMID: 25444492 No abstract available.

MeSH terms