Circumcision rates of newborn boys in the United States have significantly decreased in the past 30 years, according to CDC data released on Thursday.
The hospital procedure has dropped 6 percentage points, from 64.5 percent in 1979 to 58.3 percent in 2010, Reuter reports. The figures do not include circumcisions performed outside a hospital, in places such as religious institutions.
Circumcisions have been performed due to religious teachings. For example, parents of infant Jewish boys are obligated to have their child undergo the procedure. However, over the years it hasn't been religion that drives people to have their newborns circumcised, but rather potential health benefits.
It is a common belief that circumcised males have a reduced risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases or urinary tract infections in infants. However, there is little scientific evidence to suggest a circumcised penis is healthier for a man.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists released a statement in 2001, which was reaffirmed again in 2011, that there is not enough evidence to recommend the procedure. The American Academy of Pediatric also does not recommend newborn circumcision.
"Given this circumstance, parents should be given accurate and impartial information to help them make an informed decision," the ACOG stated. "There is ample evidence that newborns circumcised without analgesia experience pain and stress. If circumcision is performed, analgesia should be provided."
The issue of circumcision is a hot debate topic for doctors, researchers, parents and religious leaders worldwide. After Prince William and Kate Middleton's baby boy was born, people questioned if the duke and duchess would consider have little George circumcised.
Pediatrician Dr. Harvey Karp talked to HuffPost Live about Prince George's possible procedure, which has been a past tradition in the royal family:
"Traditions are hard to break. ... Now, actually, we're kind of coming into a newer phase where there is medical evidence that has been accumulating that argues that circumcision may be healthier in the long run," Karp said. "There have been studies that show that the foreskin can trap viruses, fungus and bacteria underneath it ... [and] that predisposes babies to urinary tract infections and to infections of the head of the penis itself."
Talks about the royal baby's possible circumcision reignited the debate. What do you think about the decline of circumcision? Should parents have their child undergo the procedure? Leave a comment below.
