For many decades of the twentieth century, American physicians both recommended and presumed consent for routine infant circumcision. The American Academy of Pediatrics sharply revised its policy position (1999) to hold that circumcision was strictly a cultural and/or religious consideration with no medical consideration. A decade later, the AAP again revised its policy position (2012) citing two medical benefits—reduced risk of UTI for the first year of life and reduced risk of STI/STD later in adulthood. (There might also be an indirect risk reduction of penile cancer due to reduced risk of HPV (as an STI), but the HPV vaccine is now approved for males). However, the 2012 policy revision acknowledged that the data only showed that the statistical benefit was greater than the statistical risk of the procedure. Infant circumcision was therefore categorized as an acceptable medical procedure only; the data dud not establish infant circumcision as a necessary medical procedure.Continue Reading