More than a Snip

Re-examining Infant Circumcision

by Angela Starks and illustrations by Annie Internicola, November 24, 2008

Being from England, I reached adulthood without even knowing that there was such a thing as the routine circumcision of newborn boys. In Europe it is rare, and it is estimated that between 80 and 95 percent of men worldwide are uncircumcised. But when I married an American and gave birth to a boy in the Hudson Valley, I learned that most boys are circumcised as a matter of course in the US. I informed my husband that I was against it for our child and he agreed. A few decades ago this would have been a radical choice: 85 percent of American boys in the 1980s were routinely circumcised. But that has fallen to an average of 55 percent nationwide, with just 23 percent in the western states. This decrease is partly a result of immigration from countries where it is not practiced but may also be due to factors such as a gradual change in our perception of the custom and a greater awareness of medical facts.

Ninety percent of circumcisions in the US are done electively for nonreligious reasons, and it is these nonreligious ones that this article largely addresses. Still, it is worth noting that this ancient practice is often entwined with culture, ritual, and emotion. For Jews and Muslims, it represents a covenant with God. Traditionally, these faiths interpret the Bible to require boys to be circumcised, whether as infants, or later as a rite of passage.

J.P. of New Paltz (who asked that we use only his initials) is of Jewish heritage, yet he decided that he would “never allow” his son to be circumcised either for religious or medical reasons. “For me it was a no-brainer” he says. “I encountered a lot of protest from my family and in-laws. But to me, circumcision is a hold-over from less enlightened times.”