Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine

A critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision

Brian J. Morris, Aaron A Tobian, Catherine A. Hankins, Jeffrey D. Klausner, Joya Banerjee, Stefan A. Bailis, Stephen Moses, Thomas E. Wiswell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In a recent issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Svoboda and Van Howe commented on the 2012 change in the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy on newborn male circumcision, in which the AAP stated that benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks. Svoboda and Van Howe disagree with the AAP conclusions. We show here that their arguments against male circumcision are based on a poor understanding of epidemiology, erroneous interpretation of the evidence, selective citation of the literature, statistical manipulation of data, and circular reasoning. In reality, the scientific evidence indicates that male circumcision, especially when performed in the newborn period, is an ethically and medically sound low-risk preventive health procedure conferring a lifetime of benefits to health and well-being. Policies in support of parent-approved elective newborn circumcision should be embraced by the medical, scientific and wider communities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)463-470
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
Volume40
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Male Circumcision
academy
infant
rhetoric
Medicine
medicine
Newborn Infant
Pediatrics
Medical Ethics
medical ethics
Insurance Benefits
epidemiology
health
evidence
manipulation
Epidemiology
parents
well-being
interpretation
Health

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Health(social science)
  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine : A critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision. / Morris, Brian J.; Tobian, Aaron A; Hankins, Catherine A.; Klausner, Jeffrey D.; Banerjee, Joya; Bailis, Stefan A.; Moses, Stephen; Wiswell, Thomas E.

In: Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 40, No. 7, 2014, p. 463-470.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Morris, Brian J. ; Tobian, Aaron A ; Hankins, Catherine A. ; Klausner, Jeffrey D. ; Banerjee, Joya ; Bailis, Stefan A. ; Moses, Stephen ; Wiswell, Thomas E. / Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine : A critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision. In: Journal of Medical Ethics. 2014 ; Vol. 40, No. 7. pp. 463-470.
@article{2b4481f1bfc5451d86644a738a245a11,
title = "Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine: A critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision",
abstract = "In a recent issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Svoboda and Van Howe commented on the 2012 change in the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy on newborn male circumcision, in which the AAP stated that benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks. Svoboda and Van Howe disagree with the AAP conclusions. We show here that their arguments against male circumcision are based on a poor understanding of epidemiology, erroneous interpretation of the evidence, selective citation of the literature, statistical manipulation of data, and circular reasoning. In reality, the scientific evidence indicates that male circumcision, especially when performed in the newborn period, is an ethically and medically sound low-risk preventive health procedure conferring a lifetime of benefits to health and well-being. Policies in support of parent-approved elective newborn circumcision should be embraced by the medical, scientific and wider communities.",
author = "Morris, {Brian J.} and Tobian, {Aaron A} and Hankins, {Catherine A.} and Klausner, {Jeffrey D.} and Joya Banerjee and Bailis, {Stefan A.} and Stephen Moses and Wiswell, {Thomas E.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1136/medethics-2013-101614",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "463--470",
journal = "Journal of Medical Ethics",
issn = "0306-6800",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Veracity and rhetoric in paediatric medicine

T2 - A critique of Svoboda and Van Howe's response to the AAP policy on infant male circumcision

AU - Morris, Brian J.

AU - Tobian, Aaron A

AU - Hankins, Catherine A.

AU - Klausner, Jeffrey D.

AU - Banerjee, Joya

AU - Bailis, Stefan A.

AU - Moses, Stephen

AU - Wiswell, Thomas E.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - In a recent issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Svoboda and Van Howe commented on the 2012 change in the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy on newborn male circumcision, in which the AAP stated that benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks. Svoboda and Van Howe disagree with the AAP conclusions. We show here that their arguments against male circumcision are based on a poor understanding of epidemiology, erroneous interpretation of the evidence, selective citation of the literature, statistical manipulation of data, and circular reasoning. In reality, the scientific evidence indicates that male circumcision, especially when performed in the newborn period, is an ethically and medically sound low-risk preventive health procedure conferring a lifetime of benefits to health and well-being. Policies in support of parent-approved elective newborn circumcision should be embraced by the medical, scientific and wider communities.

AB - In a recent issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, Svoboda and Van Howe commented on the 2012 change in the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy on newborn male circumcision, in which the AAP stated that benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks. Svoboda and Van Howe disagree with the AAP conclusions. We show here that their arguments against male circumcision are based on a poor understanding of epidemiology, erroneous interpretation of the evidence, selective citation of the literature, statistical manipulation of data, and circular reasoning. In reality, the scientific evidence indicates that male circumcision, especially when performed in the newborn period, is an ethically and medically sound low-risk preventive health procedure conferring a lifetime of benefits to health and well-being. Policies in support of parent-approved elective newborn circumcision should be embraced by the medical, scientific and wider communities.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84895920086&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84895920086&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/medethics-2013-101614

DO - 10.1136/medethics-2013-101614

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 463

EP - 470

JO - Journal of Medical Ethics

JF - Journal of Medical Ethics

SN - 0306-6800

IS - 7

ER -