Joseph4GI: CIRCUMCISION DEATH: 7yo Dies in Bishek, Kyrgyzstan Post-Circumcision

This happened last month, and I've been sitting on it because I've been busy with life and work, but I figured, better late than never.

I can't read the original news article anymore because it's now behind a paywall, but the opening line says it all; A 7-year-old boy died in the Bishkek Children's Hospital, Bishek, Kyrgyzstan on April 2nd this year.

The headline says that an autopsy was not performed.

Outside of the United States, circumcision is performed on boys of varying ages. In Muslim countries, such as Kyrgyzstan, circumcision is performed on children between the ages of 7 and 13.

Some circumcision advocates love to say "death doesn't happen when it's performed on newborns." Jewish advocates love to say "death never happens when performed on the 8th day." Of course, they say this because this is when Jewish boys are customarily circumcised.

None of this is true, however.

Death is a risk of circumcision, and it doesn't really matter at what age the circumcision is performed.

The risks of male infant circumcision include infection, partial or full ablation, hemorrhage and even death.

Quite possibly the most common of all complications is the child bleeding to death because the wound has failed to heal properly, and this will happen to any male, any age, whether it's performed by a ritual circumcisor or doctor.

Please see the long list of links below.

In 2012, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued their policy statement on male infant circumcision, where they state that "the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks," but at the same time, in the same policy statement, they say "the true incidence of complications after newborn circumcision is unknown." The statement concluded that "the benefits are not enough to recommend the procedure," while at the same time, that parents should be the ones to weight the risks and benefits for themselves, the risks of which are, by the AAP's own admission, unknown. In effect, the AAP absolves doctors who perform circumcisions on healthy minors of any responsibility, placing the onus on parents instead.

Because this is cosmetic, non-medical surgery, whether or not these risks are conscionable ought to be considered when performing it on healthy, non-consenting minors.

It is my view that, unless absolutely indicated, the decision of whether or not to circumcise should be left up to the individual in question, when he is of age, and after he has considered all the benefits and risks for himself.

The child was alive and well up until April 2nd last month, and had he not been circumcised he would still be alive.

Death is a risk of circumcision.

Are parents being properly informed about this?

Without medical or clinical indication, can doctors even be performing circumcision on healthy, non-consenting minors, let alone be giving parents any kind of "choice?"

Isn't it medically fraudulent to be profiting from non-medical procedures on healthy, non-consenting individuals?

And if one of said individuals dies, should doctors not be held liable?

Related Posts:

So Where's the "Sunat Party?"

No World Record for "Circumcision Party"

External Link:

AKIPress:7yo in died in Bihsek after circumcision, autopsy not performed

Further Reading:

CIRCUMCISION DEATH: 13yo Bleeds to Death in the Philippines

AUSTRALIA: One Child Dies, Another Nearly Bleeds to Death Post Circumcision

AFRICA: Two Boys Die Post-Circumcision Despite Thoughts and Prayers

FACEBOOK: Another Hemorrhaging Baby Post-Circumcision