In the 1940s and 1950s circumcision became quite common. By the 1960s, 90 percent of all male newborns in the United States were being circumcised as routine procedure. Ten years later, however, opinion among doctors swung away from the belief that certain groups of women developed cancer of the cervix because their husbands were uncircumcised. It was concluded that the cause was actually lack of good male hygiene – which is not as much of a problem in this country as it is in some other parts of the world. Also, by the early 1970s, more physicians – though not all – were aware of the psychological harm that could come from circumcision after infancy, and circumcision of an older child was not suggested as frequently as in the past. Read his article on how he changed his mind here: www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org In 1971 a task force of the American Academy of Pediatrics concluded that there is no medical reason to recommend routine circumcision, and I voiced the same opinion in the 1976 revision of Baby and Child Care. I hoped that the controversy would then be settled once and for all. But today, there are again some physicians who favor routine circumcision because they are of the opinion (not substantiated by solid scientific proof) that circumcision will decrease, at least to a small degree, the risk of contracting various venereal diseases in adulthood. But many physicians, myself included, are unconvinced. One recent study did indicate that urinary tract …