By casting a cursory glance over any baby shower gift registry, you could be forgiven for thinking babies need a mountain of expensive equipment in order to survive. However, they're quite content with a lot less. All a baby really needs is love, attention, plenty of cuddles, somewhere safe and warm to live, and good nutrition. That'swhy my husband and I won't apologize for refusing to choose circumcision.
Personally, I think there are only a few circumstances in which the procedure is necessary. For instance, if a baby has a medical condition, or for religious reasons and purposes. As a student of world faiths and someone who has a Masters in religious education, I understand that for many Jewish and Muslim families circumcision is an important ceremony and a rite of passage.
However, most parents making the decision to allow their newborn baby to essentially have an amputation of an important body part, are not motivated by religious considerations at all. The "default" United States policy of promoting circumcision across the board is actually fairly unique. The United States has the world's highest rate of non-religious, neonatal circumcisions, at 57 percent, with the overall rate climbing as high as 65 percent. Globally, circumcision rates are much lower, as low as 15 percent in the UK and only 1-2 percent in Finland and Denmark.
So, while I am in no position to tell someone else what to do with their child, I am of the belief that, for the most part, circumcision is a wildly unnecessary procedure. That, among the following reasons, is why I refuse to apologize for taking a hard pass on the circumcision debate.