4 Comments

I'm not sure how to understand some of Del Monte's comments without more context. A lot of this is coming out of left field for me. Is there really an effort to roll back child abuse protection? Is it a violation of a child's rights for parents to have a voice in public education?

To the point, it is clearly a total contradiction of the AAP's approach to newborn circumcision for him to WORRY that "the rights and privileges of children are determined exclusively by the choice, the religion, the philosophy, the decision making of parents." That is same spineless approach that has been used to perpetuate circumcision for the last decade. Talk about trying to have your cake...

Expand full comment
author

Your second paragraph is the point I'm making. The larger context, I believe, was that he was commenting on the movement against gender-transitioning children, vaccine mandates, and "woke" ideas in schools.

Expand full comment

I guess that if you follow that line of thinking, then vaccination is a child's right, and therefore so is circumcision. That is the only way for his comments to be logically consistent. Hearing that kind of talk makes me wonder if there are decision-makers at the AAP who would push for a more strongly worded statement in favor of routine circumcision, i.e. recommending it for all newborn boys.

Expand full comment
founding

It really is a stain on the AAP that they can't see genital cutting for what it is.

"are very much very much connected" ==> are very much connected

"parental rights as a as a term" ==> parental rights as a term.

"or deny that there's such such a" ==> delete second "such" token.

"the only the only" ==> "the only"

Expand full comment