Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, By Jon Delano Tuesday, March 16, 1999
It was a tough week for American boys.
First, the Academy of Pediatrics issued its latest circumcision policy statement, advising, too late for most of us, that there is no real medical evidence to justify tampering with male genitals in the United States.
Then, contrary to the old saw that infants don't feel pain, the baby docs declared that when it comes to this little surgery, yikes, it hurts. The Academy says that hospital circumcision accompanied by tears and increased rates of heartbeat, blood pressure and oxygen levels should now include local anesthesia to reduce some of the surgical stress on a day-old boy.
Finally, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that a Boston bio-engineering company is "harvesting" foreskins to make a quasi-synthetic skin for burn victims and folks with skin disorders. While this may be a medical advancement, the notion of people walking around with someone else's foreskin is a bit bizarre, especially if it wasn't necessary to remove it from the kid in the first place!
Admittedly, I'm not an expert in these things. But like most parents, we confronted the circumcision dilemma when my son arrived a few years ago. After some Internet research, I concluded that America's medical community, and many parents too, have a hard time dealing with this issue.
How else do you explain why the United States is the only country left in the world in which hospitals, with parental consent, still circumcise boys without medical necessity?
While most Europeans, Asians and South Americans never picked up the habit, Australia, Canada and Great Britain - countries that once circumcised as much as we do - have dramatically reduced their circumcision rates, primarily through strong statements against the practice by their medical academies, good counseling by doctors to parents and the refusal of national health insurance to pay for it.
The result is that 85 percent of the world's males are left intact at birth unless, of course, there is a religious reason to circumcise - or you happen to be born in the USA. In America, 60 percent of baby boys go under the hospital knife. While that's down from the high rates of the 1960s - and on the West Coast only 36 percent of boys are circumcised - the national rate has not changed much over the past decade.
In figuring out what was best for my son, I tried to surmise why this country is out of step with everyone else. First, unlike its counterparts overseas, the U.S. medical community seems unable to speak with one mind on the subject. Trying to get a straight answer out of a doctor about circumcision is harder than getting the IRS to admit it's wrong on a tax bill.
"Don't do it," is the obvious conclusion after reading the latest 10-page report from the pediatricians. But most doctors use the "on-the-one-hand this and on-the-other-hand" that approach, leaving parents more confused than ever about the old myths of health and hygiene. And parents rarely hear about the purported benefits of not circumcising or the risks of the surgery.
Contrast this with other medical procedures, like tonsillectomy. A few decades ago, children's tonsils were removed as fast as their foreskins. Today, the procedure is rare, an absolute last resort. Doctors, not parents, made that happen.
Part of the problem may be that the baby docs, who do the research on the topic, are rarely present at delivery. In U.S. hospitals, circumcision of males, ironically, is usually done by obstetrician/gynecologists, experts in the anatomy of females. These doctors are competent, but let's face it, doing "circs" on boys is not exactly why they specialized in women's health care.
Increasingly, doctors blame parents for insisting on an unnecessary surgery for their sons. But if they are not given clear medical advice, what are parents to do?
Frankly, we fall back on non-medical rationales. "The everybody does it" refrain is still commonly heard if no longer valid. With 40 percent of American males born today left intact, 21st century high school locker rooms will have penile parity.
Frankly, my recollection is that we were more concerned about size, not style, anyway.
The other rationale for circumcision makes even less sense but is better psychoanalyzed by others. "He should look like me," some dads insist, but of all the places to look like dad, well, you get the point. It's a peculiar argument anyway. Most parents born in the 1950s and 60s had lots of things done to their bodies that they should never wish on their kids. Besides, if Prince Charles, who is circumcised, could leave his two sons intact, why can't the rest of us?
In the end, what convinced us not to circumcise our son was the ethical issue. If there is no medical or religious reason to do it and the social justifications seem silly, then what right do we have to remove a normal, healthy part of our son's body?
The latest pediatric statement recognizes the ethical issues in circumcising a non-consenting infant, but defers the decision to the parents. Still, when it comes to that body part, who better to make the choice than the guy who has to live with it - or without it!
Besides, my son can always have it done when he's old enough to pierce his nose, tattoo his buttocks and knowingly donate his foreskin to some biotech firm in Boston.
Jon Delano, a local attorney, political analyst and parent of two, teaches at Carnegie Mellon University's H. John Heinz School of Public Policy & Management.
Copyright 1997-2005 PG Publishing. All rights reserved.
UK National Survey
Scotland's National Newspaper
5,000 women polled
Half the women said that if they became pregnant by another man but wanted to stay with their partner, they would lie about the baby's real father.
Forty-two per cent would lie about contraception in order to get pregnant, no matter the wishes of their partner.
Devotion and betrayal, marriage and divorce: how evolution shaped human love.
Associated Press, USA
June 1, 2004
South Korean husband successfully sues wife for Paternity Fraud and gets marriage annulled. Wins $42,380 in compensation Read More ..
Paternity Fraud Philippines
The Visayan Daily Star, Bacolod City, Philippines, BY CARLA GOMEZ, February 28, 2009
Bacolod Regional Trial Court Judge Ray Alan Drilon has annulled the marriage of a Negrense couple after a DNA test showed that the child borne by the wife was not the biological offspring of the husband who works abroad.
The family court judge ruled that the marriage of the couple, whose names are being withheld by the DAILY STAR on the request of the court, was null and void.
Due to fraud committed by the wife in getting her overseas worker husband to marry her, properties acquired during their marriage are awarded in favor of the husband, the judge said in his decision, a copy of which was furnished the DAILY STAR yesterday.
The judge also declared that since the overseas worker is not the biological, much less the legitimate father of the child of the woman, the Civil Registrar is ordered to change the surname of the child to the mother's maiden name and remove the name of the plaintiff as father of the child.
The complainant said he was working as an electronics engineer in the United Arab Emirates and on his return to the Philippines in 2001, his girlfriend of 10 years with whom he had sex, showed him a pregnancy test result showing that she was pregnant.
On receiving the news he was overjoyed and offered to marry her. Shortly after he went to Saudi Arabia to work, and his wife gave birth to a baby girl in the same year.
The birth of the child only five months after their marriage puzzled him but his wife told him that the baby was born prematurely, so he believed her, the husband said. Read More ..
The Daily Mail, UK
18th February 2009
An adulterous Spanish woman who conceived three children with her lover has been ordered to pay £177,000 in 'moral damages' to her husband.
The cuckolded man had believed that the three children were his until a DNA test eventually proved they were fathered by another man.
The husband, who along with the other man cannot be named for legal reasons to protect the children's identities, suspected his second wife may have been unfaithful in 2001.
BBC, U.K., September 25, 1998
Females 'stray to gather the best possible genes for their offspring'
Infidelity may be natural according to studies that show nine out of 10 mammals and birds that mate for life are unfaithful.
Experts found animals that fool around are only following the urges of biology.
New studies using genetic testing techniques show that even the most apparently devoted of partners often go in search of the sexual company of strangers.
Females stray to gather the best possible genes for their offspring, while males are driven to father as many and as often as possible.
"True monogamy actually is rare," said Stephen T Emlen, an expert on evolutionary behaviour at Cornell University.
Up to three million Britons may be wrong about who their real father is , experts claim. But using DNA paternity tests to discover the truth can cause its own problems.
BBC, U.K., May 16, 2003
Dad's got blue eyes, Baby brown...
When Tessa found out she was pregnant after fertility treatment, she felt a mix of delight and doubt.
This wasn't simply pre-baby nerves - she suspected that her husband might not be the father. For Tessa had started sleeping with a colleague when the stress of the ongoing treatment became too much.
Keen to build a family with her husband, she let him believe the baby was his. But her lover threatened to reveal all if she ended the affair, and Tessa soon fell pregnant again. This time, her lover started to make nuisance calls to her home.
Tessa had no choice but to tell her husband. "I said to him, 'I've had an affair and you may not be the father of my children.' So with that, he went up the stairs, got dressed and left. And that was it," Tessa says in Women Who Live a Lie, a programme for the BBC's Five Live Report.
THERE IS A story I used to find hilarious in my high school years about a not too bright man. He was light skinned, his wife was of similar hue, but their first child was born with very dark complexion (darker dan Bello, blacker dan Blakka).
When the man wondered aloud about the baby's complexion his wife assured him that the child was born dark because the child was conceived in darkness (they had sex with the lights off). The man accepted the explanation. Because he loved his wife dearly, he also ignored the fact that the child had other obvious signs of resemblance to the young dark skinned man who did their gardening. To fix the problem, the husband put flood lights, strobe lights, spotlights and forty other lights in the bed room so there would be no more darkness to create dark babies.
"Supporters of paternity identification bills point to a 1999 study by the American Association of Blood Banks that found that in 30 percent of 280,000 blood tests performed to determine paternity, the man tested was not the biological father." Read More ..
Volume of testing 310,490 for the 2001 study
The Supreme Court of Canada -
Cour suprÃªme du Canada
Father wins right to be named on birth registration forms. Read More ..
Michael Lautar was devastated when he learned his first wife was cheating on him, and then crushed to discover the then 5-year-old girl who called him "Daddy" wasn't really his daughter.
Next came the sucker punch.
Lautar is under court order to pay nearly $800 a month in child support and other expenses, despite the fact his ex-wife has admitted in Allegheny County court papers that Lautar is not the girl's father. The child was born during their marriage. After the couple divorced, the mother married the girl's biological father. The mother, the father and the daughter live together in Moon, according to papers filed in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court.
"I'm stuck in this rip-off, this fraud," said Lautar, 40, of North Strabane. "It's paternity fraud, is what it is. ... And the state is enforcing this fraud." Read More ..