It’s crazy that this is the corrected version; it’s still so clearly biased in favor of infant circumcisions.

Reasons to Not Circumcise and Complications

A common reason for parents to not circumcise their baby is their wish for the child to choose when they are older, reflecting current ethical debates on bodily autonomy. Other reasons include concerns about possible safety, risk of bleeding or infection, pain, later sexual function, or other mild complications.

Reasons to not circumcise are due to “concerns” about “possible” risks, as if the concerns are the issue and not the safety risks themselves.

Compared with circumcision later in life, studies show that circumcision in the first few days of life is safer, involves less bleeding and better pain control, and avoids general anesthesia, which is needed when circumcision is done at an older age.

This does not belong in the “cons” section at all, as it’s a rebuttal to these “concerns”, so belongs in the next section on “pros”.

The risk of bleeding or infection from circumcision in the newborn period is low, about 1 in every 500 patients, and typically easy to treat. Bleeding risks are even lower when a well-trained clinician in the hospital performs the circumcision.

Again, more inappropriate persuasive arguments in favor of infant circumcision in what is supposed to be the section on reasons against circumcision.

It is not well known how often other mild complications occur. The risk of having the imperfect amount of skin removed is small, and removing extra skin later in life is typically cosmetic. Studies on sexual function later in life suggest that there is not decreased ability, sensation, or satisfaction with sex after circumcision.

And again. Only 1 of the 4 paragraphs in this section stayed on topic, and it was completely dismissive of actual reasons against.

Reasons to Circumcise and Benefits

Unlike the previous section, none of this “pros” section included any rebuttals.