Help Ban Genital Cosmetic Surgery on Children

Learn the facts about genital cosmetic surgery performed on children and use your influence as a healthcare professional to help make a difference in the lives of these children.

Updated:  

Reports of young girls in distant northeastern African countries pinned to the ground by female relatives and subjected to female genital mutilation with razors wielded by village circumcisers to satisfy the social norms of their cultures persist. Disturbing and shocking, thankfully this custom is unheard of in our country. 

But cosmetic genital surgery is a standard of care performed in hospitals across the United States on intersex babies. Surgery performed for the sole purpose of changing the appearance of non-standard sexual anatomy in order to satisfy social norms.  Social surgeries.

Intersex

What is intersex? An umbrella term for people born with variations in their sexual anatomy, intersex is when the external genitalia, reproductive organs, chromosomes and hormones fail to align in the expected binary fashion. It’s estimated 1-2% of babies are born with intersex traits but the incidence is not tracked. Many people do not know they have intersex characteristics until puberty, adulthood, or when an unrelated surgery incidentally reveals opposite sex organs, such as ovaries discovered in a male. 

At birth, doctors proclaim, “It’s a boy!” or “It’s a girl!” at first sight. But when a newborn infant presents with a small member combined with undescended testicles, that member could be deemed an enlarged privy parts. Is the newborn a male or female? It’s an untenable question. We can’t handle genital ambiguity. To be told their baby is neither clearly male nor female is terrifying to parents. 

But in the absence of pathology, surgery is not the solution to parenteral distress.  Humans are diverse in every way possible but as interACT: Advocates for Intersex Youth point out, being different does not mean being diseased.

Gender-normalizing Surgery

gender-cosmetic-surgery-children.jpg.deb8a7c3d79d47d44e7d1b28610b07e5.jpg

Termed “gender normalizing” by those who believe that sexual anomalies need fixing, these concealment-centered surgeries are often shrouded in secrecy, thus instilling shame.

The goal is to make these infants look as female or male as possible. Most babies are surgically re-designed to look like females as it’s considered easier to take away than to add. This may include redirecting the urethra, reducing the privy parts and creating a lady parts (infant vaginoplasty). Gonads and ovaries may be removed.

It sounds horrific but the initial surgery is only the beginning. There are usually multiple surgeries coupled with complications that include incontinence, sterility, and lack of sensation. Lifelong hormone replacement therapy is needed and many are left with significant scarring. Artificial lady partss need to be dilated regularly throughout infancy and childhood, causing emotional distress and physical discomfort.

Repeated exposure to anesthesia can have harmful effects on developing brains.

Dr. John Money: Case Study

This old but still prevalent concealment-centered treatment gained traction in the 1950s largely due to Dr. John Money, a psychologist affiliated with Johns Hopkins. He believed that children with “unfinished genitals” could easily be made into whichever sex was decided. It didn’t matter which sex one was born. What mattered was convincing genitalia.

The decision-makers for surgery were the doctor and the parents, with the doctor carrying a bias of authority. Parents have later said they weren’t given all the information needed and were unduly influenced at a time of heightened anxiety to make a decision in favor of surgery. Indeed, the situation was sometimes presented as a psycho-social emergency demanding immediate action if the child was to ever have a normal life.

One of Dr. Money’s patients was David Reimer, an identical twin boy born in 1965, whose member was completely destroyed in a botched circumcision. Eager to experiment with his nurture over nature theory, Dr. Money recommended sex-rearing David as a girl, assuring the devastated parents that as long as they started at an early age and never wavered, David need never be told he was born male.

Despite being called Brenda Lee, despite wearing frilly dresses and given dolls, despite the removal of his testes and the addition of a lady parts, Brenda acted like a boy, walked like a boy, sat like a boy, and even insisted on standing up to urinate like a boy. His childhood was marked by dreaded and traumatizing trips to Johns Hopkins, where he endured repeated medical genital examinations and exhibitions. He suffered deep confusion, humiliation and shame. Brenda finally changed his name to David and insisted on living as a boy at age 15.  

After a tragically tormented life marked by failed relationships and severe depression, David died of suicide by gunshot at the age of thirty-eight. Collateral damage included David’s twin brother Brian, who died of an overdose of antidepressants at the age of thirty-six. 

CA Senate Bill 225

Senate Bill 225, introduced by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco bans 4 types of non-medically required surgery on children under the age of 6.  Known as the Bodily Autonomy, Dignity and Choice Act, it’s civil rights on behalf of infants.

According to the Gender and Sexuality Development Clinic at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, a sense of gender identity starts between 3 and 5 years of age.

The bill delays all non-essential procedures until the child can participate in the decision and the parents have had time to absorb the information and sort out the situation.

California Medical Association (CMA) Opposition

Thus far, the CMA has been a powerful opponent. Despite the lack of evidence for nurture over nature, and despite evidence that surgery can cause unwanted irreversible conditions, CMA has opposed the bill.

But progress and momentum have begun. The new model calls for patient-centered care, not concealment-centered care. Two premier pediatric hospitals, Boston Children’s Hospital of Massachusetts and a Harvard teaching hospital, and Lurie Hospital of Chicago have ceased doing surgeries.  Lurie Hospital even apologized for what they call an “approach (that) was harmful and wrong”.

Help Do No Harm

Advocates and human rights groups recommend waiting until the child can participate in the decision. Medically unnecessary, irreversible procedures should be delayed. Teams of Difference of Sex Development (DSD) experts can provide sensitive and non-discriminatory care.

Join the World Health Organization, three former U.S. surgeons general and Human Rights Watch, the American Academy of Family Physicians, in calling for the end of these surgeries until research shows clear evidence of benefit. 

Similar legislation to CA SB 225 is expected in New York.

L&D nurses everywhere should educate themselves about the issue, identify their beliefs and provide support to their patients. CA residents, contact your CA State Assemblymember using Find My Rep and ask for their vote on SB 225. 

Thanks for reading this and your support is appreciated. I would love to hear your thoughts on this topic.

Nurse Beth,

Author, First-Year Nurse and How to Land Your First Nursing Job...and your next!


References

Colapinto, J. (2000). As nature made him: The boy who was raised as a girl. Toronto: HarperCollins Publishers.

Gutierrez, Melody. A new effort to ban cosmetic genital surgery on children launches in California legislature. 2021.  Retrieved January 16, 2021 

Intersex Care at Lurie Children’s and Our Sex Development Clinic. 2020. Retrieved Jan 11, 2020

17 minutes ago, Curious1997 said:

* I would explore those studies re are they being paid for the procedure and has it affected their conclusions? Also, invalidating those conclusions, does it imply previous procedures were unnecessary? Will there be any legal complications? 

I would consider which countries were involved, previous rates of infections, AND how many variables were unaccounted for? 

Who sponsored the studies, motives of the conclusions AND how many variables were unaccounted for? 

Notice the theme running through my comments? Variables? 

It is my hope that you also consider the confounding variables of the evidence in the studies that support your assertions. All the studies  that I have looked at hitherto, including several that I did not include herein have listed no conflict of interest. I will review the mentioned variables and their effect on the studies. If you can look at the studies that I have referenced and the studies in the systematic reviews and find any variables that were significantly overlooked and unaccounted, please inform me, as that would be gross negligence of phenomena that is quite important in society. Otherwise, this will be a futile engagement of covert hypocrisy. 

3 hours ago, macawake said:

If you are going to ask for well-designed RCTs, you should courteously provide the same or better level of evidence, not anecdotes and an opinion piece of two random authors whose motives cannot be substantiated. Sigh! 

2 hours ago, cynical-RN said:

It is my hope that you also consider the confounding variables of the evidence in the studies that support your assertions. All the studies  that I have looked at hitherto, including several that I did not include herein have listed no conflict of interest. I will review the mentioned variables and their effect on the studies. If you can look at the studies that I have referenced and the studies in the systematic reviews and find any variables that were significantly overlooked and unaccounted, please inform me, as that would be gross negligence of phenomena that is quite important in society. Otherwise, this will be a futile engagement of covert hypocrisy. 

The most significant variable I would look into is, men's psyche! Don't know about your mates, but mine lie like troopers if sex ever comes up. I don't believe a word they say but it's always in good fun and very entertaining. And, do you know any men except possibly die hard academics, or ones that are paid, who will tell the truth or succumb to questions or examinations etc? 

It's the psych nurse in me. 

Specializes in Hospice, Geri, Psych and SA,.
8 hours ago, Psychnursehopeful said:

So you haven't done any research on the issue. You also made a disparaging statement about a natural part of the male genitalia based off of personal experiences with partner's and patients, I'm assuming. This is exactly the type of thinking that those who practice and condone female genital mutilation.

Sorry, you're right I don't have a Phd in male reproduction, I didn't know that was required to respond to this post. I have washed and cleaned a lot of male genitalia over the years, and while my experience is purely anecdotal and is hardly universal, people make "disparaging" comments all the time based off of anecdotal experiences. I could be very wrong, and maybe it's not right but yes, foreskin is gross to me, even though it's perfectly natural. That said, if male circumcisions falls of out practice due to evidence that it serves no purpose, by all means I couldn't care less.

My thoughts on foreskin, are a far cry from the thoughts of those who feel women should be disfigured to the point of being unable to experience sex. Yes, I realize male circumcisions can decrease sensation but if it meaningfully effected the male orgasm you can bet money that it would not still be in practice.

Specializes in Hospice, Geri, Psych and SA,.
7 hours ago, cynical-RN said:

So the call for banning these procedures is entirely based on intersex infants? I thought there prevalence was correlated with the rise of the transgender movement. 

The procedures done on intersexed individuals are different than male or female circumcisions. For intersexed individuals the genitalia is repurposed. 

22 minutes ago, Curious1997 said:

The most significant variable I would look into is, men's psyche! Don't know about your mates, but mine lie like troopers if sex ever comes up. I don't believe a word they say but it's always in good fun and very entertaining. And, do you know any men except possibly die hard academics, or ones that are paid, who will tell the truth or succumb to questions or examinations etc? 

It's the psych nurse in me. 

It is seemingly apparent, if not evident that your premise is based on anecdotal experience. I was under the impression that we were challenging confounding variables that influence either the cause or effect within the studies. Nonetheless, anecdotally, my mates will occasionally embellish minor details of sexual encounters, but the overall experiences are pretty consistent and significant lies are easily detectable. Therefore, I do know men who will tell the truth under examinations if their integrity or dignity was on the line. 

2 hours ago, cynical-RN said:

It is seemingly apparent, if not evident that your premise is based on anecdotal experience. I was under the impression that we were challenging confounding variables that influence either the cause or effect within the studies. Nonetheless, anecdotally, my mates will occasionally embellish minor details of sexual encounters, but the overall experiences are pretty consistent and significant lies are easily detectable. Therefore, I do know men who will tell the truth under examinations if their integrity or dignity was on the line. 

I looked at both of the studies you suggested. The first appears to have a conflict of interest re the authors with no apparent explanation of the subjects 

2nd study, did not show how the diseases were contracted. And who or where was the control group? 

Specializes in ICU.
12 hours ago, TheMoonisMyLantern said:

Yes, I realize male circumcisions can decrease sensation but if it meaningfully effected the male orgasm you can bet money that it would not still be in practice.

Your logic is again flawed. Female genital mutilation affects a woman's orgasm as is still performed and promoted by the women who underwent the procedure. It's a cultural and religious practice just like male circumcision. Regarding your anecdotes. Consider that most patients we take care of don't manage most health issues well, that's why we're employed. If everyone was health conscious, fit and active the world wouldn't need as many health care professionals.

Specializes in Hospice, Geri, Psych and SA,.
23 minutes ago, Psychnursehopeful said:

Your logic is again flawed. Female genital mutilation affects a woman's orgasm as is still performed and promoted by the women who underwent the procedure. It's a cultural and religious practice just like male circumcision. Regarding your anecdotes. Consider that most patients we take care of don't manage most health issues well, that's why we're employed. If everyone was health conscious, fit and active the world wouldn't need as many health care professionals.

I understand that female genital mutilation is still supported by women who had it done to them, I find all of that to be tragic. Women have their sexuality so repressed that their culture demands they be mutilated and unable to fully experience sex. The point I was trying to make with my flawed logic is that the male circumcision is hardly on that level of destruction that female circumcision is.

 

4 minutes ago, TheMoonisMyLantern said:

I understand that female genital mutilation is still supported by women who had it done to them, I find all of that to be tragic. Women have their sexuality so repressed that their culture demands they be mutilated and unable to fully experience sex. The point I was trying to make with my flawed logic is that the male circumcision is hardly on that level of destruction that female circumcision is.

 

I echo your sentiments. Considering that nearly the entire world is patriarchal relative to power, if male circumcision affected an iota of orgasm, it would be outlawed pronto and emphatically. Your logic was not flawed. The burden of comprehension in this case is on the reader, but I appreciate your modesty. 

Specializes in ICU.
35 minutes ago, TheMoonisMyLantern said:

I understand that female genital mutilation is still supported by women who had it done to them, I find all of that to be tragic. Women have their sexuality so repressed that their culture demands they be mutilated and unable to fully experience sex. The point I was trying to make with my flawed logic is that the male circumcision is hardly on that level of destruction that female circumcision is.

 

Again flawed logic. Let's use an analogy to expose your flawed logic. If a surgeon wrongly amputates a foot is it any less detrimental than wrongly amputating a patients leg? From the patients perspective, no. Of course anyone could argue that one loss is greater than another.

If these anatomical structures evolved for function why remove them? Purely a religious and cultural norm. Of course when the norms we have followed are challenged we become irrational in their justification which is why you have such flawed logic on the issue. 

Specializes in Hospice, Geri, Psych and SA,.
8 minutes ago, Psychnursehopeful said:

Again flawed logic. Let's use an analogy to expose your flawed logic. If a surgeon wrongly amputates a foot is it any less detrimental than wrongly amputating a patients leg? From the patients perspective, no. Of course anyone could argue that one loss is greater than another.

If these anatomical structures evolved for function why remove them? Purely a religious and cultural norm. Of course when the norms we have followed are challenged we become irrational in their justification which is why you have such flawed logic on the issue. 

Female circumcision= sensation and ability to orgasm destroyed

Male circumcision= decreased sensation in some, ability to achieve orgasm unaffected

Which is more detrimental? The loss of sexual function and ability to achieve orgasm, or the possible loss of some sensation which can be treated pharmacologically or mechanically.

Sex is a basic human need, not being able to fulfill that need screws people up, not just a little but a lot, most women are unable to achieve orgasm after being mutilated, men are able to perform and fulfill that need. So, my conclusion is that female circumcision is a big problem, male circumcision's is not as big of a problem