States stop circumcisions funds amid budget crisis

June 24, 2011 By IVAN MORENO , Associated Press
Nurse Angie Hagen tends to a new born baby boy in the nursery at Denver Health medical facility in Denver on Thursday, June 23, 2011. Colorado will end coverage for routine circumcisions under Medicaid next month, adding to what's become a national debate over the once widely-accepted procedure. The change will take effect July 1. Lawmakers agreed to end funding as part of a package of cuts to balance the budget. (AP Photo/Ed Andrieski)

(AP) -- A nationwide debate about circumcisions for newborn boys, combined with cash-strapped public health budgets, has Colorado taking sides with 17 other states that no longer fund Medicaid coverage of the once widely accepted procedure.

For years, Colorado lawmakers considered doing away with funding for circumcisions under - a move that would save the state $186,500 a year. Now facing a seismic estimated to be $1 billion at the beginning of this year, lawmakers finally approved the change, which takes effect July 1.

"We were just looking at virtually every option and trying to decide what was absolutely urgent now," said Republican Sen. Kent Lambert, a member of the budget-writing Joint Budget Committee. "I think 99 percent of it was completely economic."

The matter of circumcisions has gotten contentious in California, where San Francisco will be the first city to hold a public vote in November on whether to ban the practice.

Jewish and Muslim families are challenging that proposal in court, claiming it violates their right to practice their religion and decide what's best for their children. Supporters of the ballot initiative say is a form of genital mutilation that parents should not be able to force on their children.

Matthew Hess, the president of the group behind the San Francisco proposal, called the Male Genital Mutilation Bill, applauded Colorado's move and said he hopes it will lead to a drop in the circumcision rate.

"That's a good thing, because paying someone to amputate a healthy functional body part from an unconsenting minor is not just a waste of taxpayer money - it's also a violation of human rights," he said.

South Carolina is one of the most recent states to eliminate Medicaid payments for circumcisions amid budget concerns. The change, which went into effect in February, was expected to save the state about $114,800 a year. States that also no longer fund circumcisions through Medicaid include Arizona, California, Florida, Maine and Louisiana.

Scott Levin, the regional director of the Mountain States office of the Anti-Defamation League, said Jews are unlikely to be affected by the defunding of Medicaid payments for circumcisions. For them, the procedure is not performed by a hospital physician, but a mohel - a specialist trained in Jewish ritual circumcision.

Levin said his group is more concerned about places like San Francisco that are trying to ban the procedure because Jewish people see the ritual as one of their religion's most sacred.

The World Health Organization reported that circumcisions are one of the most common procedures performed on newborn males in the United States, but the practice is not as common in the rest of the world. About 75 percent of baby boys in the U.S. are circumcised, compared to 30 percent elsewhere, the organization said. The figures refer to non-religious circumcisions.

Joanne Zahora, spokeswoman for the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, which administers health care programs for low-income families, said the research her organization has seen shows that circumcisions are not medically necessary.

But the procedure retains its supporters. Although the topic never became heated during the Colorado budgetary debate, some lawmakers spoke in favor of keeping the Medicaid funding. Among them was Democratic Sen. Irene Aguilar, a primary care doctor at Denver Health.

"It's really a pretty inexpensive procedure to perform, and so it's just a little penny-wise and dollar-poor," she said.

Aguilar argued that circumcisions reduce the rates of urinary tract infections, penile cancer, and also lower the rates of cervical cancer for men's sexual partners. She also said she worried that doing away with funding for circumcisions would be discriminatory for Jewish and Muslim people on Medicaid.

Lambert, from Colorado's JBC, said the topic is sensitive for most, but the question lawmakers faced really was whether the government has the money to pay for the procedure.

"I think the general answer was no," Lambert said.

shares

Related Stories

Recommended for you

Maternal diet could affect kids' brain reward circuitry

September 25, 2017
Researchers in France found that rats who ate a junk food diet during pregnancy had heavier pups that strongly preferred the taste of fat straight after weaning. While a balanced diet in childhood seemed to reduce the pups' ...

Exercise can make cells healthier, promoting longer life, study finds

September 22, 2017
Whether it's running, walking, cycling, swimming or rowing, it's been well-known since ancient times that doing some form of aerobic exercise is essential to good health and well-being. You can lose weight, sleep better, ...

Breathing dirty air may harm kidneys, study finds

September 21, 2017
Outdoor air pollution has long been linked to major health conditions such as heart disease, stroke, cancer, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A new study now adds kidney disease to the list, according to ...

Excess dietary manganese promotes staph heart infection

September 21, 2017
Too much dietary manganese—an essential trace mineral found in leafy green vegetables, fruits and nuts—promotes infection of the heart by the bacterium Staphylococcus aureus ("staph").

Being active saves lives whether a gym workout, walking to work or washing the floor

September 21, 2017
Physical activity of any kind can prevent heart disease and death, says a large international study involving more than 130,000 people from 17 countries published this week in The Lancet.

Frequent blood donations safe for some, but not all

September 21, 2017
(HealthDay)—Some people may safely donate blood as often as every eight weeks—but that may not be a healthy choice for all, a new study suggests.

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.