Circumcision is a touchy topic for new parents, with cultural, religious and other social beliefs impacting ones decision.

The American Academy of Pediatrics announced earlier today its first major shift on a stance regarding circumcision in more than a decade.

As being published in the journal Pediatrics, “There is clear evidence that supports the health benefits of circumcision,” said Susan Blank, who led the 14-member task force that formulated the new policy.

The statement and the accompanying technical report marks the first revision of the organization’s position since 1999, when the academy took a step away from circumcision. The group, which represents about 60,000 pediatricians around the nation, concluded there to be no clear evidence for or against circumcising newborns.

As reported by NPR, since 2005, the popularity of circumcision in the United States has declined with only about 56 percent of newborn males getting the surgery.

The academy’s task force has spent the last seven years working on the latest research about the topic, analyzing over a thousand studies.

They concluded that there are health benefits to circumcision, including a 90% decrease in the likelihood of a urinary tract infection for the first year of life.

There’s also less of a risk for males to get infected with a large array of sexually transmitted diseases, as well as the risk of heterosexual HIV acquisition. It also reduces the likelihood of passing HPV to their wives and girlfriends, according to the research.

There definitely are a handful of critics commenting on the latest announcement from the American Academy of Pediatrics, with some saying that the scientific evidence is questionable. Some also find the academy’s position to be overdue, and that the group should have gone further to recommend officially the procedure to be done.

What do you think? Do you have a stance on the particular issue? Feel free to post about your position in the comments.