"They said he could get cancer and infection," so the couple consented to what they believed was "a necessary evil." The decision is one she regrets, she said. "I was misinformed. I know now I had no right to make that decision for my son." She said she was "able to protect my next two boys, but it wasn't easy."

She told her doctor explicitly during the next pregnancy that she did not want her son circumcised, and was assured it wasn't required. After he was born, nurses resisted her insistence that a note be placed in his bassinet, instructing doctors not to perform the procedure. When a nurse came to take the baby for the night, Howard asked where she was taking him. "The doctor is here to do circumcisions," was the reply.

"It wasn't even our pediatrician. Another doctor was there to do them all. Circumcision has become so routine that for a parent who questions it, there's distress among the doctors and nurses. ... To request unnecessary surgery on an unconsenting minor should require a raft of legal documents," yet most health-care professionals simply assume that male infants will be circumcised, she said.

The practice "thrives on ignorance and is perpetuated by thoughtless tradition," she said. "It ignores the human rights of the baby. Autonomy over one's own body is a basic human right."

Steve Bulger, associate professor of philosophy and humanities at UVSC, said he believes it will take "50 to 100 years" for Americans to successfully demand legislation that prohibits circumcision of minors, though he has no objection to the practice for consenting adults.

"Parents are obligated to maximize the best interests of their children. To the extent that parents are making decisions that don't do that, then it becomes questionable. I'm willing to listen to the arguments regarding the benefits of circumcision, but at this point in time it doesn't seem to exist," he said, adding "locker room fear" is highly exaggerated as a rationale when a large percentage of males are no longer circumcised.

Utah is one of 12 states where Medicare does not pay for the procedure because it is not recognized as a medical necessity, he said.

No physicians or health-care professionals participated in the panel discussion. But several medical journals have published articles in recent years that contend there are potential health benefits associated with circumcision, when comparing men who have had the procedure with those who haven't.

Dr. Edgar J. Schoen, clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of California in San Francisco, wrote in the December 2007 issue of Canadian Family Physician that "compelling published medical evidence, particularly over the past 20 years, has shown that circumcision offers protection against multiple medical conditions."