Neonatal male circumcision is the most common surgical procedure performed on pediatric patients. While the rate of neonatal circumcision in the United States has been dropping, circumcision continues to be frequent, ranging from 42% to 80% among various populations. While the cultural debate over circumcision continues, recent evidence of medical benefits led to a revision of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) circumcision policy statement. In contrast to the 1999 AAP policy statement, the 2012 policy asserts that the preventive benefits of neonatal circumcision outweigh the risk of the procedure, which is well tolerated when performed by trained professionals, under sterile conditions, and with appropriate pain management. This Circumcision Policy Statement has also been endorsed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and a similar policy statement is in place from the American Urologic Association. Despite the new recognized health benefits found by the 2012 Task Force of Circumcision (TFOC), circumcision remains controversial even among medical professionals. Other well recognized medical organizations including The American Academy of Family Practice and some international pediatric societies have not adopted such a strong endorsement of circumcision. The policy statements from these organizations continue to more closely resemble the 1999 AAP policy statement that stated, "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision." In this review we will summarize historical, cultural and ethical factors in neonatal circumcision and briefly compare common surgical techniques including anesthesia. In addition, we will discuss recent information regarding the benefits and risks of neonatal circumcision. Finally, we will discuss the financial reimbursement of practitioners and the benefits of standardized circumcision curriculum for trainees.