Everything I've read concerning the Islamic stance on circumcision usually quotes Islamic scholars saying that it is obligatory for men unless there is a physical condition that may harm them if the procedure is carried out. It is also said to be 'an honour' for women. While perhaps not a technical requirement from the quran, any reader would be left in no doubt that muslim men are required to be circumcised regardless of the age they convert. My impression is that non- circumcision for muslims is definitely the exception, not the rule.
When I read modern 'studies' about the benefits of circumcision, almost always, the names of the doctors/ researchers are usually jewish, indicating that the research is carried out with the goal to justify a procedure that is deeply embedded in the jewish culture.
In litigious societies , like the U.S. , surely its only a matter of time before circumcised boys seek damages from their parents for forcing on them an un-asked for medical procedure that is potentially dangerous and if done incorrectly, can cause life-long physical problems, (scarring, pain). In 2016, the fact that a parent has the right to request a physically altering medical procedure on their children based solely on their religious beliefs is hard to believe.