Difference between revisions of "Routine Infant Circumcision"

From IntactiWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Add text and citation; Add LINKS section.)
m
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
'''RIC''' is an acronym for '''R'''outine '''I'''nfant '''C'''ircumcision.
+
'''{{FULLPAGENAME}}''' is the name for a surgical procedure that was outlawed by court decisions in the [[United States]] more than 1/2 century age. '''RIC''' is an acronym for '''R'''outine '''I'''nfant '''C'''ircumcision.
  
−
Mainly in the United States, boys are still [[Circumcision|circumcised]] in many hospitals immediately after birth. Very often, this is done without informing or asking the parents previously at all.
+
Mainly in the [[United States]], boys formerly were [[circumcised]] without [[Informed consent]] in many hospitals immediately after birth. Very often, this was done without informing or asking the parents previously.
  
−
The word ''routine'', when applied to non-therapeutic circumcision of boys is outmoded. Circumcision has not been 'routine' since court rulings started to require [[informed consent]] in 1972.<ref>[https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/cases/250 Canterbury v. Spence], 464 F.2d 772, 782 (D.C. Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1064 (1972)</ref>
+
The word ''routine'', when applied to non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] of boys is outmoded. Circumcision has not been 'routine' (done automatically as a standard practice) since court rulings started to require [[informed consent]] in 1972.<ref>[https://h2o.law.harvard.edu/cases/250 Canterbury v. Spence], 464 F.2d 772, 782 (D.C. Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1064 (1972)</ref> Anyone who uses the term ''routine infant circumcision'' today is displaying their ignorance.
  
 
Routine infant circumcision (i. e. non-therapeutic circumcision without consent) is an unlawful procedure for which damages may be recovered.<ref name="llewellnyn1995">{{REFjournal
 
Routine infant circumcision (i. e. non-therapeutic circumcision without consent) is an unlawful procedure for which damages may be recovered.<ref name="llewellnyn1995">{{REFjournal
 
  |last=Llewellyn
 
  |last=Llewellyn
−
  |first=David
+
  |first=David J.
 +
|init=DJ
 
  |author-link=David J. Llewellyn
 
  |author-link=David J. Llewellyn
 
  |title=Legal remedies for penile torts
 
  |title=Legal remedies for penile torts
Line 19: Line 20:
 
}}</ref>
 
}}</ref>
  
−
Routine infant circumcision no longer exists in the United States, except when a hospital or doctor makes an error for which they can be sued.
+
Routine infant circumcision no longer exists in the [[United States]], except when a hospital or doctor makes an error for which they can be sued. The phrase is outmoded and inaccurate so it should not be used to refer to non-therapeutic circumcision of boys. The [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] declared non-therapeutic infant circumcision to be an ''elective'' surgery decades ago (1989).<ref name="aap1989">{{REFjournal
 +
|last=Schoen
 +
|first=Edgar J.
 +
|init=EJ
 +
|author-link=Edgar J. Schoen
 +
|last2=Anderson
 +
|first2=Glenn
 +
|init2=G
 +
|author2-link=
 +
|last3=Bohon
 +
|first3=Constance
 +
|init3=C
 +
|author3-link=
 +
|last4=Hinman
 +
|first4=Frank
 +
|init4=F
 +
|author4-link=
 +
|last5=Poland
 +
|first5=Ronald
 +
|init5=R
 +
|author5-link=
 +
|last6=Wakeman
 +
|first6=E. Maurice
 +
|init6=EM
 +
|author6-link=
 +
|etal=no
 +
|title=Report of the Task Force of Circumcision.
 +
|journal=Pediatrics
 +
|location=
 +
|date=1989-11
 +
|volume=84
 +
|issue=4
 +
|pages=388-91
 +
|url=http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aap/#a1989
 +
|archived=
 +
|quote=
 +
|pubmedID=2664697
 +
|pubmedCID=
 +
|DOI=
 +
|accessdate=2021-08-03
 +
}}</ref> Use of the phrase "routine infant circumcision" or "RIC" is a sign of ignorance on the part of the user.
 +
 
 +
[[Circumcision]] of a minor boy currently requires the surrogate consent of one parent in the [[United States]], while in the [[United Kingdom]], the surrogate consent of both parents is required, so it cannot be done automatically or "routinely".
 +
 
 +
The alleged right of a parent to consent to a non-therapeutic, non-diagnostic surgical [[amputation]] of functional tissue from a boy's [[penis]] has been questioned.<ref name="bioethics">{{REFjournal
 +
|last=Committee on Bioethics
 +
|title=Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice
 +
|journal=Pediatrics
 +
|date=1995
 +
|volume=95
 +
|issue=2
 +
|pages=314-317
 +
|url=http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/95/2/314.full.pdf
 +
|pubmedID=7838658
 +
}} Reaffirmed May 2011.</ref> <ref name="adler2013">{{REFjournal
 +
|last=Adler
 +
|first=Peter W.
 +
|init=PW
 +
|author-link=Peter W. Adler
 +
|title=Is circumcision legal?
 +
|journal=Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest
 +
|date=2013
 +
|volume=16
 +
|issue=3
 +
|pages=439-86
 +
|url=https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1265&context=jolpi
 +
|accessdate=2020-05-08
 +
}}</ref>
 +
 
 +
{{SEEALSO}}
 +
* [[Informed consent]]
 +
* [[NNMC]]
 +
* [[United States of America]]
  
 
{{LINKS}}
 
{{LINKS}}
−
 
+
* {{REFjournal
−
* J. Steven Svoboda, Robert S. Van Howe, James G. Dwyer, ''[https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1166&context=facpubs Informed Consent for Neonatal Circumcision: An Ethical and Legal Conundrum]''. 17 J Contemporary Health Law Policy 61 (2000).
+
|last=Svoboda
 +
|first=J. Steven
 +
|init=JS
 +
|author-link=J. Steven Svoboda
 +
|last2=Van Howe
 +
|first2=Robert S.
 +
|init2=RS
 +
|author2-link=Robert S. Van Howe
 +
|last3=Dwyer
 +
|first3=James G.
 +
|init3=JG
 +
|url=https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1166&context=facpubs
 +
|title=Informed Consent for Neonatal Circumcision: An Ethical and Legal Conundrum
 +
|#publisher=Faculty Publications
 +
|volume=167
 +
|journal=J Contemporary Health Law Policy
 +
|issue=61
 +
|date=2000
 +
|accessdate=2021-11-12
 +
}}
  
 
{{REF}}  
 
{{REF}}  
  
 
[[Category:Acronym]]
 
[[Category:Acronym]]
−
[[Category:Laws]]
+
[[Category:Law]]
 +
 
 +
[[Category:USA]]
  
 
[[de:Routinemäßige Jungen-Beschneidung]]
 
[[de:Routinemäßige Jungen-Beschneidung]]

Latest revision as of 13:46, 7 May 2024

Routine Infant Circumcision is the name for a surgical procedure that was outlawed by court decisions in the United States more than 1/2 century age. RIC is an acronym for Routine Infant Circumcision.

Mainly in the United States, boys formerly were circumcised without Informed consent in many hospitals immediately after birth. Very often, this was done without informing or asking the parents previously.

The word routine, when applied to non-therapeutic circumcision of boys is outmoded. Circumcision has not been 'routine' (done automatically as a standard practice) since court rulings started to require informed consent in 1972.[1] Anyone who uses the term routine infant circumcision today is displaying their ignorance.

Routine infant circumcision (i. e. non-therapeutic circumcision without consent) is an unlawful procedure for which damages may be recovered.[2]

Routine infant circumcision no longer exists in the United States, except when a hospital or doctor makes an error for which they can be sued. The phrase is outmoded and inaccurate so it should not be used to refer to non-therapeutic circumcision of boys. The American Academy of Pediatrics declared non-therapeutic infant circumcision to be an elective surgery decades ago (1989).[3] Use of the phrase "routine infant circumcision" or "RIC" is a sign of ignorance on the part of the user.

Circumcision of a minor boy currently requires the surrogate consent of one parent in the United States, while in the United Kingdom, the surrogate consent of both parents is required, so it cannot be done automatically or "routinely".

The alleged right of a parent to consent to a non-therapeutic, non-diagnostic surgical amputation of functional tissue from a boy's penis has been questioned.[4] [5]

See also

External links

References

  1. ↑ Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d 772, 782 (D.C. Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1064 (1972)
  2. ↑ REFjournal Llewellyn DJ. Legal remedies for penile torts. The Compleat Mother. 1995; 40: 16. Retrieved 4 January 2020.
  3. ↑ REFjournal Schoen EJ, Anderson G, Bohon C, Hinman F, Poland R, Wakeman EM. Report of the Task Force of Circumcision.. Pediatrics. November 1989; 84(4): 388-91. PMID. Retrieved 3 August 2021.
  4. ↑ REFjournal Committee on Bioethics. Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics. 1995; 95(2): 314-317. PMID. Reaffirmed May 2011.
  5. ↑ REFjournal Adler PW. Is circumcision legal?. Richmond Journal of Law and the Public Interest. 2013; 16(3): 439-86. Retrieved 8 May 2020.
Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Routine_Infant_Circumcision&oldid=37873"