IntactiWiki

Surrogate consent: Difference between revisions

← Older edit
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs)
Bureaucrats
22,576 edits
Add Video section.
 
(12 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 160: Line 160:
}}</ref>
}}</ref>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Hill (2002) raised the question of who can grant effective consent for such an injurious operation.
[[George Hill]] (2002) raised the question of who can grant effective consent for such an injurious operation.
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
The question is not whether circumcision is "mutilation." The question is whether anyone, parents included, has the right to remove the extremely sensitive genital tissue from an infant for any reason other than unquestionably urgent medical necessity.<ref name="hill2002">{{REFjournal
The question is not whether circumcision is "mutilation." The question is whether anyone, parents included, has the right to remove the extremely sensitive genital tissue from an infant for any reason other than unquestionably urgent medical necessity.<ref name="hill2002">{{REFjournal
Line 185: Line 185:
}}</ref>
}}</ref>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Bioethicists Myers & Earp (2020) exhaustively reviewed the evidence for and against the alleged health benefits to a healthy person claimed for non-therapeutic circumcision of a neonate, infant or child. They balanced this against the [[pain]], [[trauma]], and loss of body tissue and function. They concluded the claimed health benefits are insufficient to support surrogate consent for non-therapeutic circumcision. Given this, only the subject can grant consent for a non-therapeutic circumcision, after he reaches the right age for circumcision, which does not occurs until a male reaches the age of consent in his jurisdiction which may vary from 16 to 18 years of age. The present practice in the [[United States]] and elsewhere of parental consent for non-therapeutic circumcision is entirely unethical.
Bioethicists Myers & Earp (2020) exhaustively reviewed the evidence for and against the alleged health benefits to a healthy person claimed for non-therapeutic circumcision of a neonate, infant or child. They balanced this against the [[pain]], [[trauma]], and loss of body tissue and function. They concluded the claimed health benefits are insufficient to support surrogate consent for non-therapeutic circumcision. Given this, only the subject can grant consent for a non-therapeutic circumcision, after he reaches the right age for circumcision, which does not occurs until a male reaches the age of consent in his jurisdiction, which may vary from 16 to 18 years of age. The present practice in the [[United States]] and elsewhere of parental consent for non-therapeutic circumcision is entirely unethical and apparently unlawful.
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
On the other hand, human rights scholars have increasingly objected to the medically unnecessary genital cutting of any person—whether female, male, or intersex—who either does not or cannot consent to the cutting. Such objections were recently summarized in an international consensus statement published in the <i>American Journal of Bioethics</i>, in which the authors argued
On the other hand, human rights scholars have increasingly objected to the medically unnecessary genital cutting of any person—whether female, male, or intersex—who either does not or cannot consent to the cutting. Such objections were recently summarized in an international consensus statement published in the <i>American Journal of Bioethics</i>, in which the authors argued
Line 221: Line 221:
}}</ref>
}}</ref>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
Professor Peter W. Adler, J.D., (2013) argues strongly that child [[circumcision]] is unlawful:
Professor [[Peter W. Adler]], J.D., (2013) argues strongly that child [[circumcision]] is unlawful:
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
Legal scholars, foreign medical associations, intactivist organizations, and increasing numbers of menis claim the opposite, namely that circumcision is painful, risky, harmful, irreversible surgery that benefits few men, if any. These opponents of circumcision argue that, in any event, boys have a right to be left genitally intact, like girls under federal law, and to make the circumcision decision for themselves as adults.  
Legal scholars, foreign medical associations, [[intactivist]] organizations, and increasing numbers of menis claim the opposite, namely that circumcision is painful, risky, harmful, irreversible surgery that benefits few men, if any. These opponents of circumcision argue that, in any event, boys have a right to be left genitally intact, like girls under federal law, and to make the circumcision decision for themselves as adults.  


These opponents of circumcision can point to a June 2012 decision by a court in Cologne, Germany, which held that non-therapeutic circumcision for religious reasons is criminal assault. The German court reasoned that circumcision causes grievous bodily harm, and that boys have a fundamental right to genital integrity that supersedes their parents' religious rights.<ref name="adler2013">{{REFjournal
These opponents of circumcision can point to a June 2012 decision by a court in Cologne, Germany, which held that non-therapeutic circumcision for religious reasons is criminal assault. The German court reasoned that circumcision causes grievous bodily harm, and that boys have a fundamental right to genital integrity that supersedes their parents' religious rights.<ref name="adler2013">{{REFjournal
Line 240: Line 240:
  |accessdate=2025-05-04}}
  |accessdate=2025-05-04}}
</ref>
</ref>
==Guidance from the Bioethics Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics==
==Guidance from the Bioethics Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics==
The Bioethics Committee of the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] has provided important guidance on adapting general principles to pediatric practice.
The Bioethics Committee of the [[American Academy of Pediatrics]] has provided important guidance on adapting general principles to pediatric practice.
Line 347: Line 348:
  |trans-title=
  |trans-title=
  |journal=Pediatrics
  |journal=Pediatrics
  |date=2026-08
  |date=2016-08
  |volume=138
  |volume=138
  |issue=2
  |issue=2
Line 387: Line 388:


One should note that these guidances from the Bioethics Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics apply to the granting of "informed permission" by surrogates for "diagnosis and treatment of children", and do <i>NOT</i> apply to non-therapeutic procedures such as medically non-indicated, non-therapeutic [[circumcision]], which is neither diagnosis nor treatment.
One should note that these guidances from the Bioethics Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics apply to the granting of "informed permission" by surrogates for "diagnosis and treatment of children", and do <i>NOT</i> apply to non-therapeutic procedures such as medically non-indicated, non-therapeutic [[circumcision]], which is neither diagnosis nor treatment.
==Video==
==Video==
===Circumcision — Your Legal Rights===
===Circumcision — Your Legal Rights===
Line 403: Line 405:
}}</ref> Consent for a non-therapeutic operation offends the principle of autonomy, when granted by a surrogate.
}}</ref> Consent for a non-therapeutic operation offends the principle of autonomy, when granted by a surrogate.


A surrogate's powers to grant consent are more circumscribed than the powers granted to a competent individual acting on his own behalf.<ref name="svoboda2000" /> A surrogate's power to grant consent for treatment is dependent upon the existence of a medical condition in need of treatment. In the absence of such a condition, the surrogate lacks the power to consent.  
A surrogate's powers to grant consent are more circumscribed than the powers granted to a competent individual acting on his own behalf.<ref name="svoboda2000" /> A surrogate's power to grant consent for treatment is dependent upon the existence of a medical condition in need of diagnosis and/or treatment. In the absence of such a condition, the surrogate lacks the power to consent.  


A surrogate must:
A surrogate must:
* Act in the best interests of the patient.
* Act in the best interests of the patient.
* Protect the rights of the patient under Constitutional law, common law, and international human rights law.
* Protect the rights of the patient under Constitutional law, statute law, common law, and international human rights law.
* Receive [[informed consent]] prior to granting consent.
* Receive [[informed consent]] prior to granting consent.


A circumcision for religious reasons is not medical treatment, so a surrogate may not consent to a religious circumcision. Furthermore, consent for a religious circumcision would violate the boy's religious right to chose his religion when he is of age.
A circumcision for religious reasons is not medical treatment, so a surrogate may not consent to a religious circumcision. Furthermore, consent for a religious circumcision would violate the boy's religious right to chose his religion when he is of age.


A non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] exposes the patient to the surgical risks of [[infection]], [[bleeding]], and [[Documented severe complications of circumcision| surgical mishap]] without any health treatment or benefit, so it is not in the best interests of the patient.
A non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] exposes the patient to the surgical risks of [[infection]], [[bleeding]], and [[Documented severe complications of circumcision| surgical mishap]] without any health treatment or benefit, so it is not in the best interests of the patient. Furthermore, a surrogate may only consent to therapeutic procedures.


As explained above and we reiterate, bioethicists Myers & Earp (2020) exhaustively reviewed the evidence for and against the alleged health benefits to a healthy person claimed for non-therapeutic circumcision of a neonate, infant or child. They balanced this against the [[pain]], [[trauma]], and loss of body tissue and function. They concluded the claimed health benefits are insufficient to support surrogate consent for non-therapeutic circumcision. Given this, only the subject can grant consent for a non-therapeutic circumcision, after he reaches the right age for circumcision, which does not occurs until a male reaches the age of consent in his jurisdiction which may vary from 16 to 18 years of age.<ref name="myers2020" />
As explained above and we reiterate, bioethicists Myers & Earp (2020) exhaustively reviewed the evidence for and against the alleged health benefits to a healthy person claimed for non-therapeutic circumcision of a neonate, infant or child. They balanced this against the [[pain]], [[trauma]], and loss of body tissue and function. They concluded the claimed health benefits are insufficient to support surrogate consent for non-therapeutic circumcision. Given this, only the subject can grant consent for a non-therapeutic circumcision, after he reaches the right age for circumcision, which does not occurs until a male reaches the age of consent in his jurisdiction which may vary from 16 to 18 years of age.<ref name="myers2020" />
Line 420: Line 422:


{{SEEALSO}}
{{SEEALSO}}
* [[Ethics of non-therapeutic child circumcision]]
* [[Human rights]]
* [[Human rights]]
* [[Informed consent]]
* [[Informed consent]]
{{LINKS}}
* {{REFweb
|url=https://www.reddit.com/r/Advice/comments/9ohhij/son_hates_me_for_circumcision_help/
|title=Son hates me for circumcision - help?
|last=Anonymous
|publisher=Reddit
|date=2016
|accessdate=2026-05-01
}}
* {{REFweb
|url=https://intactamerica.org/circumcision-cosmetic-surgery-on-newborns/
|title=The World’s Oldest Cosmetic Surgery Is Still Performed on Newborns—Without Consent
|last=Alissa
|first=
|init=K
|author-link=Kristel Alissa
|publisher=Intact America
|date=2025-04-24
|accessdate=2025-05-16
}}
<b>The author of the following paper has improperly labelled surrogate consent as <i>proxy consent.</b>
* {{REFjournal
|last=Bonyai
|first=
|init=J
|author-link=
|etal=no
|title=Why Bioethics Matters in the Debate Over Routine Infant Circumcision
|trans-title=
|language=
|journal=Ethics Today
|location=
|date=2026-04-05
|volume=
|issue=
|article=
|page=
|pages=
|url=https://bioethicstoday.org/blog/why-bioethics-matters-in-the-debate-over-routine-infant-circumcision/#
|archived=
|quote=Circumcision is a surgical intervention, and like all surgeries, it carries inherent risks. These include pain, bleeding, infection, and, in rare cases, more serious complications. While many procedures occur without major incident, the ethical question is not simply whether harm is common, but whether the risk of harm is justified at all
|accessdate=2026-06-11
}}
{{REF}}
{{REF}}


Retrieved from "https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/Surrogate_consent"