Child circumcision: Difference between revisions

Line 1,838:

|DOI=10.1542/peds.2016-1485

|accessdate=2023-05-21

}}</ref>

}}</ref> <ref>{{REFjournal

|last=Committee on Bioethics

||etal=no

|title=Informed Consent in Decision-Making in Pediatric Practice

|trans-title=

|language=

|journal=Pediatrics

|location=

|date=2016-08

|volume=138

|issue=2

|article=

|page=e20161484

|pages=

|url=

|archived=

|quote=

|pubmedID=27456514

|pubmedCID=

|DOI=10.1542/peds.2016-1484

|accessdate=2023-05-21

}}</ref>

Two ethicists, Myers & Earp (2020), have conducted a detailed review and analysis of the claimed medical benefits of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]]. They have determined that the alleged benefits are not material, so they do not support granting of consent by a surrogate. Moreover, they comment that even the most perfectly executed surgery produces [[trauma]] and harm to the patient. Circumcision also produces tissue loss and loss of function, therefore, circumcision should be performed only after the individual reaches the age of consent. Consent by a surrogate for a non-therapeutic circumcision is an unethical practice.<ref name="myers2020">{{REFjournal

Two ethicists, Myers & Earp (2020), have conducted a detailed review and analysis of the claimed medical benefits of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]]. They have determined that the alleged benefits are not material, so they do not support granting of consent by a surrogate. ''Non-therapeutic'' circumcision is not truly healthcare. Moreover, they comment that even the most perfectly executed surgery produces [[trauma]] and harm to the patient. Circumcision also produces tissue loss and loss of function, therefore, circumcision should be performed only after the individual reaches the age of consent. Consent by a surrogate for a ''non-therapeutic'' circumcision is an unethical practice.<ref name="myers2020">{{REFjournal

|last=Myers

|first=

@@ Line 1,838: / Line 1,838: @@
   |DOI=10.1542/peds.2016-1485
   |accessdate=2023-05-21
-}}</ref>
+}}</ref> <ref>{{REFjournal
+ |last=Committee on Bioethics
+ ||etal=no
+ |title=Informed Consent in Decision-Making in Pediatric Practice
+ |trans-title=
+ |language=
+ |journal=Pediatrics
+ |location=
+ |date=2016-08
+ |volume=138
+ |issue=2
+ |article=
+ |page=e20161484
+ |pages=
+ |url=
+ |archived=
+ |quote=
+ |pubmedID=27456514
+ |pubmedCID=
+ |DOI=10.1542/peds.2016-1484
+ |accessdate=2023-05-21
+}}</ref>
-Two ethicists, Myers & Earp (2020), have conducted a detailed review and analysis of the claimed medical benefits of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]]. They have determined that the alleged benefits are not material, so they do not support granting of consent by a surrogate. Moreover, they comment that even the most perfectly executed surgery produces [[trauma]] and harm to the patient. Circumcision also produces tissue loss and loss of function, therefore, circumcision should be performed only after the individual reaches the age of consent. Consent by a surrogate for a non-therapeutic circumcision is an unethical practice.<ref name="myers2020">{{REFjournal
+Two ethicists, Myers & Earp (2020), have conducted a detailed review and analysis of the claimed medical benefits of non-therapeutic [[circumcision]]. They have determined that the alleged benefits are not material, so they do not support granting of consent by a surrogate. ''Non-therapeutic'' circumcision is not truly healthcare. Moreover, they comment that even the most perfectly executed surgery produces [[trauma]] and harm to the patient. Circumcision also produces tissue loss and loss of function, therefore, circumcision should be performed only after the individual reaches the age of consent. Consent by a surrogate for a ''non-therapeutic'' circumcision is an unethical practice.<ref name="myers2020">{{REFjournal
   |last=Myers
   |first=