Ethics of non-therapeutic child circumcision: Difference between revisions

mNo edit summary
Add text and citation.
Line 57: Line 57:
  |archivedate=2008-07-20
  |archivedate=2008-07-20
}}</ref><ref name="bma2006">Committee on Medical Ethics. [https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/employment/ethics/children-and-young-people/non-therapeutic-male-circumcision-of-children-ethics-toolkit The law and ethics of male circumcision: Guidance for doctors]. London: British Medical Association 2006.</ref>
}}</ref><ref name="bma2006">Committee on Medical Ethics. [https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/employment/ethics/children-and-young-people/non-therapeutic-male-circumcision-of-children-ethics-toolkit The law and ethics of male circumcision: Guidance for doctors]. London: British Medical Association 2006.</ref>
There is no disease present in the newborn penis and no medical indication exists for [[circumcision of the newborn]].<ref>{{GairdnerDM 1949}}</ref>


Some [[Medical trade association| medical trade associations]] formerly took the position that the parents should determine what is in the best interest of the newborn, infant, or child.<ref name="AAP1999">{{REFjournal
Some [[Medical trade association| medical trade associations]] formerly took the position that the parents should determine what is in the best interest of the newborn, infant, or child.<ref name="AAP1999">{{REFjournal