Position statements on infant circumcision: Difference between revisions

Netherlands: Fix broken link.
Britain: Major revision to this section.
Line 91: Line 91:
{{Citation
{{Citation
  |Text=The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefits from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it.
  |Text=The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefits from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it.
  |Author=The British Medical Association
  |Author=The British Medical Association<ref>{{REFdocument
|title=Non-therapeutic male circumcision (NTMC) of children – practical guidance for doctors
|trans-title=
|language=English
|url=https://www.bma.org.uk/media/1847/bma-non-therapeutic-male-circumcision-of-children-guidance-2019.pdf
|archived=
|contribution=
|quote=Doctors can refuse to perform NTMC if they do not believe it is in the overall best interests of a child.  Doctors are under no obligation to comply with a request to circumcise a child. In these circumstances, doctors should explain this to the child and his parents, and, if appropriate, explain their right to seek a second opinion.
|trans-quote=
|quote-lang=
|publisher=British Medical Association
|location=BMA House, Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9JP
|format=PDF
|date=2019
|accessdate=2020-06-25
}}</ref>
  |Source=
  |Source=
}}
}}