Surrogate consent: Difference between revisions

Line 271:

|accessdate=2025-05-04

}}</ref>

</blockquote>

Hill (2002) raised the question of who can grant effective consent for such an injurious operation.<ref name="hill2002">{{REFjournal

Hill (2002) raised the question of who can grant effective consent for such an injurious operation.

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

|last=Hill

|first=

Line 289:

Line 291:

|url=https://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/hill2/

|archived=

|quote=In the case of nontherapeutic circumcision of a boy, electing not to have circumcision performed is a reasonable, practicable, and viable alternative, so patients or their proxy representatives must be given all material information about circumcision and its risks, potential benefits and possible outcomes; they must also be informed about the risks, potential benefits, and possible outcomes of remaining uncircumcised.

|quote=

|pubmedID=12190244

|pubmedCID=

|DOI=10.1097/00007611-200208000-00037

|accessdate=2025-05-03

|accessdate=2025-05-04

}}</ref>

</blockquote>

Line 327:

Line 329:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/George-Hill-3/publication/371599857_Can_Anyone_Authorize_the_Nontherapeutic_Permanent_Alteration_of_a_Child's_Body/links/648b8819c41fb852dd0949be/Can-Anyone-Authorize-the-Nontherapeutic-Permanent-Alteration-of-a-Childs-Body.pdf

In the case of nontherapeutic circumcision of a boy, electing not to have circumcision performed is a reasonable, practicable, and viable alternative, so patients or their proxy representatives must be given all material information about circumcision and its risks, potential benefits and possible outcomes; they must also be informed about the risks, potential benefits, and possible outcomes of remaining uncircumcised.

@@ Line 271: / Line 271: @@
   |accessdate=2025-05-04
 }}</ref>
+</blockquote>
-Hill (2002) raised the question of who can grant effective consent for such an injurious operation.<ref name="hill2002">{{REFjournal
+Hill (2002) raised the question of who can grant effective consent for such an injurious operation.
+<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
   |last=Hill
   |first=
@@ Line 289: / Line 291: @@
   |url=https://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/hill2/
   |archived=
-  |quote=In the case of nontherapeutic circumcision of a boy, electing not to have circumcision performed is a reasonable, practicable, and viable alternative, so patients or their proxy representatives must be given all material information about circumcision and its risks, potential benefits and possible outcomes; they must also be informed about the risks, potential benefits, and possible outcomes of remaining uncircumcised.
+  |quote=
   |pubmedID=12190244
   |pubmedCID=
   |DOI=10.1097/00007611-200208000-00037
-  |accessdate=2025-05-03
+  |accessdate=2025-05-04
 }}</ref>
+</blockquote>
@@ Line 327: / Line 329: @@
 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/George-Hill-3/publication/371599857_Can_Anyone_Authorize_the_Nontherapeutic_Permanent_Alteration_of_a_Child's_Body/links/648b8819c41fb852dd0949be/Can-Anyone-Authorize-the-Nontherapeutic-Permanent-Alteration-of-a-Childs-Body.pdf
+In the case of nontherapeutic circumcision of a boy, electing not to have circumcision performed is a reasonable, practicable, and viable alternative, so patients or their proxy representatives must be given all material information about circumcision and its risks, potential benefits and possible outcomes; they must also be informed about the risks, potential benefits, and possible outcomes of remaining uncircumcised.
 {{SEEALSO}}