Child circumcision: Difference between revisions

Line 616:

=== Non-therapeutic circumcision of male children ===

Human babies, because they are not yet in possession of language, are incapable of giving or refusing consent for being circumcised. The element of force has led some scholars to view the circumcision of baby boys as a category of forced circumcision.<ref>For example, Frederick M. Hodges, a medical historian, writes: "In the late 1970s, as the Americans were growing increasingly aware of the abuses of power rampant throughout the nation's social institutions, influential grass-roots movements protesting the forced circumcision of American children sprang up nationwide." F. Hodges, "A Short History," p. 31; see also Glick, ''Marked in Your Flesh'', pp. 273-281.</ref> There are, however, physicians in the United States who argue strongly for routine circumcision of newborn babies; and circumcision is widely accepted as a postnatal procedure in American hospitals.<ref>{{REFbook

Human babies, because they are not yet in possession of language, are incapable of giving or refusing consent for being circumcised. The element of force has led some scholars to view the circumcision of baby boys as a category of forced circumcision.<ref>For example, Frederick M. Hodges, a medical historian, writes: "In the late 1970s, as the Americans were growing increasingly aware of the abuses of power rampant throughout the nation's social institutions, influential grass-roots movements protesting the forced circumcision of American children sprang up nationwide." F. Hodges, "A Short History," p. 31; see also [[Leonard B. Glick|Glick]], ''Marked in Your Flesh'', pp. 273-281.</ref> There are, however, physicians in the United States who argue strongly for routine circumcision of newborn babies; and circumcision is widely accepted as a postnatal procedure in American hospitals.<ref>{{REFbook

| last=Fletcher

| first=Christopher R.

@@ Line 616: / Line 616: @@
 === Non-therapeutic circumcision of male children ===
-Human babies, because they are not yet in possession of language, are incapable of giving or refusing consent for being circumcised. The element of force has led some scholars to view the circumcision of baby boys as a category of forced circumcision.<ref>For example, Frederick M. Hodges, a medical historian, writes: "In the late 1970s, as the Americans were growing increasingly aware of the abuses of power rampant throughout the nation's social institutions, influential grass-roots movements protesting the forced circumcision of American children sprang up nationwide." F. Hodges, "A Short History," p. 31; see also Glick, ''Marked in Your Flesh'', pp. 273-281.</ref> There are, however, physicians in the United States who argue strongly for routine circumcision of newborn babies; and circumcision is widely accepted as a postnatal procedure in American hospitals.<ref>{{REFbook
+Human babies, because they are not yet in possession of language, are incapable of giving or refusing consent for being circumcised. The element of force has led some scholars to view the circumcision of baby boys as a category of forced circumcision.<ref>For example, Frederick M. Hodges, a medical historian, writes: "In the late 1970s, as the Americans were growing increasingly aware of the abuses of power rampant throughout the nation's social institutions, influential grass-roots movements protesting the forced circumcision of American children sprang up nationwide." F. Hodges, "A Short History," p. 31; see also [[Leonard B. Glick|Glick]], ''Marked in Your Flesh'', pp. 273-281.</ref> There are, however, physicians in the United States who argue strongly for routine circumcision of newborn babies; and circumcision is widely accepted as a postnatal procedure in American hospitals.<ref>{{REFbook
   | last=Fletcher
   | first=Christopher R.