22,335
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
|trans-title=
|language=
→The guidance of the British Medical Association: reformattings
The BMA seems to lean toward protecting the alleged right of its members to profit from carrying out non-therapeutic circumcision on boys, in the face of increasingly severe legal concerns.
Lempert et al. (2022) criticized the 2019 BMA guidance for "serious weaknesses". They listed:<br>(1) # the absence of an explicit stance on the underlying ethical status of NPC, coupled with an implicit permissive stance,<br> (2) # an incoherent and impracticable analysis of the child’s best interests,<br> (3) # unbalanced guidance regarding cultural issues,<br> (4) # unbalanced guidance regarding scientific issues,<br> (5) # unjustified differential treatment of children of the same sex,<br> (6) # unjustified differential treatment of children of different sexes,<br> (7) # problems with child safeguarding, and (8) problems with regulation and training. <br>(9) # an unjustified presumption of lawfulness of NPC of minors and<br> (10#) failure adequately to address recent case law.<ref name="lempert2022">{{REFjournal
|last=Lempert
|first=Antony
|init=A
|author-link=Antony Lempert
|last2=Chegwidden
|first2=James
|init2=J
|author2-link=James Chegwidden
|last3=Steinfeld
|first3=Rebecca
|init3=R
|author3-link=Rebecca Steinfeld
|last4=Earp
|first4=Brian D.
|init4=BD
|author4-link=Brian D. Earp
|etal=no
|title=Non-therapeutic penile circumcision of minors: Current controversies in UK law and medical ethics.
|journal=Clinical Ethics
|location=
|accessdate=2022-05-20
}}</ref>
In addition, they noted an egregiously inadequate description of the male [[foreskin]] and its functions.<ref name="lempert2022" />
==Symposia==