17,111
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
|DOI=10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61042-2
|accessdate=2011-09-27
}}</ref> Palfrey reiterated this stance in an interview with ''The Lancet'', saying “we want to make it clear to the international community we are opposed to any form of female genital cutting, and that includes the ritual nick.”<ref>{{REFjournal
|last=MacReady
|first=Norra
|quote=
|accessdate=2011-10-09
}}</ref> as its source. The Fleishman article addresses the ethics of caring for gravely ill and dying children. It is totally irrelevant to the care and non-therapeutic circumcision of well-babies. <!--While this document focuses primarily on sick children and not infants, it does go into much detail on the ethics surrounding autonomy and consent, particularly with respect to patient-centered vs. parent-centered medicine. --> That document says the following, which the AAP's "hands-off" position on circumcision might contradict:
{{Citation