22,221
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
wikify Robert S. Van Howe and others
Frisch et al. conclude that "The AAP report lacks a serious discussion of the central ethical dilemma with, on one side, parents’ right to act in the best interest of the child on the basis of cultural, religious, and health-related beliefs and wishes and, on the other side, infant boys’ basic right to physical integrity in the absence of compelling reasons for surgery. Physical integrity is one of the most fundamental and inalienable rights a child has. Physicians and their professional organizations have a professional duty to protect this right, irrespective of the gender of the child."
[[Robert S. Van Howe |Van Howe]] & [[J. Steven Svoboda|Svoboda ]] (2013) criticize the AAP statement because it failed to include important points, in accurately analyzed and interpret current medical literature, and made unsupported conclusions.<ref>{{REFjournal
|last=Van Howe
|first=Robert S.
|init=RS
|author-link=Robert S. Van Howe
|last2=Svoboda
|first2=J. Steven
|init2=JS
|author2-link=J. Steven Svoboda
|date=2013-07-01
|title=Out of step: fatal flaws in the latest AAP policy report on neonatal circumcision
|first=J. Steven
|init=JS
|author-link=J. Steven Svoboda
|last2=Van Howe
|first2=Robert S.
|init2=RS
|author2-link=Robert S. Van Howe
|last3=Dwyer
|first3=James G.