20,855
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Conclusion
}}</ref> Consent for a non-therapeutic operation offends the principle of autonomy, when granted by a surrogate.
A surrogate's powers to grant consent are more circumscribed than the powers granted to a competent individual acting on his own behalf.<ref name="svoboda2000" /> A surrogate's power to grant consent for treatment is dependent upon the existence of a medical condition in need of treatment. In the absence of such a condition, the surrogate lacks the power to consent. A circumcision for religious reasons is not medical treatment, so a surrogate may not consent to a religious circumcision. A surrogate must:
* Act in the best interests of the patient.
* Protect the rights of the patient under Constitutional law, common law, and international human rights law.
A non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] exposes the patient to the surgical risks of [[infection]], [[bleeding]], and surgical mishap without any health treatment or benefit, so it is not in the best interests of the patient.
{{SEEALSO}}
* [[Human rights]]