20,864
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→The emerging consensus on surrogate consent for non-therapeutic newborn, infant, and child circumcision
}}</ref>
Bioethicists Myers & Earp (2020) exhaustively reviewed the evidence for and against the alleged health benefits to a healthy person claimed for non-therapeutic circumcision of a neonate, infant or child. They balanced this against the [[pain]], [[trauma]], and loss of body tissue and function. They concluded the claimed health benefits are insufficient to support surrogate consent for non-therapeutic circumcision. Given this, only the subject can grant consent for a non-therapeutic circumcision, after he reaches the right age for circumcision, which does not occurs until a male reaches the age of consent in his jurisdiction which may vary from 16 to 18 years of age. The present practice in the [[United States]] and elsewhere of parental consent for non-therapeutic circumcision is entirely unethical.<ref name="myers2020">{{REFjournal
|last=Myers
|first=
|date=2013
}}</ref> if a court should accept Adler's arguments.
==Ethics journals ==
<!--