Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ethics of non-therapeutic child circumcision

1,942 bytes removed, 14:02, 3 November 2019
no edit summary
|isbn=978-1-4496-7600-1
|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W6eRUtlujbkC&pg=PA555
}}</ref> The foreskin has protective, immunological, sensory, and sexual functions. The '''ethics of non-therapeutic child circumcision''' being imposed on unconsenting minors (babies and children) has been a source of ongoing controversy.<ref>{{REFjournal
|last=Boyle
|first=G.J.
|year=2000
|title=Circumcision of healthy boys: Criminal assault?
|url=http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/boyle1/
|journal=Journal of Law and Medicine
|volume=7
|format=PDF
|publisher=[[Royal Australasian College of Physicians]]
|quote=The Paediatrics and Child Health Division, The [[Royal Australasian College of Physicians]] (RACP) has prepared this statement on routine circumcision of infants and boys to assist parents who are considering having this procedure undertaken on their male children and for doctors who are asked to advise on or undertake it. After extensive review of the literature the RACP reaffirms that '''there is no medical indication for routine neonatal circumcision.''' Circumcision of males has been undertaken for religious and cultural reasons for many thousands of years. It remains an important ritual in some religious and cultural groups. […] In recent years there has been evidence of possible health benefits from routine male circumcision. The most important conditions where some benefit may result from circumcision are urinary tract infections, HIV and later cancer of the penis.…The complication rate of neonatal circumcision is reported to be around 1% and includes tenderness, bleeding and unhappy results to the appearance of the penis. Serious complications such as bleeding, septicaemia and may occasionally cause death (1 in 550,000). The possibility that routine circumcision may contravene human rights has been raised because circumcision is performed on a minor and is without proven medical benefit. Whether these legal concerns are valid will be known only if the matter is determined in a court of law. If the operation is to be performed, the medical attendant should ensure this is done by a competent operator, using appropriate anesthesia and in a safe child-friendly environment. In all cases where parents request a circumcision for their child the medical attendant is obliged to provide accurate information on the risks and benefits of the procedure. Up-to-date, unbiased written material summarizing the evidence should be widely available to parents. Review of the literature in relation to risks and benefits shows there is no evidence of benefit outweighing harm for circumcision as a routine procedure in the neonate.
|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080720092409/http://www.racp.edu.au/download.cfm?DownloadFile=A453CFA1-2A57-5487-DF36DF59A1BAF527
|archivedate=2008-07-20
}}</ref><ref name="BMAGuide">{{REFweb
|url=http://www.bma.org.uk/ap.nsf/Content/malecircumcision2006?OpenDocument&Highlight=2,circumcision
|title=The law and ethics of male circumcision - guidance for doctors
|pubmedID=10049981
|pubmedCID=
}}</ref> Others say that circumcision is an infringement of the child's autonomy and should be prolonged delayed until he is capable of making the decision himself.<ref>{{REFbook
|url=https://books.google.com/?id=C1T6NrSPD_AC
|title=Clinical Ethics in Pediatrics: A Case-Based Textbook
|first=M.D.
|authorlink=
|date=1999-01
|title=A child's right to circumcision
|journal=BJU Int
17,052
edits

Navigation menu