Changes

}}</ref> <ref name="bma2006">{{REFjournal |last=Committee on Medical Ethics |first= |author-link= |last2= |first2= |author2-link= |etal=no |title=The law and ethics of male circumcision: Guidance for doctors |trans-title= |language= |journal=British Medical Association |location= |date=2006-06 |volume= |issue= |pages= |url=. [http://www.bma.org.uk/-/media/Files/PDFs/Practical advice at work/Ethics/Circumcision.pdf |quote= |pubmedID= |pubmedCID= |DOI= |accessdate=2019-11-03}}The law and ethics of male circumcision: Guidance for doctors]. London: British Medical Association 2006.</ref>

}}</ref> Others say that circumcision is an infringement of the child's autonomy and should be 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 |last=Diekema |first=Douglas S. |last2=Mercurio |first2=Mark R. |last3=Adam |first3=Mary B. |date=2011-09-08 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=9781139501835 |location= |pages=43–48 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="knmg.artsennet.nl2KNMG2010">[http://knmgcircumstitions.artsennet.nlcom/webDocs/file?uuid=579e836dKNMG-ea83-410f-9889-feb7eda87cd5&owner=a8a9ce0e-f42b-47a5-960e-be08025b7b04&contentid=77976&elementid=771754 policy.pdf Non-Therapeutic Circumcision of Male Minors]. Utrecht: Royal Dutch Medical Association, 2010.</ref>

The [[Royal Dutch Medical Association]] (''Koninklijke Nederlandsche Maatschappij tot bevordering der Geneeskunst'') (KNMG) and several Dutch specialist medical societies published a statement of position regarding circumcision of male children on 27 May 2010. The KNMG argues against circumcising male minors due to lack of evidence the procedure is useful or necessary, its associated risks, and violate the child's autonomy.<ref name="knmg.artsennet.nl2KNMG2010"/> They recommend deferring circumcision until the child is old enough to decide for himself.<ref name="knmg.artsennet.nl2KNMG2010" /> The Royal Dutch Medical Association questions why the ethics regarding male genital alterations should be viewed any differently from female genital alterations, when there are mild forms of female genital alterations (like pricking the clitoral hood without removing any tissue or removing the clitoral hood altogether). They have expressed opposition to both male circumcision and all forms of female circumcision, however they do not advocate a prohibition of male circumcision and prefer that circumcisions be done by doctors instead of illegal, underground circumcisers .<ref name="knmg.artsennet.nl2KNMG2010"/>