Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Circumcision Is Unethical and Unlawful.J. Steven Svoboda, Peter W. Adler & Robert S. Van Howe - 2016 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 44 (2):263-282.
    The foreskin is a complex structure that protects and moisturizes the head of the penis, and, being the most densely innervated and sensitive portion of the penis, is essential to providing the complete sexual response. Circumcision—the removal of this structure—is non-therapeutic, painful, irreversible surgery that also risks serious physical injury, psychological sequelae, and death. Men rarely volunteer for it, and increasingly circumcised men are expressing their resentment about it.Circumcision is usually performed for religious, cultural and personal reasons. Early claims about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Infant male circumcision and the autonomy of the child: two ethical questions.Akim McMath - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (8):687-690.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • On the Child’s Right to Bodily Integrity: When Is the Right Infringed?Joseph Mazor - 2021 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 46 (4):451-465.
    This article considers two competing types of conceptions of the pre-autonomous child’s right to bodily integrity. The first, which I call encroachment conceptions, holds that any physically serious bodily encroachment infringes on the child’s right to bodily integrity. The second, which I call best-interests conceptions, holds that the child’s right to bodily integrity is infringed just in case the child is subjected to a bodily encroachment that substantially deviates from what is in the child’s best interests. I argue in this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Non-therapeutic penile circumcision of minors: current controversies in UK law and medical ethics.Antony Lempert, James Chegwidden, Rebecca Steinfeld & Brian D. Earp - 2023 - Clinical Ethics 18 (1):36-54.
    The current legal status and medical ethics of routine or religious penile circumcision of minors is a matter of ongoing controversy in many countries. We focus on the United Kingdom as an illustrative example, giving a detailed analysis of the most recent British Medical Association guidance from 2019. We argue that the guidance paints a confused and conflicting portrait of the law and ethics of the procedure in the UK context, reflecting deeper, unresolved moral and legal tensions surrounding child genital (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Ritual Male Infant Circumcision and Human Rights.Allan J. Jacobs & Kavita Shah Arora - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (2):30-39.
    Opponents of male circumcision have increasingly used human rights positions to articulate their viewpoint. We characterize the meaning of the term “human rights.” We discuss these human rights arguments with special attention to the claims of rights to an open future and to bodily integrity. We offer a three-part test under which a parental decision might be considered an unacceptable violation of a child's right. The test considers the impact of the practice on society, the impact of the practice on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Male or female genital cutting: why ‘health benefits’ are morally irrelevant.Brian D. Earp - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (12):e92-e92.
    The WHO, American Academy of Pediatrics and other Western medical bodies currently maintain that all medically unnecessary female genital cutting of minors is categorically a human rights violation, while either tolerating or actively endorsing medically unnecessary male genital cutting of minors, especially in the form of penile circumcision. Given that some forms of female genital cutting, such as ritual pricking or nicking of the clitoral hood, are less severe than penile circumcision, yet are often performed within the same families for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • In defence of genital autonomy for children.Brian D. Earp - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (3):158-163.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Circumcision, Autonomy and Public Health.Brian D. Earp & Robert Darby - 2019 - Public Health Ethics 12 (1):64-81.
    Male circumcision—partial or total removal of the penile prepuce—has been proposed as a public health measure in Sub-Saharan Africa, based on the results of three randomized control trials showing a relative risk reduction of approximately 60 per cent for voluntary, adult male circumcision against female-to-male human immunodeficiency virus transmission in that context. More recently, long-time advocates of infant male circumcision have argued that these findings justify involuntary circumcision of babies and children in dissimilar public health environments, such as the USA, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Addressing polarisation in science.Brian D. Earp - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (9):782-784.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations