Circumcision: What should be done?

Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (7):459-462 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I explain why I think that considerations regarding the opposing rights involved in the practice of circumcision—rights of the individual to bodily integrity and rights of the community to practice its religion—would not help us decide on the desirable policy towards this controversial practice. I then suggest a few measures that are not in conflict with either religious or community rights but that can both reduce the harm that circumcision as currently practiced involves and bring about a change in attitude towards the practice, thus further reducing its frequency. These measures are the compulsory administration of anaesthetics; the banning of the metzitzah b’peh; and having an upper age limit of a few months on nontherapeutic circumcision of minors. I conclude with general considerations on why the steps taken towards the reform of circumcision should be moderate.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-06

Downloads
77 (#211,913)

6 months
11 (#225,837)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Hanoch Ben-Yami
Central European University

Citations of this work

Circumcision, Autonomy and Public Health.Brian D. Earp & Robert Darby - 2019 - Public Health Ethics 12 (1):64-81.
The ethics of infant male circumcision.Brian D. Earp - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (7):418-420.
Can Culture Justify Infant Circumcision?Eldar Sarajlic - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (4):327-343.
In defence of genital autonomy for children.Brian D. Earp - 2016 - Journal of Medical Ethics 42 (3):158-163.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references