Should Boys be Circumcised?

Europeans do not circumcise newborns Dr morris

Male circumcision is inherently harmful to the Child that is it is not perfomed on newborns in Europe and the British Medical Association ethical guidelines advise conserving the foreskin and a non invasive approach to foreskin management.

"The BMA considers that the evidence concerning health benefit from non-therapeutic circumcision is insufficient for this alone to be a justification for doing it"

It is always beneficial not to carry out surgery when there are other non invasive alternatives. A recent series of circumcisions for religious reasons in an NHS facility reported an 18% complication rate. The overall rate of significant complications for circumcision may be of the order of 2%-10%. Complication rates of up to 55% have however been reported for circumcision. Recent studies have reported sexual dysfunction rates of 27% to 38% secondary to male circumcision.

Doctors have legal and ethical duties to their child patients to render competent medical care based on what the patient needs, not what someone else expresses. The majority of parents and doctors work with the best interests of their children at heart however many parents and doctors have been sadly misinformed.

Nick Malone of the Sexual Problems Clinic in Edinburgh Royal Infirmary has said

“If the good doctors brushed up on their science a little, we could bypass these tiresome refutations and focus on more pertinent issues of legality, human rights and consent.”

It may be argued, with some degree of persuasiveness, that religious circumcision must be made available through doctors to minimise the harm. The high rates of complications for circumcisions in NHS hosptals and the later high rate of sexual dysfunction remind us that male circumcision is a traditional practice prejudicial to the health of children.

Parents asserting their right to circumcise their children assert that their right to manifest one's religious beliefs is guaranteed by article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). That article of the ECHR however includes a permission to restrict that right where necessary to protect the rights and freedoms of others. Such a restriction is appropriate to protect children from the harm inherent in non-therapeutic circumcision.

The question for this exercise asks "Is male circumcision ever justified?". My answer to this is yes, it may be justified if - and only if - it has the informed personal consent of the person being circumcised.

Circumcision, of male or female children is only ever justified if the patient's life is at risk if it is not performed - for example if there is a tumour or a gangrenous infection and if the patient is a sexually active and psychologically sound adult, and provides proper consent after being fully informed of all the conflicting evidence.

This is an issue of our own rights to make informed decisions about our own bodies this is a choice we must all be allowed to make for ourselves as adults.