The Bioethics of the Circumcision of Male Children.
International human rights law has profoundly transformed medical ethics.
This page, therefore, indexes human rights instruments in addition to
medical ethics documents.
The Physician's Oath of the World Medical Association requires doctors
to use their medical knowledge in compliance with "the laws of humanity."
The codes of medical ethics of Australia, Canada, Norway, and the United States all require doctors to respect the 'human rights of patients'.
The United Kingdom makes respect for the human rights of patients a legal requirement by the Human Rights Act 1998.
Children enjoy certain human rights (including the right to special protection) under general human rights instruments.
They also enjoy additional protections under special instruments related to childhood.
See 'Attorneys for the Rights of the Child' for a table of human rights that are violated by circumcision of male children.
The UN Commission on the former Yugoslavia defines circumcision as sexual assault and a human rights violation.
In Article 24.3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child the phrase, "traditional procedures prejudicial to the health of children," refers to
the practice of circumcision.
The circumcision of male children, therefore, violates numerous provisions of various international human rights instruments, and must be considered unethical medical practice.
Doctors Opposing Circumcision has released a detailed report on human
rights and the circumcision of children.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
.
No comments:
Post a Comment