Between prophylaxis and child abuse: The ethics of neonatal male circumcision

124Citations
Citations of this article
80Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

Opinion about neonatal male circumcision is deeply divided. Some take it to be a prophylactic measure with unequivocal and significant health benefits, while others consider it a form of child abuse. We argue against both these polar views. In doing so, we discuss whether circumcision constitutes bodily mutilation, whether the absence of the child’s informed consent makes it wrong, the nature and strength of the evidence regarding medical harms and benefits, and what moral weight cultural considerations have. We conclude that nontherapeutic circumcision of infant boys is a suitable matter for parental discretion. © 2003, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Benatar, M., & Benatar, D. (2003). Between prophylaxis and child abuse: The ethics of neonatal male circumcision. American Journal of Bioethics, 3(2), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1162/152651603766436216

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free