The ethics of infant male circumcision - University of Oxford

Описание: Earp, B. D. (2013). The ethics of infant male circumcision. Invited lecture, Uehiro Seminar Series. University of Oxford. June 7. Oxford, England, UK.

In this talk, I argue that the non-therapeutic circumcision of infant males is unethical, whether it is performed for reasons of obtaining possible future health benefits, for reasons of cultural transmission, or for reasons of perceived religious obligation. I begin with the premise that it should be considered morally impermissible to sever healthy, functional genital tissue from another person's body without first asking for, and then actually receiving, that person's informed consent—otherwise, this action would qualify as a criminal assault. I then raise a number of possible exceptions to this rule, to see whether they could reasonably serve to justify the practice of infant male circumcision in certain cases. I conclude with a discussion of the similarities and differences between male and female forms of genital cutting, and I argue that anyone who is committed to the view that infant male circumcision is morally permissible must also accept the moral permissibility of some (though not all) forms of female genital cutting. However, as I argue, neither type of cutting should be allowed absent clear consent of the individual and/or strict medical necessity.

For more on the ethics of circumcision, see:

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/...

For Brian D. Earp's academic page, see: http://oxford.academia.edu/BrianEarp