Aurenque Diana, Wiesing Urban
Bioethics. 2015 Mar;29(3):203-10. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12077. Epub 2013 Dec 23.
The article aims to illuminate the recent debate in Germany about the legitimacy of circumcision for religious reasons. The aim is both to evaluate the new German law allowing religious circumcision, and to outline the resulting conflict between the surrounding ethical and legal issues. We first elucidate the diversity of legal and medical views on religious circumcision in Germany. Next we examine to what extent invasive and irreversible physical interventions on infant boys unable to given their consent should be carried out for non-medical reasons. To this end, the potential benefits and harms of circumcision for non-medical reasons are compared. We argue that circumcision does not provide any benefits for the 'child as a child' and poses only risks to boys. We then set out to clarify and analyse political (rather than ethical) justifications of the new circumcision law. We demonstrate through this analysis how the circumcision debate in Germany has been transformed from a legal and ethical problem into a political issue, due at least in part to Germany's unique historical context. Although such a particular political sensibility is entirely comprehensible, it raises particular problems when it comes to framing and responding to medical ethical issues - as in the case of religious circumcision.
本文旨在阐明德国近期关于出于宗教原因进行割礼合法性的辩论。目的在于评估德国允许宗教割礼的新法律，并概述由此引发的围绕伦理和法律问题的冲突。我们首先阐明德国在宗教割礼方面法律和医学观点的多样性。接下来，我们探讨在何种程度上，出于非医学原因，对无法表示同意的男婴进行侵入性且不可逆转的身体干预是合理的。为此，我们比较了非医学原因割礼的潜在益处和危害。我们认为，割礼对“作为儿童的儿童”没有任何益处，只会给男童带来风险。然后，我们着手阐明并分析新割礼法律的政治（而非伦理）依据。通过这一分析，我们展示了德国的割礼辩论是如何从一个法律和伦理问题转变为一个政治问题的，这至少部分归因于德国独特的历史背景。尽管这种特殊的政治敏感性完全可以理解，但在处理和应对医学伦理问题时，比如宗教割礼问题，它会引发特殊的问题。
