Svoboda J Steven, Adler Peter W, Van Howe Robert S
J. Steven Svoboda, M.S., J.D., is Executive Director of Attorneys for the Rights of the Child, graduated with honors from Harvard Law School and has a B.S. (Physics and English, summa cum laude) from the University of California at Los Angeles and a Master's Degree in Physics from the University of California at Berkeley. He presented to the United Nations on male circumcision as a human rights violation. He has published numerous articles regarding male circumcision in publications such as the Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, the American Journal of Bioethics, the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, and, most recently, the Journal of Medical Ethics. Peter W. Adler, J.D., M.A., is Legal Advisor to Attorney For the Rights of the Child. He holds a B.A. degree in Philosophy from Dartmouth College (magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa), an M.A. degree with Honours in Philosophy from Cambridge University, and a J.D. degree from University of Virginia School of Law, where he was an editor of the Virginia Law Review and the Virginia Journal of International Law. Robert S. Van Howe, M.D., M.S., is Professor and Interim Chairman of Pediatrics at Central Michigan University College of Medicine. His research interests include primary care issues, evidence-based medicine, and the efficacy of teaching bioethics to medical students. He has been an invited presenter to the American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Circumcision and to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and is currently working on a book on the ethics of genital alteration.
J Law Med Ethics. 2016 Jun;44(2):263-82. doi: 10.1177/1073110516654120.
The foreskin is a complex structure that protects and moisturizes the head of the penis, and, being the most densely innervated and sensitive portion of the penis, is essential to providing the complete sexual response. Circumcision-the removal of this structure-is non-therapeutic, painful, irreversible surgery that also risks serious physical injury, psychological sequelae, and death. Men rarely volunteer for it, and increasingly circumcised men are expressing their resentment about it.Circumcision is usually performed for religious, cultural and personal reasons. Early claims about its medical benefits have been proven false. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control have made many scientifically untenable claims promoting circumcision that run counter to the consensus of Western medical organizations.Circumcision violates the cardinal principles of medical ethics, to respect autonomy (self-determination), to do good, to do no harm, and to be just. Without a clear medical indication, circumcision must be deferred until the child can provide his own fully informed consent.In 2012, a German court held that circumcision constitutes criminal assault. Under existing United States law and international human rights declarations as well, circumcision already violates boys› absolute rights to equal protection, bodily integrity, autonomy, and freedom to choose their own religion. A physician has a legal duty to protect children from unnecessary interventions. Physicians who obtain parental permission through spurious claims or omissions, or rely on the American Academy of Pediatrics' position, also risk liability for misleading parents about circumcision.
包皮是一个复杂的结构，它保护并滋润阴茎头，而且作为阴茎神经分布最密集、最敏感的部分，对于实现完整的性反应至关重要。包皮环切术——切除这一结构——是一种非治疗性、痛苦且不可逆转的手术，还存在严重身体损伤、心理后遗症及死亡的风险。男性很少自愿接受该手术，而且越来越多接受了包皮环切术的男性表达了他们对此的不满。包皮环切术通常是出于宗教、文化和个人原因而进行的。早期关于其医学益处的说法已被证明是错误的。美国儿科学会和疾病控制与预防中心提出了许多在科学上站不住脚的主张来推广包皮环切术，这与西方医学组织的共识背道而驰。包皮环切术违反了医学伦理的基本原则，即尊重自主权（自我决定权）、行善、不伤害和公正。在没有明确的医学指征的情况下，包皮环切术必须推迟到孩子能够给出充分知情的同意为止。2012年，一家德国法院裁定包皮环切术构成刑事攻击。根据美国现行法律以及国际人权宣言，包皮环切术也已经侵犯了男孩在平等保护、身体完整性、自主权以及选择自己宗教信仰的自由等方面的绝对权利。医生有法律责任保护儿童免受不必要的干预。那些通过虚假声明或隐瞒来获得家长许可，或者依赖美国儿科学会立场的医生，也可能因在包皮环切术问题上误导家长而面临法律责任。
