Circumcision and law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
Please discuss this issue on the talk page or replace this tag with a more specific message.
This article has been tagged since May 2006.

[edit] History

Religious laws pertaining to circumcision are ancient. The Hebrew Bible commands the Jews to perform the operation on their male child's eighth day of life and also to circumcise their slaves (Genesis 17:11-12). See Brit milah (the Hebrew name for ritual circumcision).

Laws banning circumcision are also ancient. The ancient Greeks prized the foreskin and disapproved of the Jewish custom of circumcision.[1] Thus, banning circumcision may have been enacted as much to stop what the Greeks regarded as an abuse as for a deliberately anti-Jewish purpose.

King Antiochus IV, of Syria, the occupying power of the Holy Land in 170 BC decreed that circumcision was unlawful and punishable by death. According to the Historia Augusta, the Roman emperor Hadrian issued a decree banning circumcision in the empire,[2] triggering the Jewish Bar Kokhba revolt of 132 AD. The Roman historian Cassius Dio, however, made no mention of such a law, and blamed the Jewish uprising instead on Hadrian's decision to rebuild Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina, a city dedicated to Jupiter.

Hadrian permitted Jews to circumcise their own sons, but forbade them from circumcising non-Jews. Genesis 17:12 commands that Jews must circumcise their slaves, so this law prohibited the circumcision of slaves, and also made it illegal for a man to convert to Judaism. [3] Antoninus Pius exempted the Egyptian priesthood from the otherwise universal ban on circumcision.

[edit] Modern Law

Circumcision has traditionally been presumed legal under British law. One 1999 case, Re "J" (child's religious upbringing and circumcision)[4] said that circumcision in Britain required the consent of all those with parental responsibility, or the permission of the court, acting for the best interests of the child, and issued an order prohibiting the circumcision of a male child of a non-practicing Muslim father and non-practicing Christian mother with custody. The reasoning included evidence that circumcision carried some medical risk; that the operation would be likely to weaken the relationship of the child with his mother, who strongly objected to circumcision without medical necessity; that the child may be subject to ridicule by his peers as the odd one out and that the operation might irreversibly reduce sexual pleasure, by permanently removing some sensory nerves, even though cosmetic foreskin restoration might be possible. The court did not rule out circumcision against the consent of one parent. It cited a hypothetical case of a Jewish mother and an agnostic father with a number of sons, all of whom, by agreement, had been circumcised as infants in accordance with Jewish laws; the parents then have another son who is born after they have separated; the mother wishes him to be circumcised like his brothers; the father refuses his agreement. In such a case, a decision in favor of circumcision was said to be likely. The passage of the Human Rights Act 1998 has led to some speculation that the lawfulness of the circumcision of male children is unclear.[5]

In the United States, male circumcision is not specifically unlawful. However some believe that the circumcision of a child violates general laws enacted for the protection of children. Doctors who circumcise children must take care that all applicable rules regarding informed consent are satisfied. If consent is invalid, then a circumcision is a battery. [6] MGM Bill is currently lobbying to extend the ban on female circumcision to males, arguing that banning female circumcision but allowing male circumcision violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [7]

In Canada, Arif Bhimji, MD, believes that male circumcision violates rights granted by provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982).[8]

In South Africa, the Children's Act (no. 38 of 2005) makes the circumcision of boys under 16 years of age unlawful unless performed for religious or medical reasons.[9]

A non-binding research paper of the Queensland Law Reform Commission (Circumcision of Male Infants) concluded that "On a strict interpretation of the assault provisions of the Queensland Criminal Code, routine circumcision of a male infant could be regarded as a criminal act", and that doctors who perform circumcision on male infants may be liable to civil claims by that child at a later date.[10] No prosecutions have occurred in Queensland, and circumcisions continue to be performed.

An attempt to have circumcision ruled illegal was rejected by the Israeli Supreme Court.[11] The North Dakota Supreme Court rejected a mother's attempt to prosecute her doctor for circumcising her child with her permission.[12]

Anti-circumcision groups in various countries have attempted to persuade legislatures to ban circumcision outright. These attempts have thus far not been successful.

Hirsi Ali, when she was a Member of Parliament in the Netherlands asked Parliament to consider making the circumcision of male children unlawful.[13]

In Sweden, the circumcision of minors may only be performed under anaesthesia and, unless performed by a physician, must be performed within the first two months of life.[14]

In December 2004, Edwin B. Baxter was convicted of second degree child assault after he circumcised his son with a hunting knife. He was sentenced to serve three years in jail.[15]

In August 2006, a Finnish court ruled a four-year-old Muslim boy's circumcision to be an assault. The case will now go to the Court of Appeals.[16]

In October 2006, a Turkish national who performed ritual circumcision on seven boys was convicted of causing dangerous bodily harm by the state court in Dusseldorf, Germany.[17]

In October 2006, a Chicago court ruled that a nine-year-old boy should be protected from circumcision until he is eighteen, at which point he may decide for himself.[18]

[edit] External links

William E. Brigman. Circumcision as Child Abuse: The Legal and Constitutional Issues, 23 J Fam Law 337 (1985).

Gregory J Boyle, J. Steven Svoboda, Christopher P Price, J Neville Turner. Circumcision of Healthy Boys: Criminal Assault? 7 Journal of Law and Medicine 301 (2000). The authors are leading anti-circumcision campaigners.