On the impermissibility of infant male circumcision: a response to Mazor

Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (2):186-190 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This is a response to Dr Joseph Mazor’s paper ‘The child's interests and the case for the permissibility of male infant circumcision.’ I argue that Dr Mazor fails to prove that bodily integrity and self-determination are mere interests as opposed to genuine rights in the case of infant male circumcision. Moreover, I cast doubt on the interest calculus that Dr Mazor employs to arrive at his conclusions about circumcision

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Male Infant Circumcision as a 'HIV Vaccine'.B. Lyons - 2013 - Public Health Ethics 6 (1):90-103.
No distinction between male and female circumcision.S. A. Abu-Sahlieh - 1995 - Journal of Medical Ethics 21 (5):311-311.
Bodily integrity and male and female circumcision.Wim Dekkers, Cor Hoffer & Jean-Pierre Wils - 2005 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 8 (2):179-191.
The ethics of infant male circumcision.Brian D. Earp - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (7):418-420.
Male Circumcision - Facts and Fiction.Rida Usman Khalafzai - 2008 - Chisholm Health Ethics Bulletin 13 (4):6.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-22

Downloads
55 (#259,775)

6 months
5 (#246,492)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?