Circumcision without consent. Is it wrong?

[dybmh]

Willingly? A baby? Even a small child would not be able to give fully informed consent. Why would it matter if it was left up to the individual? If you're right they will still choose to "participate in a cultural and religious practice" no?

There is a big difference between getting circumcised as an infant vs. an adult. In a religious family where the adult will likely want to be circumcised the parent is doing them a favor by getting it done as an infant.

NIH.gov - A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?

 

[dybmh]

The infant isn't choosing to participate... the choice is being made for them.

I think an adult should be able to retroactively give consent. I consent to my circumcision as an infant. I wasn't violated; no harm was done. Eventhough I couldn't consent at the time; I'm consenting now.

 

[an anarchist]

There is a big difference between getting circumcised as an infant vs. an adult. In a religious family where the adult will likely want to be circumcised the parent is doing them a favor by getting it done as an infant.

NIH.gov - A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?

What is your opinion if the baby eventually is not okay with the circumcision as they become an adult? Surely not every Jewish baby stays with the faith. I'm upset I was circumcised without consent even though I was born into a religious family where it is generally accepted. If you already answered this feel free to ignore

 

[Koldo]

I think an adult should be able to retroactively give consent. I consent to my circumcision as an infant. I wasn't violated; no harm was done. Eventhough I couldn't consent at the time; I'm consenting now.

By this reasoning, statutory rape can only be punished once the victim becomes of age. After all, we never know if the victim is going to "retroactively" give consent.

 

[dybmh]

What is your opinion if the baby eventually is not okay with the circumcision as they become an adult? Surely not every Jewish baby stays with the faith. I'm upset I was circumcised without consent even though I was born into a religious family where it is generally accepted. If you already answered this feel free to ignore

I think it depends on your relationship with your family. In the worst case, I think you should be able to sue for damages in court. If that's too extreme, maybe having a conversation with your parents about it to try to understand their point of view and giving you a chance to express your disappointment about their choice.

 

[Sheldon]

I don't know enough about FGM to say for sure; but, IF it's done as an infant and it has the same outcome as circumcision, then yes I think it's acceptable.

 

[Sheldon]

Willingly? A baby? Even a small child would not be able to give fully informed consent. Why would it matter if it was left up to the individual? If you're right they will still choose to "participate in a cultural and religious practice" no?

There is a big difference between getting circumcised as an infant vs. an adult.

I know, an infant can't consent, and you haven't answered my question rather tellingly.

In a religious family where the adult will likely want to be circumcised the parent is doing them a favor by getting it done as an infant.

By denying them consent to an unnecessary and risky medical procedure?
Since you ignored what I asked I will ask again:

Why would it matter if it was left up to the individual? If you're right they will still choose to "participate in a cultural and religious practice" no?

It seems you're keen to get this done before a person is able to decide for themselves, it isn't hard to see why either.

 

[dybmh]

By this reasoning, statutory rape can only be punished once the victim becomes of age. After all, we never know if the victim is going to "retroactively" give consent.

Apples and oranges, false equivalence.

 

[Sheldon]

I think an adult should be able to retroactively give consent.

I think that is asinine nonsense.

I consent to my circumcision as an infant.

So what?

I wasn't violated; no harm was done. Eventhough I couldn't consent at the time; I'm consenting now.

So then there would be no harm in waiting, for you to be old enough to give informed consent.

 

[dybmh]

Why would it matter if it was left up to the individual?

Because the procedure isn't risky if performed on an infant.

 

[dybmh]

So then there would be no harm in waiting, for you to be old enough to give informed consent.

You clearly didn't look at the article I cited.

 

[Sheldon]

Koldo said: ↑
By this reasoning, statutory rape can only be punished once the victim becomes of age. After all, we never know if the victim is going to "retroactively" give consent.

Apples and oranges, false equivalence.

Not at all, it addresses the issue of informed consent, which you just specifically claimed could be given retroactively. It was an absurd claim you made, that is not coming back to bite you.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Why would it matter if it was left up to the individual?

Because the procedure isn't risky if performed on an infant.

Yes it is, but that's not what I asked, why would it matter if it was left until someone can give informed consent? You don't seem to have a cogent response.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
So then there would be no harm in waiting, for you to be old enough to give informed consent.

You clearly didn't look at the article I cited.

You clearly are refusing to answer my simple question, since your assertion made it clear you would still choose as an adult, where is the harm in waiting until people can give informed consent?

 

[dybmh]

Yes it is, but that's not what I asked, why would it matter if it was left until someone can give informed consent? You don't seem to have a cogent response.

Because the person is no longer an infant and the procedure is riskier at that time.

 

[dybmh]

You clearly are refusing to answer my simple question, since your assertion made it clear you would still choose as an adult, where is the harm in waiting until people can give informed consent?

Read the article I provided. Here's another link. Just reading the beginning and the end will answer your question.

A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?

 

[dybmh]

Not at all, it addresses the issue of informed consent, which you just specifically claimed could be given retroactively. It was an absurd claim you made, that is not coming back to bite you.

Sexual activity with a minor is not the same as a medical procedure on an infant.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Actually, the State serves an important role under God's authority. Hence why some tyrants don't get away with 'murder'... every time.
The State does not always apply its dictates.
Say for example, tomorrow they did like Russia.
The authority of Jehovah's people remain the same, and does not change.

That seems an odd claim considering Jehovah's control over states and cultures has waned and dwindled.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I think an adult should be able to retroactively give consent. I consent to my circumcision as an infant. I wasn't violated; no harm was done. Eventhough I couldn't consent at the time; I'm consenting now.

So what about those men who don't want to give retroactive consent? The choice has already been made for them. Why not wait to do the procedure until AFTER the individual is old enough to decide for themselves? I suspect that it's because if they did let them decide for themselves most would choose not to.

 

[dybmh]

So what about those men who don't want to give retroactive consent? The choice has already been made for them. Why not wait to do the procedure until AFTER the individual is old enough to decide for themselves? I suspect that it's because if they did let them decide for themselves most would choose not to.

The best time to circumcise is at infancy.

NIH.gov - A 'snip' in time: what is the best age to circumcise?