The law and ethics of male circumcision - guidance for doctors


June 2006

Notes and references
  1. By “therapeutic" we mean that the procedure is necessary to deal specifically with a medical problem. By “non-therapeutic" we mean that the procedure is for any other purpose than medical benefit.
  2. Female genital mutilation is a separate issue. The BMA’s views on the issue are published in British Medical Association. Female genital mutilation. Caring for patients and child protection. London: BMA, 2001.
  3. General Medical Council. Guidance for doctors who are asked to circumcise male children. London: GMC, 1997.
  4. The term “parents” is used in these guidelines to indicate holders of parental responsibility. The law relating to parental responsibility changed on 1 December 2003. In relation to children born before this date both of a child’s parents have parental responsibility if they were married at the time of the child’s conception, or birth, or at some time after the child’s birth. Neither parent loses parental responsibility if they divorce. If the parents have never married, only the mother automatically has parental responsibility. The father may acquire it by entering into a parental responsibility agreement with the mother, or through a parental responsibility order made by a court. From 1 December 2003 unmarried fathers in England and Wales who are registered on the child’s birth certificate have automatic parental responsibility. Clearly where a child has only one parent with parental responsibility, that person is responsible for decision making, although his or her views may not be determinative. For further information on parental responsibility see BMA guidance: Parental responsibility. London: BMA, 2005. Read more here
  5. British Association of Paediatric Surgeons, Royal College of Nursing, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Royal College of Surgeons of England and Royal College of Anaesthetists. Statement on male circumcision. London: Royal College of Surgeons of England, March 2001.
  6. Ibid.
  7. R v Brown [1993] 2 All ER 75, HL, per Lord Templeman.
  8. Re J (A Minor) (Prohibited Steps Order: Circumcision), sub nom Re J (Child’s Religious Upbringing and Circumcision) and Re J (Specific Issue Orders: Muslim Upbringing & Circumcision) [2000] 1 FLR 571; [2000] 1 FCR 307; [2000] 52 BMLR 82.
  9. Re S. (Children) (Specific issue: circumcision) [2005] 1 FLR 236.
  10. Ibid.
  11. M Fox and M Thomson. A covenant with the status quo? Male circumcision and the new BMA guidance to doctors. London: JME 2005; 31; 463-469.
  12. Law Commission. Consent in the criminal law. Law Commission consultation paper no 139. London: HMSO, 1995: 119, 128.
  13. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (4. ix. 1950; TS 71; Cmnd 8969). Human Rights Act 1988.
  14. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (20. xi. 1989; TS 44; Cm 1976) Article 24(3).
  15. Re J (A Minor) (Prohibited Steps Order: Circumcision), Op cit.
  16. Based on checklist in British Medical Association. Consent, rights and choices in health care for children and young people. London: BMJ Books, 2001: ch 1. Read more here
  17. Re J (A Minor) (Prohibited Steps Order: Circumcision), Op cit.
  18. General Medical Council. Guidance for doctors who are asked to circumcise male children. Op cit.

    © British Medical Association 2008

Log in to your BMA here